6 hours ago, Jumper_Dad said:

I'll try to find a better shot when it's 100% complete. 

Not a fan of the purple (to each his own, I guess), but they've done a nice job with what was already a really good place for baseball.

6 hours ago, Jumper_Dad said:

I'd think being able to play/practice more would be much BETTER and better for the game than not being able to play.

 

Better for the game doesn't mean it's a better game. Of course getting play more is better. No one likes not playing, or losing games/practice. And if it were up to me as a coach, I wouldn't say no if the powers that be, offered me a turf field. Baseball however, is not a better game on turf, at least in my opinion. 

3 hours ago, gchs_uk9 said:

Not a fan of the purple (to each his own, I guess), but they've done a nice job with what was already a really good place for baseball.

The purple goes great with the adjacent football field! ?

 

On 3/8/2021 at 6:22 AM, Jumper_Dad said:

I'd think being able to play/practice more would be much BETTER and better for the game than not being able to play.

 

Baseball was meant to be played on grass. I’m not saying I don’t see the advantages turf provides against weather, but playing on turf takes some of the strategy out of the game. Turf changes the game, and all the things that make it interesting: no bad hops, virtually no use in bunting, ball screaming off the bat when hit on the ground with no grass to slow it down, and the chopper that bounces 15 feet in the air instead of being killed by the dirt. I don’t find it entertaining to watch. 

1 hour ago, wrn1979 said:

Baseball was meant to be played on grass. I’m not saying I don’t see the advantages turf provides against weather, but playing on turf takes some of the strategy out of the game. Turf changes the game, and all the things that make it interesting: no bad hops, virtually no use in bunting, ball screaming off the bat when hit on the ground with no grass to slow it down, and the chopper that bounces 15 feet in the air instead of being killed by the dirt. I don’t find it entertaining to watch. 

This is definitely a "get off my lawn" take.

I've watched dozens of UofL baseball games on their turf... Everything about turf is better than a natural surface, other than the smell of fresh cut grass. There are still bad hops, just not as many. Plenty of teams still bunt effectively on turf. Concerning the bounces off the turf, it's just an adjustment that needs to be made, one that isn't that difficult once you've seen it a time or two. 

When you factor in the maintenance (or lack thereof) in comparison to grass/dirt, the benefits of turf are exponential. 

5 hours ago, TheDeuce said:

This is definitely a "get off my lawn" take.

I've watched dozens of UofL baseball games on their turf... Everything about turf is better than a natural surface, other than the smell of fresh cut grass. There are still bad hops, just not as many. Plenty of teams still bunt effectively on turf. Concerning the bounces off the turf, it's just an adjustment that needs to be made, one that isn't that difficult once you've seen it a time or two. 

When you factor in the maintenance (or lack thereof) in comparison to grass/dirt, the benefits of turf are exponential. 

That’s why we are all allowed to have our opinions.

13 hours ago, wrn1979 said:

Baseball was meant to be played on grass. I’m not saying I don’t see the advantages turf provides against weather, but playing on turf takes some of the strategy out of the game. Turf changes the game, and all the things that make it interesting: no bad hops, virtually no use in bunting, ball screaming off the bat when hit on the ground with no grass to slow it down, and the chopper that bounces 15 feet in the air instead of being killed by the dirt. I don’t find it entertaining to watch. 

That's like saying a dead spot on a basketball court where the ball won't bounce makes the game better. Or a divot on a soccer field or football field that players twist their ankles in, adds to the game.

I prefer the game be decided by the skill and hard work of the players, not some random bad bounce due to field issues. 

But hey, I'm for automated ball/strike calls in MLB...not balls and strikes called at the whim of an umpire like Angel Hernandez. 

18 minutes ago, Jumper_Dad said:

That's like saying a dead spot on a basketball court where the ball won't bounce makes the game better. Or a divot on a soccer field or football field that players twist their ankles in, adds to the game.

I prefer the game be decided by the skill and hard work of the players, not some random bad bounce due to field issues. 

But hey, I'm for automated ball/strike calls in MLB...not balls and strikes called at the whim of an umpire like Angel Hernandez. 

I consider the ability to recover from the hop and make the play a sign of ultimate skill.

I’m also the guy that would outlaw aluminum bats. 
 

Again, that’s why we are all entitled to our opinion.

3 hours ago, wrn1979 said:

I consider the ability to recover from the hop and make the play a sign of ultimate skill.

I’m also the guy that would outlaw aluminum bats. 
 

Again, that’s why we are all entitled to our opinion.

It’s no coincidence that the game at its highest level is played on grass. But I also understand the resources and the time it takes to keep grass fields playable, which probably means turf makes more sense at the high school and college level, just from a maintenance standpoint alone, even though I feel like the game is meant to be played on grass. 

10 hours ago, wrn1979 said:

I consider the ability to recover from the hop and make the play a sign of ultimate skill.

I’m also the guy that would outlaw aluminum bats. 
 

Again, that’s why we are all entitled to our opinion.

 

6 hours ago, rjs4470 said:

It’s no coincidence that the game at its highest level is played on grass. But I also understand the resources and the time it takes to keep grass fields playable, which probably means turf makes more sense at the high school and college level, just from a maintenance standpoint alone, even though I feel like the game is meant to be played on grass. 

Yeah, today the MLB is mostly played on grass.  But for the 70's, 80's and a good portion of the 90's, there were quite a few teams that played on turf.  (Reds, Astros, Pirates, Phillies, Cardinals, Royals, Mariners, Braves, Blue Jays and Expos)  The reason why?  Field maintenance. 

I have played on fields where the guy who drug the infield didn't know what he was doing, and over the years built a crown up at the outfield grass.  Yeah, from the stands, it may have looked okay.  But, when you stood out there, it was probably a good 4-8 inch difference.  At the one field, balls would actually ricochet up in the air if they hit it.  I took one off the collar bone because of a hop like that.  Our shortstop wasn't so lucky.  He broke his nose.  I'm sorry, but that's not baseball.  And I don't care if both teams do have to play on it.  

Now, granted, my experiences are 35+ years old...so, maybe things have changed.  But, I think we overestimate just how much time, knowledge and money is needed to put into field for true, proper maintenance at the high school level.  We have become spoiled by what we see at the MLB level.  But most schools just don't have that.

Ultimately, in my opinion, a game played on turf is better than a game played on a poor grass field, and certainly better than no game at all.

1 hour ago, CincySportsFan said:

We have become spoiled by what we see at the MLB level.  But most schools just don't have that.

This. 

People see MLB fields and don't acknowledge that those are likely the best natural surfaces in the entire world because of resources. Sure, if every baseball field on the planet could be tended to like an MLB park, the need for turf may not exist. 

2 hours ago, CincySportsFan said:

 

Yeah, today the MLB is mostly played on grass.  But for the 70's, 80's and a good portion of the 90's, there were quite a few teams that played on turf.  (Reds, Astros, Pirates, Phillies, Cardinals, Royals, Mariners, Braves, Blue Jays and Expos)  The reason why?  Field maintenance. 

I have played on fields where the guy who drug the infield didn't know what he was doing, and over the years built a crown up at the outfield grass.  Yeah, from the stands, it may have looked okay.  But, when you stood out there, it was probably a good 4-8 inch difference.  At the one field, balls would actually ricochet up in the air if they hit it.  I took one off the collar bone because of a hop like that.  Our shortstop wasn't so lucky.  He broke his nose.  I'm sorry, but that's not baseball.  And I don't care if both teams do have to play on it.  

Now, granted, my experiences are 35+ years old...so, maybe things have changed.  But, I think we overestimate just how much time, knowledge and money is needed to put into field for true, proper maintenance at the high school level.  We have become spoiled by what we see at the MLB level.  But most schools just don't have that.

Ultimately, in my opinion, a game played on turf is better than a game played on a poor grass field, and certainly better than no game at all.

Not so much for maintenance but because most of those who had turf had multi purpose facilities that housed baseball and football teams, which are pretty much gone now. It was much easier to convert from baseball to football (and vice versa) with turf, and turf was much more durable than grass for football, especially in cold weather climates when most of the football season was played in fall and winter when grass went dormant. Most baseball only fields of that era (that were outdoors), were still played on grass. KC and Montreal were the only outdoor, baseball only stadiums that comes to mind that played on turf (and Fulton County stadium was grass, so the Braves didn't play on turf), so maintaining the grass fields wasn't necessarily the issue. And let me tell you, I played on the old astroturf (Veterans Stadium in Philly at least a dozen times), and it sucked. It was like playing on a parking lot, and had plenty of bad hops. Granted that field was notoriously know for being a bad surface.

As I said before, I don't disagree with anything that's been stated about turf. There are certainly advantages, some of which are magnified at the high school level. I've played and coached on both surfaces, and of various qualities. I simply prefer the game on grass. Doesn't mean turf is awful, or ruins the game. Again, I'll take turf over a bad or swampy grass field any day. 

On 3/8/2021 at 1:30 PM, gchs_uk9 said:

Not a fan of the purple (to each his own, I guess), but they've done a nice job with what was already a really good place for baseball.

I just drove by the softball field, it's getting a turf infield as well. If you don't like purple, you'll really hate our softball field now. ?

6 hours ago, Jumper_Dad said:

I just drove by the softball field, it's getting a turf infield as well. If you don't like purple, you'll really hate our softball field now. ?

So for future reference, no left turns on 80 for me as I come into town!

Just completed putting the turf and new sod in.

I personally, think it looks pretty good.