NHS Big Daddy's thread about Newport/NCC getting turf made me wonder what other people think about so many high schools getting the field turf....I personally like the idea, after I had played on it at Lexington Catholic, I would much rather have played on it than real Bermuda...Thoughts?

Deuce, I think its a terrible idea. All artificial turf does is let you have meaningful practices when your practice field is a quagmire and you don't want to practice on your grass main field because you don't want to tear it up. All it does is allow you to practice on your main field at night during the summer (without fear of tearing up your main field) when its too hot to practice during the day because your main field has lights and most practice fields do not. All it does it make it easier to host your youth league games at the main field which helps build loyalty between the youth leagues and your high school team because you don't have to worry about tearing up your main field. All it does is eliminate problems between your football team and other users of the main field (such as the band) because you don't worry about the other users tearing up the field. All of the above is typed with tongue firmly placed in cheek.

 

About the only downside is that if you have to play an away game against a team that does not have turf, you don't get practice time playing in the mud. But even that disadvantage can be overcome, if it is a disadvantage, by practicing that week in the mud on your practice field.

 

Personally, I see nothing but advantages with artificial turf. I was one of the major proponents of getting FieldTurf at Highlands (as most readers here by now are well aware and tired of me saying). But even the original naysayers at the school (including some administrators and school board members) are now believers. In fact I was told by one school administrator that when it comes time to replace the surface in 10 years or so, the school will even pay for some or all of the replacement cost (whereas when we put it in originally, they wouldn't pay one cent).

LN listed all of the football benefits.

 

From a ROI perspective, add in many other activities that can take place (some that produce revenue) for the school and its even a better idea.

 

Heck, CCH uses it for baseball practice while the baseball field is wet/muddy.

 

In addition, CCH has added lacrosse as another sport using the field. No worry about how the grass will hold up with another team using it.

 

It seems like a lot of money and I don't know the hard dollars involved in non-turf fields but it has worked well at CCH.

LN listed all of the football benefits.

 

From a ROI perspective, add in many other activities that can take place (some that produce revenue) for the school and its even a better idea.

 

Heck, CCH uses it for baseball practice while the baseball field is wet/muddy.

 

In addition, CCH has added lacrosse as another sport using the field. No worry about how the grass will hold up with another team using it.

 

It seems like a lot of money and I don't know the hard dollars involved in non-turf fields but it has worked well at CCH.

 

Very good points also 81. Our baseball and soccer teams use the field to practice when their fields are muddy.

With this new sports turf, playing like grass (without the weather factors, that can ruin a football game), and the shear number of activities that go on, on that surface...

 

Great thing.

I grew up believing that grass was king. I loved mud games. I Still do to a certain extent, but there comes a time when mud costs more than turff. For me, that was two years ago. I firmly believe that it cost our team a state title appearance and or championship. Now I fully know that some of you may disagree with that statement, and that is fine. But oh how I would like to turn back the clock and have that mudbowl game back on a turf surface. Grasss is great, but it seems that late in the year after a long fall season of all kinds of activities being played on the surface in our area the rains come. Even the schools that baby there grass fields are pretty tore up by late October if they are still playing. You can't change mother nature, but you can change the surface. I will always love the game on a grass field in Sept., but I've seen too many muddy Octobers, and Novembers to make me think otherwise of what is best for the game.

I prefer grass. I'm old school and like the surface to be played in the natural conditions that God so approves of on Friday nights. Rain, sleet, snow, etc. JMO. There aren't too many turf fields that can boast about looking as good as the Corbin's and the Danville's Bermuda fields, even in late November.

Anything that keeps the cheerleaders from grazing on the field, I'm for!

I like the turf but I like the grass also so it dont really matter. Which ever one the shcool wants.

South Oldham is going to the Turf (same company that installed Henry

Clay's). It is a positive thing. More games on better turf. We will play 7 games on turf this year. Possibly more with the playoffs. I think it is a good thing for all of our sports. (including boys soccer, girls soccer, field hockey, middle school football, lacrosse, band, and even baseball (on wet practice day they can take infield on the turf without destroying their field). It also gives the community something to be proud of.

If you have limited Practice/Playing space such as Lexington Catholic, Field Turf is a must. Soccer, Football, Baseball, Softball, and Lacross all use parts of the field for practice and Games. The Baseball and Football fields actually share an end zone and out to near the 30 yard line. Having the turf in has allowed the building to expand, where the newer gym and Fine Arts center are now located.

Cuts down on the upkeep of reseeding every year.To me, it is worth every penny.

It would be good to have turf on your field if the middle school, and JFL teams play on it. If not then it will usually get messed up.

Having turf is much cheaper than the upkeep of grass. Though I do prefer grass for the first couple of weeks, I definately favor the turf towards the end of the season. Personally, the only problem I see with turf is that it has a tendancy to cause more knee problems (usually from the cleats getting stuck in the surface while turning or planting).

 

This might sound kind of dumb, but thinking back, the turf sure did help my allergies rather than practicing on the grass. I could actually breathe a lot easier on the turf at the end of practice compared to when we had grass.

 

Overall, IMO, turf rules over grass.

I am a soccer player... and I would prefer to play on Bermuda grass or natural grass, such as Highlands' field. I would say that Highlands has the best natural field this side of the state without a doubt. Ashland's is also top notch. At CovCath I played on turf my last 3 years, but grass was always my personal favorite. Although turf always made for an even bounce... just not in the rain.

 

So in that respect, I prefer grass. But watching a football game is much less sloppy on turf, so I voted good.