I posted this here because it could apply to high school, college, or the pros.

 

I just saw on ESPN that the last time USC played in Notre Dame a lot of people were not happy with the field conditions at ND. The grass was described as just about ankle deep and people thought it was a bid by ND to slow down USC's great running backs and recievers.

 

My question is what is the big deal? Charlie Weis had it right when he said that both teams had to play on it. Isn't this just another form of homefield advantage? If you're not quite as fast as another team why not grow it out? Or cut it shorter if you have the speed advantage?

 

What is your opinion on this?

I think the advantage goes to the defense over the offense because if it slows 2 teams down equally, a D-line only has to move maybe 5 yards out of their way during an entire play where as a running back coming up the middle or running through the tackles has to be a little quicker and run longer to get to his destination. Receivers and DB's would probably be about the same thing, as it would slow down both teams equally.

I think the advantage goes to the defense over the offense because if it slows 2 teams down equally, a D-line only has to move maybe 5 yards out of their way during an entire play where as a running back coming up the middle or running through the tackles has to be a little quicker and run longer to get to his destination. Receivers and DB's would probably be about the same thing, as it would slow down both teams equally.

 

Pretty much what I was thinking. Makes me wonder why people make such a big deal about it when it is done. I've seen it from high school to the pros where people complain about it. Both teams play on it. Adjust and hush up about it.

Is it poor sportsmanship or just cheating if a team artificially "rains" a field. I've heard of this several times over the years, teams even going so far as to have a firetruck come to the field on game day to give it a good soaking. I'm not talking about watering but making the field a mud pit.

We played a team several years ago after a rainy week went out on the field and you could tell the sprinklers had been used before we arrived.

We played a team several years ago after a rainy week went out on the field and you could tell the sprinklers had been used before we arrived.

 

Amen on that. I have seen that many times.

I think watering down a field is dirty, but growing the grass out not so much. Kind of the difference between cheating and gamesmanship.

It's just a psychological thing, IMO. I wouldn't do it, but some (like Weis) use stuff like that to give their team a mental edge, IMO. It's dirty, but I don't know if it's really cheating.

It's just a psychological thing, IMO. I wouldn't do it, but some (like Weis) use stuff like that to give their team a mental edge, IMO. It's dirty, but I don't know if it's really cheating.

 

What's dirty about long grass?

USC already got out of having to ever travel to South Bend in late November... what more do they want?

USC already got out of having to ever travel to South Bend in late November... what more do they want?

 

Also a good point. I hate this anyway. I mean it's like if Miami had to go to Green Bay and play in snow. Isn't that just part of home field advantage? Why should USC get to play in favorable condition when they are in South Bend?

Growing the grass longer for one game only is bush league. It should be the same length for every game.

I don't see a problem with it. If it makes a fast team slower, then it has to make the slower team even slower.

Growing the grass longer for one game only is bush league. It should be the same length for every game.

Good grief. Same conditions for both teams. Home field advantage. Grow a set and line 'em up in my opinion.

Good grief. Same conditions for both teams. Home field advantage. Grow a set and line 'em up in my opinion.

 

I don't have a dog in this fight, but shouldn't "grow a set and line 'em up" be told to the home team who is scared of the other teams speed :idunno: