Started By
Message
Is there a legitimate reason that Ole Miss uses turf on their field than grass?
Posted on 10/6/14 at 1:51 pm
Posted on 10/6/14 at 1:51 pm
I want to preface this post by saying I dont believe turf had anything to do with the loss saturday. We got our asses beat. Ole Miss was the better team Saturday and may be the best team period. I have said since week 1 that we were a 2-3 loss team and are a middle of the pack SEC west team. This post is purely about injuries and turf when players are not used to playing on it because the vast majority of college football fields in the country are natural grass.
Are they just too lazy to cut it or what? I can understand turf in domes and in certain climates where its difficult to keep grass looking presentable during the entirety of football season, but freakin Mississippi isnt one of them. You see a lot of turf in the NFL, and while I dont like it, at least there is enough of it in the league that the players are used to it and know how play on it without getting hurt. College players on the other hand not so much. I would bet a lot of money that Drakes injury Saturday wouldnt have been nearly as devastating if the surface had been grass. He still would have rolled his ankle im sure because of the way the defender rolled up on his leg (unintentionally of course) but his cleat would have been able to let go of the ground or at least tear some of the grass with it instead of being held in place by the turf and forcing the leg to get completely fricked. Same with Duvall's injury. The cleat stuck and the leg moved and it resulted in a sprain instead of just a simple rolled ankle that could have been taped and played on after a few minutes rest. I didnt get to closely see any of the rest of the injuries because I was watching from work so I cant speculate on them.
Every time we play on turf I get nervous about injuries, except at the Superdome. They use some kind of different turf Ive never seen anywhere else before and it doesnt seem to cause as many leg injuries as other places. (I may be completely off base on that but I just dont seem to notice as many turf related injuries in the Superdome personally.) But everywhere else, every time I see someone fighting for yardage or getting gang tackled I tense up.
So, back to my original question, is there a reason why Ole Miss has decided that not cutting grass is more important than leg injuries for opposing teams coming in that arent used to artificial turf?
ETA: Article talking about more frequent injuries on turf
"College football players suffer knee injuries about 40 percent more often when playing on an artificial surface compared to when they're playing on grass, according to a new study."
Are they just too lazy to cut it or what? I can understand turf in domes and in certain climates where its difficult to keep grass looking presentable during the entirety of football season, but freakin Mississippi isnt one of them. You see a lot of turf in the NFL, and while I dont like it, at least there is enough of it in the league that the players are used to it and know how play on it without getting hurt. College players on the other hand not so much. I would bet a lot of money that Drakes injury Saturday wouldnt have been nearly as devastating if the surface had been grass. He still would have rolled his ankle im sure because of the way the defender rolled up on his leg (unintentionally of course) but his cleat would have been able to let go of the ground or at least tear some of the grass with it instead of being held in place by the turf and forcing the leg to get completely fricked. Same with Duvall's injury. The cleat stuck and the leg moved and it resulted in a sprain instead of just a simple rolled ankle that could have been taped and played on after a few minutes rest. I didnt get to closely see any of the rest of the injuries because I was watching from work so I cant speculate on them.
Every time we play on turf I get nervous about injuries, except at the Superdome. They use some kind of different turf Ive never seen anywhere else before and it doesnt seem to cause as many leg injuries as other places. (I may be completely off base on that but I just dont seem to notice as many turf related injuries in the Superdome personally.) But everywhere else, every time I see someone fighting for yardage or getting gang tackled I tense up.
So, back to my original question, is there a reason why Ole Miss has decided that not cutting grass is more important than leg injuries for opposing teams coming in that arent used to artificial turf?
ETA: Article talking about more frequent injuries on turf
"College football players suffer knee injuries about 40 percent more often when playing on an artificial surface compared to when they're playing on grass, according to a new study."
This post was edited on 10/6/14 at 2:42 pm
Posted on 10/6/14 at 1:52 pm to ThaKaptin
Other than Ole Miss and Vandy, what schools in the SEC have artificial turf?
Posted on 10/6/14 at 1:53 pm to ThaKaptin
We had mold issues with our grass IIRC
Posted on 10/6/14 at 1:54 pm to ThaKaptin
The South End Zone overhang keeps grass from growing down there at that end late in the year.
Posted on 10/6/14 at 2:16 pm to ThaKaptin
I doubt there's a significant link between turf and leg injuries. If anything, you don't have inconsistencies and divots in the surface that could cause problems. Cleats can get caught it it though.
I always hated playing on sports turf because it made my knees and ankles sore and was really hot. I would guess most college players are used to it though. Most major programs have a turf practice field of some kind.
I always hated playing on sports turf because it made my knees and ankles sore and was really hot. I would guess most college players are used to it though. Most major programs have a turf practice field of some kind.
Posted on 10/6/14 at 2:22 pm to ThaKaptin
Because it's their field and they can use whatever they want. Is there scientific data that proves more injuries occur on turf or this is just your personal belief?
Posted on 10/6/14 at 2:54 pm to ThaKaptin
We save money on gas by not having to mow it. That money goes to recruits. End of story.
Posted on 10/6/14 at 2:57 pm to ThaKaptin
Harvey Updyke would have a hard time trying to kill the turf, but as a Gump he would probably try.....
Posted on 10/6/14 at 2:57 pm to ThaKaptin
LOL @ teams without turf. Sorry y'all are poor.
Posted on 10/6/14 at 3:16 pm to ThaKaptin
Alabama always looking out for player safety
Posted on 10/6/14 at 3:20 pm to ThaKaptin
Well Hell yeah there is a reason. The Salesman said that if we would go ahead and install the turf then he would not sell it to Bama or Auburn or LSU or MSU. He said the first one to go turf had an exclusive deal. That and he gave us 0% interest and 25% discount. We had no choice after he knocked another 25% off.
Posted on 10/6/14 at 4:00 pm to ThaKaptin
The goal posts leave less of a mark when dropping on Turf vs. Grass??
Posted on 10/6/14 at 4:43 pm to ThaKaptin
quote:
Is there a legitimate reason that Ole Miss uses turf on their field than grass?
holy shite, what a fabulous melt
Posted on 10/6/14 at 4:50 pm to ThaKaptin
quote:
The South End Zone overhang keeps grass from growing down there at that end late in the year.
This is 100% the reason.. Because of the way our stadium faces.
Posted on 10/6/14 at 5:28 pm to ThaKaptin
Was going to read but I did not.
Posted on 10/6/14 at 5:57 pm to ThaKaptin
Archie Manning endorses arificial turf!
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News