Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum

SDSU's Football Stadium plans


The Sicatoka

Recommended Posts

Should the home team be allowed to dump broken glass and fire ants on the visiting team sideline? Obviously not.

So then, it's logically established: a home team should not be allowed to keep their field in whatever condition they choose.

Thus, the only point to debate is where is the line drawn? What should a home team be able to get away with and what should they not be allowed?

I see it as no stretch of credibility that a home team in DI be required to maintain a surface that, within reason, upholds the highest standard of player safety and performance. Without doubt, a sloppy, muddy, junior high field does neither.

What game are you talking about where the players safety was jepordized by these sloppy, muddy, junior high field conditions? Surely it wasn't this game.. As you can tell by the players jerseys it really must have been a sloppy, muddy, junior high school field mess out there with all the mud. You can barely tell what team a player is on.

I would say beings it rained for an week leading up to the game that field is in great shape. With as much rain as they had any field surface would have been slippery. By your logic the NCAA should require all teams to play inside or only play in dry conditions above 32 degrees. Or maybe the NCAA could require all teams to build domes so there is no outside conditions that could effect the outcome of a game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What game are you talking about where the players safety was jepordized by these sloppy, muddy, junior high field conditions? Surely it wasn't this game.. As you can tell by the players jerseys it really must have been a sloppy, muddy, junior high school field mess out there with all the mud. You can barely tell what team a player is on.

I would say beings it rained for an week leading up to the game that field is in great shape. With as much rain as they had any field surface would have been slippery. By your logic the NCAA should require all teams to play inside or only play in dry conditions above 32 degrees. Or maybe the NCAA could require all teams to build domes so there is no outside conditions that could effect the outcome of a game.

Requiring play indoors or dry conditions above 32 degrees => too restrictive.

Requiring turf on stadiums in particular climates where grass does not grow well in the fall season => not too restrictive.

My opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Requiring play indoors or dry conditions above 32 degrees => too restrictive.

Requiring turf on stadiums in particular climates where grass does not grow well in the fall season => not too restrictive.

My opinion.

Do you honestly beleive the !@#$ you type? Maybe they could just play two hand touch as well. You never answered my question about what game was too sloppy to play football.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see it as no stretch of credibility that a home team in DI be required to maintain a surface that, within reason, upholds the highest standard of player safety and performance. Without doubt, a sloppy, muddy, junior high field does neither.

That sloppy, muddy field probably causes fewer injuries and is safer for players than the carpet that either North Dakota or NDSU play on. Ya know, when it is muddy and slippery, it is that way for both teams, not just the visiting team. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That sloppy, muddy field probably causes fewer injuries and is safer for players than the carpet that either North Dakota or NDSU play on. Ya know, when it is muddy and slippery, it is that way for both teams, not just the visiting team. :)

I never said they should get magic carpet. That crap should be banned.

And yes I realize that muddy, slippery conditions cause a greater chance for injuries and slower performance for both teams. What a treat for the fans that came out to see football played at one of the highest levels. :sad:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Should the home team be allowed to dump broken glass and fire ants on the visiting team sideline? Obviously not.

So then, it's logically established: a home team should not be allowed to keep their field in whatever condition they choose.

Seriously, think before you type.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never said they should get magic carpet. That crap should be banned.

And yes I realize that muddy, slippery conditions cause a greater chance for injuries and slower performance for both teams. What a treat for the fans that came out to see football played at one of the highest levels. :)

Still don't know what game your talking about. It rained the whole week leading up to the NDSU game I linked pictures of and that field looks like its in pretty good shape. Not muddy at all. You can also find pictures of the UNI and SIU games which where later in the year in Brookings and the field looks good in them as well. If you have ever played in Brookings you know that the field itself is well taken care of and one of the nicest grass fields you can find as a player. Not every field needs to be field turf, sprint turf or any other kind of artificial surface. I think your just making excuses for the Bison recent struggles against the Bunnies. Wrong board for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still don't know what game your talking about. It rained the whole week leading up to the NDSU game I linked pictures of and that field looks like its in pretty good shape. Not muddy at all. You can also find pictures of the UNI and SIU games which where later in the year in Brookings and the field looks good in them as well. If you have ever played in Brookings you know that the field itself is well taken care of and one of the nicest grass fields you can find as a player. Not every field needs to be field turf, sprint turf or any other kind of artificial surface. I think your just making excuses for the Bison recent struggles against the Bunnies. Wrong board for that.

I didn't say that it was a problem last year either.

Ask SDSU fans about the field conditions when they lost to Wisc-La Crosse (or whatever team it was). Mud bowl.

There is no point in even risking field conditions like that.

Plus, the new style artificial turfs are seen by recruits as a facilities improvement. If Ohio State, Michigan, Minnesota, Iowa, etc. have it, why doesn't SDSU? You get the idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bet SDSU has field turf within the next decade...Especially if they want playoff games(they won't get one if their field is torn up) and recruits also like field turf.

Yeah cause no team with grass can recruit. Also I seem to remember a kitty littter playoff game the bison played in a few years back. They had to go on the road when they had a nice, warm, dry dome to play in. Bottom line is win your games and more importantly put butts in the seats and thats all the NCAA cares about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah cause no team with grass can recruit. Also I seem to remember a kitty littter playoff game the bison played in a few years back. They had to go on the road when they had a nice, warm, dry dome to play in. Bottom line is win your games and more importantly put butts in the seats and thats all the NCAA cares about.

Doesn't matter. Recruits see it as an advantage (and it is one, whether you're too stubborn to admit it or not) so teams are going to keep installing long blade turf.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't matter. Recruits see it as an advantage (and it is one, whether you're too stubborn to admit it or not) so teams are going to keep installing long blade turf.

Well I'd say based on the success SDSU has had the last few years and the direction their program is going that they are doing ok. Plus Notre Dame and Penn St. are north teams that don't seem to think they need long blade turf to win recruits. Add in Florida and Florida St. and how much rain they can get in Florida and they don't seem to have a problem getting recruits.

Field turf's appeal is due to the cost savings of basically paying for the initial installation and thats it. Not a lot of up keep after that. To get recruits its more important you consistently win games, have a coaches they like, make the playoffs and in some cases offer a major they are looking for. Do that and recruits could care less about whether they play on grass or turf. I have yet to see a kid say the sole reason I picked school A over school B is because they have turf. Its not being stubborn, its actually having common sense and being realistic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I'd say based on the success SDSU has had the last few years and the direction their program is going that they are doing ok. Plus Notre Dame and Penn St. are north teams that don't seem to think they need long blade turf to win recruits. Add in Florida and Florida St. and how much rain they can get in Florida and they don't seem to have a problem getting recruits.

Field turf's appeal is due to the cost savings of basically paying for the initial installation and thats it. Not a lot of up keep after that. To get recruits its more important you consistently win games, have a coaches they like, make the playoffs and in some cases offer a major they are looking for. Do that and recruits could care less about whether they play on grass or turf. I have yet to see a kid say the sole reason I picked school A over school B is because they have turf. Its not being stubborn, its actually having common sense and being realistic.

As much as it pains me to say it, mpls is right. The Montana schools moved to it(MSU fans love it), SDSU is in a similar climate, plus they share their field with a high school. An issue that PSU and Norte Dame don't have.

The FCS is not DII, they forced Chatty to put in field turf after field conditions were bad during a recent title game, if SDSU has a torn up field it will be a strike against them. Yes, most players prefer field turf, I doubt it is a dealbreaker but it just another thing that recruits look for. Once NDSU replaces the concrete turf in a few years it will be another issue SDSU will have to deal with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As much as it pains me to say it, mpls is right. The Montana schools moved to it(MSU fans love it), SDSU is in a similar climate, plus they share their field with a high school. An issue that PSU and Norte Dame don't have.

The FCS is not DII, they forced Chatty to put in field turf after field conditions were bad during a recent title game, if SDSU has a torn up field it will be a strike against them. Yes, most players prefer field turf, I doubt it is a dealbreaker but it just another thing that recruits look for. Once NDSU replaces the concrete turf in a few years it will be another issue SDSU will have to deal with.

So your saying mpls is right that the NCAA should force SDSU to replace their grass with turf? I agree that most schools do it as a maintence issue as I stated earlier. Its a cheaper long term investment. mpls says its all about recruiting, which I don't buy. He also says that the NCAA should force field turf on all schools. I guess if you agree with those things so be it. ???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So your saying mpls is right that the NCAA should force SDSU to replace their grass with turf? I agree that most schools do it as a maintence issue as I stated earlier. Its a cheaper long term investment. mpls says its all about recruiting, which I don't buy. He also says that the NCAA should force field turf on all schools. I guess if you agree with those things so be it. ???

Whoa, I only agree that it will happen, the NCAA has bigger fish to fry than SDSU's turf.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As much as it pains me to say it, mpls is right. The Montana schools moved to it(MSU fans love it), SDSU is in a similar climate, plus they share their field with a high school. An issue that PSU and Norte Dame don't have.

The FCS is not DII, they forced Chatty to put in field turf after field conditions were bad during a recent title game, if SDSU has a torn up field it will be a strike against them. Yes, most players prefer field turf, I doubt it is a dealbreaker but it just another thing that recruits look for. Once NDSU replaces the concrete turf in a few years it will be another issue SDSU will have to deal with.

Yep, once Montana got it Montana State eventually had no choice. SDSU will need to get it just to keep up with their peers.

And it looks so much better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...