Maximum Grilled Steelers Forum
Nov 26, 2014 at 15:48 *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
  Home   Forum   Help Calendar Media Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Heinz Field still grass.  (Read 1174 times)
pensodyssey
Halfsharkalligator halfman.
Global Moderator
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 8124
Online Online

Posts: 9,753



« on: Feb 08, 2008 at 20:57 »

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08039/856014-100.stm


I'm glad the announcement is out of the way, it's my least favorite Steelers-related topic.
Logged

A shabby Charlie Brown.
otismalibu
Global Moderator
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 7055
Online Online

Posts: 10,918



« Reply #1 on: Feb 08, 2008 at 21:30 »

No big surprise here, although I was wondering when they were going to get around to announcing it.

Here's hoping for dry weather home games in the last half of the season.
Logged
shills
No longer a N00b!
**

Karma: 101
Offline Offline

Posts: 55



WWW
« Reply #2 on: Feb 09, 2008 at 08:58 »

Not my favorite topic either, nor am I surprised by the decision.  But, a  topic nonetheless.

No matter if they put in new sod or more DD-Crapmaster, the Rooneys can continue to have those dumb looking 1950's high school field end zone lines as well.  :bang:  Fieldturf is so nice, it's almost too good for the Rooneys.

I blame this reaction on Willie getting his foot caught on the turf in St. Louis.

But, if DD-Crapmaster works in Green Bay, it ought to work here.

Myself, I hope for monsoon season to set in, more slop, more punts getting buried in the turf like lawn darts.   :D

Too bad, too, I was hoping to see what Willie and the speedy QB-killer, LaMarr Woodley would do on fieldturf.
Logged
LambertsFrontTeeth
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 1617
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,462



« Reply #3 on: Feb 09, 2008 at 11:31 »

Hopefully, we host the Cheatriots next year (as opposed to playing on their fast track).  
Logged

"Dreith said I hit Sipe too hard. I hit him as hard as I could. Brian has a chance to go out of bounds and he decides not to. He knows I'm going to hit him. And I do. History."
- - - Jack Lambert, after referee Ben Dreith ejected him from a game for knocking out Browns QB Brian Sipe.
dcity21
Member
***

Karma: 154
Offline Offline

Posts: 214



WWW
« Reply #4 on: Feb 09, 2008 at 11:36 »

maybe Willie and the pass rush is better but the other team's will be better as well.. and the last thing the Steelers need right now is to take anything at all away from their O-line..

God have mercy on Ben's health if we had 8 home games on turf.. Our T's (at least Smith and sometimes Colon (although i think he might have what it takes to stick.. maybe at G but maybe at T too) would get torched to the outside every time and that would allow teams to drop back 7-8 guys in coverage while still getting great pressure..

I don't understand why ppl get all caught up in this turf bull.. I played rugby for 4 years at my college and we played half our home games on a turf field and half on grass, and i HATED TURF, and i mean that good black pebbley stuff that all these stadiums have.. and i was a speed reliant player. For those who know the sport at all, i played outside-centre and wing.. those two positions rely on speed probably more than any one position in football..

and Guess what? fast players are still faster than other guys on grass..

and i'll tell you what we had WAY more injuries relating to shoulders, elbows, knees, and ankles on the turf than we did on the grass.. Honestly, i don't know if any ex football player will agree with me or not but if a grass field was in good shape it was a fricking rush to get planted once or twice into the sod.. and the next day it was always easier to move around after having played on grass..

if someone wants to call me a liar they are more than welcome but that's my story and i'm sticking to it..
« Last Edit: Feb 10, 2008 at 00:07 by dcity21 » Logged

"i don't know Nutting about baseball.. but i know about Nutting over making some cash.." Ownership ROCKS!!!
pensodyssey
Halfsharkalligator halfman.
Global Moderator
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 8124
Online Online

Posts: 9,753



« Reply #5 on: Feb 09, 2008 at 11:47 »

Quote


I don't understand why ppl get all caught up in this turf bull.. I played rugby for 4 years at my college and we played half our home games on a turf field and half on grass, and i HATED TURF, and i mean that good black pebbley stuff that all these stadiums have.. and i was a speed reliant player. For those who know i played outside-centre, and wing.. those two positions rely on speed probably more than anyone position in football..

and Guess what? fast players are still faster than other guys on grass..
 
I couldn't agree with you more, dcity.  I see no immediate, mid-range, or long-term benefit to switching to another surface, except to win some BS popularity contest about "best playing surface".  Who won that this year, btw?  Anyone know?  Exactly.

As for rugby, I know exactly what you're saying.  I started as a wing then moved to fullback after I understood the game better.  I played in Scotland, so the weather was almost invariably a factor.  Let me tell you, I loved playing in the rain and on muddy tracks because, apart from anything else, it really puts the defender in a bad spot concerning tackling angles, and any juke you have is that much more effective.

Of course, the key is to get the ball into empty space, too.  It's not the surface, it's knowing how to play the game.  That's why I disagree with aj's assertion that we have to cater to speed.  First of all, every team in the league drafts for speed; the key is to get fast guys who also are football players.  Woodson was a beast at TRS; I can't help but imagine how well (or how long) he would have been on grass for all those years.
Logged

A shabby Charlie Brown.
Preacherman0
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 5808
Offline Offline

Posts: 4,848



WWW
« Reply #6 on: Feb 09, 2008 at 14:09 »

Hate playing on the old-style turf.  The field turf, well, I never got to experience that, at my age.   oo)

My son trains on field turf and likes it, but he doesn't have to land on it.  I still think it would be pretty rough to hit that stuff 60 times a game.
Logged

We have traded Christ for the religion of Christianity.
dcity21
Member
***

Karma: 154
Offline Offline

Posts: 214



WWW
« Reply #7 on: Feb 10, 2008 at 00:05 »

Quote
Quote


I don't understand why ppl get all caught up in this turf bull.. I played rugby for 4 years at my college and we played half our home games on a turf field and half on grass, and i HATED TURF, and i mean that good black pebbley stuff that all these stadiums have.. and i was a speed reliant player. For those who know i played outside-centre, and wing.. those two positions rely on speed probably more than anyone position in football..

and Guess what? fast players are still faster than other guys on grass..
 
I couldn't agree with you more, dcity.  I see no immediate, mid-range, or long-term benefit to switching to another surface, except to win some BS popularity contest about "best playing surface".  Who won that this year, btw?  Anyone know?  Exactly.

As for rugby, I know exactly what you're saying.  I started as a wing then moved to fullback after I understood the game better.  I played in Scotland, so the weather was almost invariably a factor.  Let me tell you, I loved playing in the rain and on muddy tracks because, apart from anything else, it really puts the defender in a bad spot concerning tackling angles, and any juke you have is that much more effective.

Of course, the key is to get the ball into empty space, too.  It's not the surface, it's knowing how to play the game.  That's why I disagree with aj's assertion that we have to cater to speed.  First of all, every team in the league drafts for speed; the key is to get fast guys who also are football players.  Woodson was a beast at TRS; I can't help but imagine how well (or how long) he would have been on grass for all those years.
WOW!! i would love to play overseas.. we had a couple of English kids on our team and they were absolute studs and played the game almost in a completely different way/level.. I mean we had the same concept of rugby as they did and our American asses played the game real tough but they just played possessed 100% of the time..

and i agree 100% with the sloppy field comment..

and yeah having the brains to play a position is just as important.. Especially for a fullback, the last line of defense!! and you're right ppl probably don't realize how important strategy and planning is in a rugby game.. I unfortunately never played football (i would have had to play for a rival HS cuz our school was too small and i was having none of that) and really wish i had so that i could compare the two sports better.. Rugby seems to be much more intense just based on the fact that play is 100% continuous..



and Preach the new field turf stuff really is great stuff for the School, Franchise, or Community that puts it in, b/c of how low maintenance it is, and how aesthetically pleasing it is. But you're assumption that it sucks to fall on is basically right on and therefore IMO it sucks for those that have to play on it..

It is kind of bouncy and soft, but still not good for being tackled on.. if you get absolutely planted you can really kind of get stuck.. That is how you really get hurt.. Your knee gets planted and the rubber only gives so much than it stops and the rest of you keeps moving.. I'm almost 100% that the turf was 100% responsible the 2 times i separated my shoulders.. I got tackled just like it says in the books.. they got me low and lifted me up and drove me into the ground onto one shoulder and got stuck like i said earlier and that was that..

Never happened in grass.. On soft fields you get planted and leave a huge dent.. on hard fields you'd get planted and slide.. On turf it was a combo and IMO that is the scary stuff.. oh and he RUG BURN IS THE FRICKING WORST!!! You get every damn place you can imagine.. and you get those rubber pebbles all through your eyes and that is a real bitch and a half..


Ok, enough about me, i'm done.. I hope that makes at least some sense regarding the turf.. I seriously don't have a clue as to why any athlete would prefer it..  but maybe i'm just old-fashioned..
Logged

"i don't know Nutting about baseball.. but i know about Nutting over making some cash.." Ownership ROCKS!!!
LambertsFrontTeeth
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 1617
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,462



« Reply #8 on: Feb 10, 2008 at 05:30 »

There have also been concerns that artificial surfaces *might* promote bacteria. Don't want our boys getting weird MRSA or anything.

Although, we DO have to play in Cleveland at least once a year.
Logged

"Dreith said I hit Sipe too hard. I hit him as hard as I could. Brian has a chance to go out of bounds and he decides not to. He knows I'm going to hit him. And I do. History."
- - - Jack Lambert, after referee Ben Dreith ejected him from a game for knocking out Browns QB Brian Sipe.
aj_law
Global Moderator
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 5538
Offline Offline

Posts: 15,186


« Reply #9 on: Feb 11, 2008 at 12:51 »

Again, the only reason why I prefer FieldTurf over the current DD system is because of the amount of play the field gets.

If Pittsburgh treated their field with the same reverance that the Packers did and allowed nobody to play on it, I'd be completely cool with a 100%, home grown grass surface.  Ideally, that's the way the game should be played.

Limit non-Steeler use and get a better tarp/coverage system for foul weather and they're golden.  Neither one will happen though.
Logged

We suck because our drafts have been THE SUCK.
Pages: [1] 2  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal
| Sitemap
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!