Chip: The Big Ten should put an end to bowl arrangements held in baseball stadiums because field conditions deteriorate and threaten player safety.

Donate To GopherHole
mnsportsgeek said:
There’s a lot wrong with the stadiums though. This is like playing basketball in a football stadium but without rearranging the seats in the entire lower bowl.

Click to expand...
That is bad.

For football, where the sidelines are physically inbetween spectators and the field -- unlike baseball where you have dugouts -- the seats need to be above those players so you can actually see.

Long winded way of saying you're right.
 

Bob_Loblaw said:
If this is the price we have to pay for the honor of playing in the crown jewel of all civilization, then so be it. We were lucky to pay $400 per night to buy dollar slices of pizza (for $1.50) and cheap hot dogs while the stench of human feces and urine danced in our nostrils. New York is really a majestic place and I know our Gopher fans will cherish their $45 chinese-made tchotchkes forever. Well I mean, at least the cultured ones, you know that like spicy foods, hate all-inclusives, and realize there is absolutely no crime problem in New York (despite what new yorkers say).

So what if that person didn't get to see the game? I mean, they got to look at New York City.
Click to expand...
You really do hate NYC!

To each, their own! :cool:
 

disco said:
Allegiant in Las Vegas is home to the Raiders and UNLV. Raiders play on grass. UNLV plays on artificial turf. Anything is possible.
Click to expand...
Allegiant is one of two football stadiums in the USA (as far as I know), the other being Glendale, where the NFL playing surface is natural grass and the entire field sits in a giant tray that physically rolls out of the stadium into natural sunlight.

Obviously being in a desert makes that more feasible, but another option, on paper at least, would be to roll that tray into some underground compartment where you could shine grow lights on it.
 
Last edited:

disco said:
But for the G-Rate, and I said this before, there is NO reason that game should not be held at Sun Devil Stadium if they don't/can't have it at the Cardinals stadium where the Fiesta Bowl is. I suspect it's a downtown tourism interest thing.

In fairness to San Diego, they didn't HAVE a football stadium until this year. After Jack Murphy was torn down, SDSU was playing up in Carson until the new stadium was built which took a few years. They have a contract with Petco for a couple more years, and then we'll see if they move to Snapdragon, which looks like a great stadium.
Click to expand...
These bowls are all about profits and deals. Deals with hotels, restaurants, and tourism boards.

The quality of the stadium seating, and the field condition, are the absolute last priories for the people who plan and promote these things.


In Arizona, it's the same board who does the Fiesta Bowl, is who puts on the G-R Bowl. And they still decided that that one is better in the (unheated) baseball stadium. Must have got a "better deal" (bigger bribe).
 

disco said:
I've said for some time (and admittedly, it's not a popular opinion) that the league should mandate all NFL stadiums have identical artificial turf. You'd still have weather related effects on games, but you wouldn't have bad turf issues (like that game in Pittsburgh where the re-sodded the field twice in a weekend and someone's shoe disappeared into the field and they never found it.)

I coach youth football and the kids I coach, if they play through high school, will likely never play a single game on natural grass.
Click to expand...
Players think -- and there is some science, but not consistent -- that artificial turf causes more serious (knee) injuries.

NFL's scientists say that is not true. Player's scientists say it is.


If you keep the grass warm (heating Coyles!) and you use grow lights, like they do at Allianz
e0252f-20190403-allianz-field-7.jpg


it is possible to keep a natural grass field in good condition year-round in any climate.
 


My personal ranking for football:

1) Good grass field, good weather
2) Mediocre grass field, good weather
3) New turf, good weather
4) New turf, bad weather
5) Grass field, wet weather
6) Old turf field, good or wet weather
6) Frozen grass field with a think layer of mud on top (Pinstripe).
7) Frozen old turf field
 






rgv2 said:
Disagree. I'll take the new turf over grass 7days a week, and twice on Sunday. Especially after that hot garbage the all holy yankees rolled out Thursday.
Click to expand...
You disagree with the stats?
 


I think all fans understand and appreciate the gameday weather is an intangible factor for every game and presents the same challenge(s) to both teams in real time.

There is an expectation however that the game facility itself...including the field...meets some minimum standards. Although arguably poor or adverse weather provides challenges that can essentially mimic the poor condition of the field itself (like Yankee Stadium this time), this is considered unacceptable. The latter is controllable while the former is not.

So we look at a Mud Bowl like Pantha shared (thanks BTW) with a smile while treating the pock-marked Yankee Stadium with disdain. That's just how it is.
 

GophersInIowa said:
Fenway puts the field from home plate to right field so people can sit down the 1st base line get a decent view. I think they put both teams on the opposite sideline though so that’s weird.
Click to expand...
That was also the set-up at Met Stadium.
 



Panthadad2 said:
My personal ranking for football:

1) Good grass field, good weather
2) Mediocre grass field, good weather
3) New turf, good weather
4) New turf, bad weather
5) Grass field, wet weather
6) Old turf field, good or wet weather
6) Frozen grass field with a think layer of mud on top (Pinstripe).
7) Frozen old turf field
Click to expand...
Well done. My college team was pretty good and relied on speed both on O and D and when we traveled to some of our away games on grass fields you could have lost a small child in some of them the grass was allowed to grow so long!!
 


BilldGopher said:
I think all fans understand and appreciate the gameday weather is an intangible factor for every game and presents the same challenge(s) to both teams in real time.

There is an expectation however that the game facility itself...including the field...meets some minimum standards. Although arguably poor or adverse weather provides challenges that can essentially mimic the poor condition of the field itself (like Yankee Stadium this time), this is considered unacceptable. The latter is controllable while the former is not.

So we look at a Mud Bowl like Pantha shared (thanks BTW) with a smile while treating the pock-marked Yankee Stadium with disdain. That's just how it is.
Click to expand...
I kind of wonder if now that we are getting so used to turf that people's tolerance for slippery grass fields is less than it used to be. My son plays traveling/high school soccer and he and his teammates always hate playing on grass. I am the opposite (and I can't ignore the stats that say turf is worse for injuries).
 

Word said:
I kind of wonder if now that we are getting so used to turf that people's tolerance for slippery grass fields is less than it used to be. My son plays traveling/high school soccer and he and his teammates always hate playing on grass. I am the opposite (and I can't ignore the stats that say turf is worse for injuries).
Click to expand...

No question. New turf is so much better than it used to be. Grass fields are also potentially much better than they used to be too (designed drainage, soil layering, heated fields, grow lights) but you won't find that at the high school level or below, or even most colleges. Some old school grass fields can be terrible cow pastures if not maintained nor designed properly. That's what young people run into.

At the top level of soccer, though, they despise artificial turf.
 
Last edited:

Panthadad2 said:
No question. New turf is so much better than it used to be. Grass fields are also potentially much better than they used to be too (designed drainage, soil layering, heated fields, grow lights) but you won't find that at the high school level or below, or even most colleges. Some old school grass fields can be terrible cow pastures if not maintained nor designed properly. That's what young people run into.

At the top level of soccer, though, they despise artificial turf.
Click to expand...
Because the bounce is crazy. They also like to wet down the field to slow the ball a bit too. That doesn't happen on turf. Every touch needs to be pure. I played soccer in HS and some in college. I'd rather play on the new turf than grass every day of the week.
 
Last edited:

with all due respect, I think the discussion is off the point of the OP.

So, let's say the B1G proclaims "our teams will not play games in baseball stadiums."

do you think the Bowls are just going to say "OK" and that's it?

these bowl agreements have to be negotiated, and some of them run for years.

and the other conferences are definitely going to have a say in the matter.

so it's not as easy as saying "no games in baseball stadiums."

Let's say for sake of argument that next year, the Gophers qualify for a bowl, and they are slotted to play in a baseball stadium. What do they do? Refuse to play the game?

I understand all the issues being discussed. but in the here and now, as long as the present Bowl affiliations are in place, I don't think a B1G school has many options, other than refusing to play - which would have some fairly serious financial implications.
 

Panthadad2 said:
No question. New turf is so much better than it used to be. Grass fields are also potentially much better than they used to be too (designed drainage, soil layering, heated fields, grow lights) but you won't find that at the high school level or below, or even most colleges. Some old school grass fields can be terrible cow pastures if not maintained nor designed properly. That's what young people run into.

At the top level of soccer, though, they despise artificial turf.
Click to expand...
Btw I agree that a bad grass field is the worst (especially for soccer) but a well-manicured grass field is the best IMO. Turf is consistent though and that's the lure of it.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
with all due respect, I think the discussion is off the point of the OP.

So, let's say the B1G proclaims "our teams will not play games in baseball stadiums."

do you think the Bowls are just going to say "OK" and that's it?

these bowl agreements have to be negotiated, and some of them run for years.

and the other conferences are definitely going to have a say in the matter.

so it's not as easy as saying "no games in baseball stadiums."

Let's say for sake of argument that next year, the Gophers qualify for a bowl, and they are slotted to play in a baseball stadium. What do they do? Refuse to play the game?

I understand all the issues being discussed. but in the here and now, as long as the present Bowl affiliations are in place, I don't think a B1G school has many options, other than refusing to play - which would have some fairly serious financial implications.
Click to expand...
Maybe they do refuse...maybe that's what it takes....but the thing is this is all contracted.. That's why nobody actually turns down a bowl game....the conference kinda has them by the short hairs...but what the conference can do is not renew contracts with bowls in baseball stadiums (you can't tell me the Yankees don't have the $$ to roll out a good turf field and heat it). Do the what you can to get into football stadiums or have field condition requirements. What we saw Thursday reeked of the all mighty dollar counts....not players or player safety.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom