Steelers sticking with grass at Heinz Field (1 Viewer)

[Godsbrother]

Steelers will stick with grass at Heinz Field

Posted: February 8, 2008

SportingNews staff reports

The Steelers have decided to keep playing on natural grass at Heinz Field, SportsBusiness Daily reports.

"That's what the players want," Executive Director of Stadium Development Jimmie Sacco said Thursday at the Stadium Managers Association conference.

In 2006, the NFL Players Association voted Heinz Field the league's second-worst playing surface. The Steelers had considered installing artificial turf for the 2008 season after heavy rain turned the natural field to mud for a November 26 game against the Dolphins.

Team chairman Dan Rooney said last week that he was inclined to keep grass at Heinz Field because players were concerned that artificial turf can cause injuries.

"Our No. 1 concern is the safety of our players," Rooney told the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. "We had the leading runner (Willie Parker) in the National Football League break his leg, and it had something to do with the (St. Louis) turf.

The University of Pittsburgh also plays its home games at Heinz Field.

 

[jonessed]

It's not like the Rams use AstroTurf anymore. The quality of artifical turf has come quite a long way. Seems more hazardous to play in 3 inches of mud.

 

[NorrisB]

The Rooney's need to stop being so cheap and not allow other sporting event to happen there.

 

[kevinray]

Cheap? Its not like they bought the stadium. Pitt and the High school playoffs were always apart of the stadium deal. Its Pitts main facility.

 

[QuizGuy66]

Will they continue to let the cows graze there as well?

-QG

 

[redman]

The Rooney's need to stop being so cheap and not allow other sporting event to happen there.

A torn up field for a playoff game because they were holding the NFL version of a bake sale only days before is an embarrassment.

 

[Godsbrother]

The Rooney's need to stop being so cheap and not allow other sporting event to happen there.

I think the grass surface is actually more expensive in the long run. The Steelers resod the field twice each season at a cost of > $100K.

 

[Doug B]

Other teams' grass fields (when grass was more prevalent in the 70s & 80s) weren't that bad. Does Heinz just have bad grass in some way? It seems to divot too easily and deeply ... is the rooting lousy?

 

[redman]

The Rooney's need to stop being so cheap and not allow other sporting event to happen there.

I think the grass surface is actually more expensive in the long run. The Steelers resod the field twice each season at a cost of > $100K.

Mercy, you mean that they have to sell a whole 25k beers just to get some more sod onto the field? How does that team even operate?

 

[kevinray]

Other teams' grass fields (when grass was more prevalent in the 70s & 80s) weren't that bad. Does Heinz just have bad grass in some way? It seems to divot too easily and deeply ... is the rooting lousy?

Pittsburgh gets the second most rain to Seattle. Pitt plays their games there, and when the weathers hardest on the field in Nov the field sometimes has highschool playoffs on friday, pitt saturday and Steelers sunday. Also the new turf didn't work with the original drainage system for some reason so hopefully they fixed that. Either way the feilds always fine early and just gets abused so much that its dead come the end of November. I was kind of hoping they'd go to artifical so I wouldn't have to hear about the field anymore.

 

[kevinray]

The Rooney's need to stop being so cheap and not allow other sporting event to happen there.

I think the grass surface is actually more expensive in the long run. The Steelers resod the field twice each season at a cost of > $100K.

Mercy, you mean that they have to sell a whole 25k beers just to get some more sod onto the field? How does that team even operate?

100k is a 100k. who cares how you get it? does it support the cheap idea that they'd only have to move that much money from beer sales to give the players what they want when they could easily say were putting in old astro tuff cause theres a deal on it and we wont have to change it for 20 years? I'd like the new field turf to be put in but the players want grass and the Rooney's certainly aren't being cheap by putting it in.

 

[Sheriff66]

The Rooney's need to stop being so cheap and not allow other sporting event to happen there.

I think the grass surface is actually more expensive in the long run. The Steelers resod the field twice each season at a cost of > $100K.

Mercy, you mean that they have to sell a whole 25k beers just to get some more sod onto the field? How does that team even operate?

 

[NorrisB]

The Rooney's need to stop being so cheap and not allow other sporting event to happen there.

I think the grass surface is actually more expensive in the long run. The Steelers resod the field twice each season at a cost of > $100K.

You got a link to that

 

[Barry]

The Rooney's need to stop being so cheap and not allow other sporting event to happen there.

I think the grass surface is actually more expensive in the long run. The Steelers resod the field twice each season at a cost of > $100K.

You got a link to that

Artificial turf would be the cheap route. Cost plays no part in the decision to go grass. Why exactly is a muddy playing surface an embarrassment? who cares.

 

[redman]

The Rooney's need to stop being so cheap and not allow other sporting event to happen there.

I think the grass surface is actually more expensive in the long run. The Steelers resod the field twice each season at a cost of > $100K.

You got a link to that

Artificial turf would be the cheap route. Cost plays no part in the decision to go grass. Why exactly is a muddy playing surface an embarrassment? who cares.

Because the name of the surface is "grass", not "mud", and the lack of traction on the latter both changes the way the game is played and can cause injuries. HTH.

 

[Barry]

The Rooney's need to stop being so cheap and not allow other sporting event to happen there.

I think the grass surface is actually more expensive in the long run. The Steelers resod the field twice each season at a cost of > $100K.

You got a link to that

Artificial turf would be the cheap route. Cost plays no part in the decision to go grass. Why exactly is a muddy playing surface an embarrassment? who cares.

Because the name of the surface is "grass", not "mud", and the lack of traction on the latter both changes the way the game is played and can cause injuries. HTH.

The players like it how it is. Too bad if it makes the media sad.

 

[redman]

The Rooney's need to stop being so cheap and not allow other sporting event to happen there.

I think the grass surface is actually more expensive in the long run. The Steelers resod the field twice each season at a cost of > $100K.

You got a link to that

Artificial turf would be the cheap route. Cost plays no part in the decision to go grass. Why exactly is a muddy playing surface an embarrassment? who cares.

Because the name of the surface is "grass", not "mud", and the lack of traction on the latter both changes the way the game is played and can cause injuries. HTH.

The players like it how it is. Too bad if it makes the media sad.

If you're referring to the Jacksonville players, then I agree with you.

 

[kevinray]

The NFL said they were fine with the the field after the Jacksonville game.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8...mp;confirm=true

I could care less what the other teams think. I'm sure a lot of teams would prefer to play in a dome with field turf every week but you're going to have to adapt your playing style when you play up north outside in the winter months. The Dolphins game was a one time situation where they resoded the field right before a the field was hit with 1 and 1/2 inches of rain in a short time frame. Its not the best surface the rest of the year but the NFL doesn't have a problem with it and our players like it.

 

[redman]

The NFL said they were fine with the the field after the Jacksonville game.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8...mp;confirm=true

I could care less what the other teams think. I'm sure a lot of teams would prefer to play in a dome with field turf every week but you're going to have to adapt your playing style when you play up north outside in the winter months. The Dolphins game was a one time situation where they resoded the field right before a the field was hit with 1 and 1/2 inches of rain in a short time frame. Its not the best surface the rest of the year but the NFL doesn't have a problem with it and our players like it.

The NFL also said that the taping of other teams was a non-issue after the Patriots were punished. I don't take seriously what the image-conscious NFL's official stance is on these issues.

 

[kevinray]

The NFL said they were fine with the the field after the Jacksonville game.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8...mp;confirm=true

I could care less what the other teams think. I'm sure a lot of teams would prefer to play in a dome with field turf every week but you're going to have to adapt your playing style when you play up north outside in the winter months. The Dolphins game was a one time situation where they resoded the field right before a the field was hit with 1 and 1/2 inches of rain in a short time frame. Its not the best surface the rest of the year but the NFL doesn't have a problem with it and our players like it.

The NFL also said that the taping of other teams was a non-issue after the Patriots were punished. I don't take seriously what the image-conscious NFL's official stance is on these issues.

You ever hear of game film?I don't want to get into the Patriots stuff again. There isn't enough info yet about the Rams situation and the rest of it has been rehashed so many times that I'm done with it.

You can make the NFL cover up arguement about anything you don't like about the league so I don't think its a good point. All northern teams fields get bad come winter, the steelers have a bad field normally come that time and no ones argueing otherwise. I'd be interested in hearing a point to all of this.

 

[redman]

The NFL said they were fine with the the field after the Jacksonville game.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8...mp;confirm=true

I could care less what the other teams think. I'm sure a lot of teams would prefer to play in a dome with field turf every week but you're going to have to adapt your playing style when you play up north outside in the winter months. The Dolphins game was a one time situation where they resoded the field right before a the field was hit with 1 and 1/2 inches of rain in a short time frame. Its not the best surface the rest of the year but the NFL doesn't have a problem with it and our players like it.

The NFL also said that the taping of other teams was a non-issue after the Patriots were punished. I don't take seriously what the image-conscious NFL's official stance is on these issues.

You ever hear of game film?I don't want to get into the Patriots stuff again. There isn't enough info yet about the Rams situation and the rest of it has been rehashed so many times that I'm done with it.

You can make the NFL cover up arguement about anything you don't like about the league so I don't think its a good point. All northern teams fields get bad come winter, the steelers have a bad field normally come that time and no ones argueing otherwise. I'd be interested in hearing a point to all of this.

This is just equivocating. Yeah, a lot of northern teams have turf fields, and none of them were anywhere near as bad as the Steelers' field. It wasn't close. Make all the excuses you want, but for a front-line, supposedly proud franchise to be unable to provide a good field to play on for a playoff game is an embarrassment.

 

[kevinray]

The NFL said they were fine with the the field after the Jacksonville game.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8...mp;confirm=true

I could care less what the other teams think. I'm sure a lot of teams would prefer to play in a dome with field turf every week but you're going to have to adapt your playing style when you play up north outside in the winter months. The Dolphins game was a one time situation where they resoded the field right before a the field was hit with 1 and 1/2 inches of rain in a short time frame. Its not the best surface the rest of the year but the NFL doesn't have a problem with it and our players like it.

The NFL also said that the taping of other teams was a non-issue after the Patriots were punished. I don't take seriously what the image-conscious NFL's official stance is on these issues.

You ever hear of game film?I don't want to get into the Patriots stuff again. There isn't enough info yet about the Rams situation and the rest of it has been rehashed so many times that I'm done with it.

You can make the NFL cover up arguement about anything you don't like about the league so I don't think its a good point. All northern teams fields get bad come winter, the steelers have a bad field normally come that time and no ones argueing otherwise. I'd be interested in hearing a point to all of this.

This is just equivocating. Yeah, a lot of northern teams have turf fields, and none of them were anywhere near as bad as the Steelers' field. It wasn't close. Make all the excuses you want, but for a front-line, supposedly proud franchise to be unable to provide a good field to play on for a playoff game is an embarrassment.

The steelers get more rain and more use out of their field than any one else. Neither of those are going to change. Again the leagues fine with the field, and our players like the field. I don't see why it would need to go any further than that. The cheap arguement has been disproved, and no one disagrees with you about the field getting bad at the end of the year, so whats the point? You feel its embarrassing. I'm sure the Steelers care more about how thier team feels about it then anyone else.

 

[redman]

The NFL said they were fine with the the field after the Jacksonville game.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8...mp;confirm=true

I could care less what the other teams think. I'm sure a lot of teams would prefer to play in a dome with field turf every week but you're going to have to adapt your playing style when you play up north outside in the winter months. The Dolphins game was a one time situation where they resoded the field right before a the field was hit with 1 and 1/2 inches of rain in a short time frame. Its not the best surface the rest of the year but the NFL doesn't have a problem with it and our players like it.

The NFL also said that the taping of other teams was a non-issue after the Patriots were punished. I don't take seriously what the image-conscious NFL's official stance is on these issues.

You ever hear of game film?I don't want to get into the Patriots stuff again. There isn't enough info yet about the Rams situation and the rest of it has been rehashed so many times that I'm done with it.

You can make the NFL cover up arguement about anything you don't like about the league so I don't think its a good point. All northern teams fields get bad come winter, the steelers have a bad field normally come that time and no ones argueing otherwise. I'd be interested in hearing a point to all of this.

This is just equivocating. Yeah, a lot of northern teams have turf fields, and none of them were anywhere near as bad as the Steelers' field. It wasn't close. Make all the excuses you want, but for a front-line, supposedly proud franchise to be unable to provide a good field to play on for a playoff game is an embarrassment.

The steelers get more rain and more use out of their field than any one else. Neither of those are going to change. Again the leagues fine with the field, and our players like the field. I don't see why it would need to go any further than that. The cheap arguement has been disproved, and no one disagrees with you about the field getting bad at the end of the year, so whats the point? You feel its embarrassing. I'm sure the Steelers care more about how thier team feels about it then anyone else.

This is the problem.

 

[kevinray]

The NFL said they were fine with the the field after the Jacksonville game.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8...mp;confirm=true

I could care less what the other teams think. I'm sure a lot of teams would prefer to play in a dome with field turf every week but you're going to have to adapt your playing style when you play up north outside in the winter months. The Dolphins game was a one time situation where they resoded the field right before a the field was hit with 1 and 1/2 inches of rain in a short time frame. Its not the best surface the rest of the year but the NFL doesn't have a problem with it and our players like it.

The NFL also said that the taping of other teams was a non-issue after the Patriots were punished. I don't take seriously what the image-conscious NFL's official stance is on these issues.

You ever hear of game film?I don't want to get into the Patriots stuff again. There isn't enough info yet about the Rams situation and the rest of it has been rehashed so many times that I'm done with it.

You can make the NFL cover up arguement about anything you don't like about the league so I don't think its a good point. All northern teams fields get bad come winter, the steelers have a bad field normally come that time and no ones argueing otherwise. I'd be interested in hearing a point to all of this.

This is just equivocating. Yeah, a lot of northern teams have turf fields, and none of them were anywhere near as bad as the Steelers' field. It wasn't close. Make all the excuses you want, but for a front-line, supposedly proud franchise to be unable to provide a good field to play on for a playoff game is an embarrassment.

The steelers get more rain and more use out of their field than any one else. Neither of those are going to change. Again the leagues fine with the field, and our players like the field. I don't see why it would need to go any further than that. The cheap arguement has been disproved, and no one disagrees with you about the field getting bad at the end of the year, so whats the point? You feel its embarrassing. I'm sure the Steelers care more about how thier team feels about it then anyone else.

This is the problem.

Since when is it the home teams job to make the oppossing team comfortable? Its within the rules of the NFL, and its prefered by the team. Again the Miami game was an anomoly and the rest of the years field conditions were fine by NFL standards. What so surprising that they're sticking with grass.

 

[Godsbrother]

The Rooney's need to stop being so cheap and not allow other sporting event to happen there.

I think the grass surface is actually more expensive in the long run. The Steelers resod the field twice each season at a cost of > $100K.

You got a link to that

The Steelers traditionally sod the field in November and again after the season. This is the best I could do for a link:

Ed Bouchette on the Steelers: The Grass Menagerie

Front office is still mulling its options for the surface at Heinz Field, and that includes keeping the grass.

Sunday, January 20, 2008

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Some of the Heinz Field turf kicks up during the Monday night game vs. Miami in November.The Steelers soon will decide whether to stick with grass at Heinz Field or finally make the move to artificial turf.

They had meetings on the matter this past week.

"Don't rule out grass," one official cautioned as mounting sentiment grows inside the organization to install artificial turf.

They've already chosen the type of artificial surface if they make the change -- the new generation of FieldTurf that West Virginia University installed last summer and the New England Patriots put down in 2006. It's called Duraspine and it cost WVU $901,152 to install.

The cost has little to do with the Steelers' decision. They paid $150,000 last November to have sod placed over their deteriorating DDGrassMaster field, which is grass tied together and down by synthetic fibers.

The DDGrassMaster, which also is used by the Denver Broncos, was supposed to be an improvement over Heinz Field's original all-grass field. It was great in September and October. By November, after poundings by Pitt and the Steelers for two months, the five high school championships played at Heinz Field applied the coup de gras.

Injuries and their own players' professed preferences for grass are reasons the Steelers have stayed with the grass that turned to dirt and mud by late season. They believed it to be safer. In that sense, it's been a well-intentioned experiment.

 

[redman]

The NFL said they were fine with the the field after the Jacksonville game.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8...mp;confirm=true

I could care less what the other teams think. I'm sure a lot of teams would prefer to play in a dome with field turf every week but you're going to have to adapt your playing style when you play up north outside in the winter months. The Dolphins game was a one time situation where they resoded the field right before a the field was hit with 1 and 1/2 inches of rain in a short time frame. Its not the best surface the rest of the year but the NFL doesn't have a problem with it and our players like it.

The NFL also said that the taping of other teams was a non-issue after the Patriots were punished. I don't take seriously what the image-conscious NFL's official stance is on these issues.

You ever hear of game film?I don't want to get into the Patriots stuff again. There isn't enough info yet about the Rams situation and the rest of it has been rehashed so many times that I'm done with it.

You can make the NFL cover up arguement about anything you don't like about the league so I don't think its a good point. All northern teams fields get bad come winter, the steelers have a bad field normally come that time and no ones argueing otherwise. I'd be interested in hearing a point to all of this.

This is just equivocating. Yeah, a lot of northern teams have turf fields, and none of them were anywhere near as bad as the Steelers' field. It wasn't close. Make all the excuses you want, but for a front-line, supposedly proud franchise to be unable to provide a good field to play on for a playoff game is an embarrassment.

The steelers get more rain and more use out of their field than any one else. Neither of those are going to change. Again the leagues fine with the field, and our players like the field. I don't see why it would need to go any further than that. The cheap arguement has been disproved, and no one disagrees with you about the field getting bad at the end of the year, so whats the point? You feel its embarrassing. I'm sure the Steelers care more about how thier team feels about it then anyone else.

This is the problem.

Since when is it the home teams job to make the oppossing team comfortable? Its within the rules of the NFL, and its prefered by the team. Again the Miami game was an anomoly and the rest of the years field conditions were fine by NFL standards. What so surprising that they're sticking with grass.

Again, Jacksonville looked plenty comfortable. That's not the point. If you can't supply an NFL caliber field, I don't think you deserve to host NFL games. Pretty simple.

 

[poopdawg]

Other teams' grass fields (when grass was more prevalent in the 70s & 80s) weren't that bad. Does Heinz just have bad grass in some way? It seems to divot too easily and deeply ... is the rooting lousy?

I always thought that it had something to do with the quality of the dirt and ground underneath the grass itself. When it rains, it turns into quicksand of sorts. But if thats what the players want and as long as they win games, so be it.

 

[kevinray]

The NFL said they were fine with the the field after the Jacksonville game.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8...mp;confirm=true

I could care less what the other teams think. I'm sure a lot of teams would prefer to play in a dome with field turf every week but you're going to have to adapt your playing style when you play up north outside in the winter months. The Dolphins game was a one time situation where they resoded the field right before a the field was hit with 1 and 1/2 inches of rain in a short time frame. Its not the best surface the rest of the year but the NFL doesn't have a problem with it and our players like it.

The NFL also said that the taping of other teams was a non-issue after the Patriots were punished. I don't take seriously what the image-conscious NFL's official stance is on these issues.

You ever hear of game film?I don't want to get into the Patriots stuff again. There isn't enough info yet about the Rams situation and the rest of it has been rehashed so many times that I'm done with it.

You can make the NFL cover up arguement about anything you don't like about the league so I don't think its a good point. All northern teams fields get bad come winter, the steelers have a bad field normally come that time and no ones argueing otherwise. I'd be interested in hearing a point to all of this.

This is just equivocating. Yeah, a lot of northern teams have turf fields, and none of them were anywhere near as bad as the Steelers' field. It wasn't close. Make all the excuses you want, but for a front-line, supposedly proud franchise to be unable to provide a good field to play on for a playoff game is an embarrassment.

The steelers get more rain and more use out of their field than any one else. Neither of those are going to change. Again the leagues fine with the field, and our players like the field. I don't see why it would need to go any further than that. The cheap arguement has been disproved, and no one disagrees with you about the field getting bad at the end of the year, so whats the point? You feel its embarrassing. I'm sure the Steelers care more about how thier team feels about it then anyone else.

This is the problem.

Since when is it the home teams job to make the oppossing team comfortable? Its within the rules of the NFL, and its prefered by the team. Again the Miami game was an anomoly and the rest of the years field conditions were fine by NFL standards. What so surprising that they're sticking with grass.

Again, Jacksonville looked plenty comfortable. That's not the point. If you can't supply an NFL caliber field, I don't think you deserve to host NFL games. Pretty simple.

Pretty simple the NFL says its a NFL caliber field even if you don't.

 

[redman]

The NFL said they were fine with the the field after the Jacksonville game.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8...mp;confirm=true

I could care less what the other teams think. I'm sure a lot of teams would prefer to play in a dome with field turf every week but you're going to have to adapt your playing style when you play up north outside in the winter months. The Dolphins game was a one time situation where they resoded the field right before a the field was hit with 1 and 1/2 inches of rain in a short time frame. Its not the best surface the rest of the year but the NFL doesn't have a problem with it and our players like it.

The NFL also said that the taping of other teams was a non-issue after the Patriots were punished. I don't take seriously what the image-conscious NFL's official stance is on these issues.

You ever hear of game film?I don't want to get into the Patriots stuff again. There isn't enough info yet about the Rams situation and the rest of it has been rehashed so many times that I'm done with it.

You can make the NFL cover up arguement about anything you don't like about the league so I don't think its a good point. All northern teams fields get bad come winter, the steelers have a bad field normally come that time and no ones argueing otherwise. I'd be interested in hearing a point to all of this.

This is just equivocating. Yeah, a lot of northern teams have turf fields, and none of them were anywhere near as bad as the Steelers' field. It wasn't close. Make all the excuses you want, but for a front-line, supposedly proud franchise to be unable to provide a good field to play on for a playoff game is an embarrassment.

The steelers get more rain and more use out of their field than any one else. Neither of those are going to change. Again the leagues fine with the field, and our players like the field. I don't see why it would need to go any further than that. The cheap arguement has been disproved, and no one disagrees with you about the field getting bad at the end of the year, so whats the point? You feel its embarrassing. I'm sure the Steelers care more about how thier team feels about it then anyone else.

This is the problem.

Since when is it the home teams job to make the oppossing team comfortable? Its within the rules of the NFL, and its prefered by the team. Again the Miami game was an anomoly and the rest of the years field conditions were fine by NFL standards. What so surprising that they're sticking with grass.

Again, Jacksonville looked plenty comfortable. That's not the point. If you can't supply an NFL caliber field, I don't think you deserve to host NFL games. Pretty simple.

Pretty simple the NFL says its a NFL caliber field even if you don't.

Good to know that Steelers fans are robotic enough to defer all of their own thinking to what the NFL says. Remember to wind that key turning in your back.

 

[Godsbrother]

A grass surface in Pittsburgh is never going to be pretty in November but I don't think people appreciate how much rain we had the night of the Miami game. I don't care where you play if you have 3" of rain in a few hours no field is going to be in good shape. I am telling you I have come out of the bathtub drier than I did at that game. I was absolutely soaked.

It reminded me of Big Ben's first start in Miami where the game was played in a hurricane. Very similar conditions.

 

[Godsbrother]

The NFL said they were fine with the the field after the Jacksonville game.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8...mp;confirm=true

I could care less what the other teams think. I'm sure a lot of teams would prefer to play in a dome with field turf every week but you're going to have to adapt your playing style when you play up north outside in the winter months. The Dolphins game was a one time situation where they resoded the field right before a the field was hit with 1 and 1/2 inches of rain in a short time frame. Its not the best surface the rest of the year but the NFL doesn't have a problem with it and our players like it.

The NFL also said that the taping of other teams was a non-issue after the Patriots were punished. I don't take seriously what the image-conscious NFL's official stance is on these issues.

You ever hear of game film?I don't want to get into the Patriots stuff again. There isn't enough info yet about the Rams situation and the rest of it has been rehashed so many times that I'm done with it.

You can make the NFL cover up arguement about anything you don't like about the league so I don't think its a good point. All northern teams fields get bad come winter, the steelers have a bad field normally come that time and no ones argueing otherwise. I'd be interested in hearing a point to all of this.

This is just equivocating. Yeah, a lot of northern teams have turf fields, and none of them were anywhere near as bad as the Steelers' field. It wasn't close. Make all the excuses you want, but for a front-line, supposedly proud franchise to be unable to provide a good field to play on for a playoff game is an embarrassment.

The steelers get more rain and more use out of their field than any one else. Neither of those are going to change. Again the leagues fine with the field, and our players like the field. I don't see why it would need to go any further than that. The cheap arguement has been disproved, and no one disagrees with you about the field getting bad at the end of the year, so whats the point? You feel its embarrassing. I'm sure the Steelers care more about how thier team feels about it then anyone else.

This is the problem.

Since when is it the home teams job to make the oppossing team comfortable? Its within the rules of the NFL, and its prefered by the team. Again the Miami game was an anomoly and the rest of the years field conditions were fine by NFL standards. What so surprising that they're sticking with grass.

Again, Jacksonville looked plenty comfortable. That's not the point. If you can't supply an NFL caliber field, I don't think you deserve to host NFL games. Pretty simple.

Pretty simple the NFL says its a NFL caliber field even if you don't.

Good to know that Steelers fans are robotic enough to defer all of their own thinking to what the NFL says. Remember to wind that key turning in your back.

It is not just the NFL, the Steelers players want to keep the grass field.

 

[kevinray]

The NFL said they were fine with the the field after the Jacksonville game.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8...mp;confirm=true

I could care less what the other teams think. I'm sure a lot of teams would prefer to play in a dome with field turf every week but you're going to have to adapt your playing style when you play up north outside in the winter months. The Dolphins game was a one time situation where they resoded the field right before a the field was hit with 1 and 1/2 inches of rain in a short time frame. Its not the best surface the rest of the year but the NFL doesn't have a problem with it and our players like it.

The NFL also said that the taping of other teams was a non-issue after the Patriots were punished. I don't take seriously what the image-conscious NFL's official stance is on these issues.

You ever hear of game film?I don't want to get into the Patriots stuff again. There isn't enough info yet about the Rams situation and the rest of it has been rehashed so many times that I'm done with it.

You can make the NFL cover up arguement about anything you don't like about the league so I don't think its a good point. All northern teams fields get bad come winter, the steelers have a bad field normally come that time and no ones argueing otherwise. I'd be interested in hearing a point to all of this.

This is just equivocating. Yeah, a lot of northern teams have turf fields, and none of them were anywhere near as bad as the Steelers' field. It wasn't close. Make all the excuses you want, but for a front-line, supposedly proud franchise to be unable to provide a good field to play on for a playoff game is an embarrassment.

The steelers get more rain and more use out of their field than any one else. Neither of those are going to change. Again the leagues fine with the field, and our players like the field. I don't see why it would need to go any further than that. The cheap arguement has been disproved, and no one disagrees with you about the field getting bad at the end of the year, so whats the point? You feel its embarrassing. I'm sure the Steelers care more about how thier team feels about it then anyone else.

This is the problem.

Since when is it the home teams job to make the oppossing team comfortable? Its within the rules of the NFL, and its prefered by the team. Again the Miami game was an anomoly and the rest of the years field conditions were fine by NFL standards. What so surprising that they're sticking with grass.

Again, Jacksonville looked plenty comfortable. That's not the point. If you can't supply an NFL caliber field, I don't think you deserve to host NFL games. Pretty simple.

Pretty simple the NFL says its a NFL caliber field even if you don't.

Good to know that Steelers fans are robotic enough to defer all of their own thinking to what the NFL says. Remember to wind that key turning in your back.

Way to provide good opinion there. What other basis are you looking for? I watch every Steeler game and Pitt game. How many do you see? The field is not the best in the league buts it’s perfectly fine to play ball on. What basis are you using that trumps the opinion of teams that play on it every week, the originations that govern them, and the fans that watch every game?

 

[Jiggyonthehut]

I'm fine with it. I'd only prefer they re-sod the field after looking at the weather forecast.

 

[Pai Mei]

I am telling you I have come out of the bathtub drier than I did at that game.

Steelers fans do not bathe.(Sorry, just a pure harmless poke inside the Steelers / Browns rivalry. Not meant to be personal.)

 

[Fiddles]

props to kevin for responding so well in this thread

usually I agree with redman but seems like you are spinning your wheels and missing the point here

 

[Class Dismissed]

The simple solution is for the Steelers and the Panthers to play away games the weekend of the High School Championships, it really shouldn't be that hard to accomplish.

 

[Godsbrother]

Looks like common sense might finally be sinking in:

Heinz Field could avoid scheduling fiascoBy Kevin GormanTRIBUNE-REVIEWMonday, February 25, 2008 The scheduling fiasco that saw Heinz Field turn to a muddy mess after playing host to six football games in one weekend this past November likely will be avoided this fall, as Pitt will play at Cincinnati the weekend of the WPIAL championships and the Steelers also have requested that the NFL schedule a road game. There was concern when the Pitt-West Virginia game was scheduled for the Friday after Thanksgiving that it would interfere with the WPIAL football finals, which have been played on that day the past few years, but the WPIAL championship games are scheduled the weekend before, Nov. 21-22. With Pitt away, the WPIAL finals could be played on a Saturday for the first time in a few years. "We are elated by the opportunity to go there," WPIAL executive director Tim O'Malley said. "The date of availability will be dictated by the scheduled use of Heinz Field. Our day of preference would be to play on Saturday, if they let us, because we're in school on Friday. This year, it wasn't an issue. It's not conducive to anything we're supposedly about if we play on Friday when the kids are in school. If we have no choice, we would make other arrangements. Pitt's away and if the Steelers are away, it shouldn't be a problem." It was a problem that drew national attention last fall, when the WPIAL played four championship games Nov. 24 and Pitt played host to South Florida the following day. The Steelers placed sod over their DD Grassmasters surface after the Pitt game, but a torrential downpour turned it into a quagmire for their Monday Night Football game against the Miami Dolphins. Heinz Field executive director Jimmy Sacco was out of town and could not be reached immediately for comment, but the Steelers have already said they asked the NFL to schedule a road game that weekend. "We always tell (the NFL) we don't want a game that weekend," Steelers president Art Rooney II told the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review earlier this month. "Last year they called us and talked to us and said it will screw the schedule up if we can't put you at home that weekend. We said we'll live with it but we don't want to do it on a regular basis. They know that's not a weekend that we want to be home."

 

[redman]

Looks like common sense might finally be sinking in:

Heinz Field could avoid scheduling fiascoBy Kevin GormanTRIBUNE-REVIEWMonday, February 25, 2008 The scheduling fiasco that saw Heinz Field turn to a muddy mess after playing host to six football games in one weekend this past November likely will be avoided this fall, as Pitt will play at Cincinnati the weekend of the WPIAL championships and the Steelers also have requested that the NFL schedule a road game. There was concern when the Pitt-West Virginia game was scheduled for the Friday after Thanksgiving that it would interfere with the WPIAL football finals, which have been played on that day the past few years, but the WPIAL championship games are scheduled the weekend before, Nov. 21-22. With Pitt away, the WPIAL finals could be played on a Saturday for the first time in a few years. "We are elated by the opportunity to go there," WPIAL executive director Tim O'Malley said. "The date of availability will be dictated by the scheduled use of Heinz Field. Our day of preference would be to play on Saturday, if they let us, because we're in school on Friday. This year, it wasn't an issue. It's not conducive to anything we're supposedly about if we play on Friday when the kids are in school. If we have no choice, we would make other arrangements. Pitt's away and if the Steelers are away, it shouldn't be a problem." It was a problem that drew national attention last fall, when the WPIAL played four championship games Nov. 24 and Pitt played host to South Florida the following day. The Steelers placed sod over their DD Grassmasters surface after the Pitt game, but a torrential downpour turned it into a quagmire for their Monday Night Football game against the Miami Dolphins. Heinz Field executive director Jimmy Sacco was out of town and could not be reached immediately for comment, but the Steelers have already said they asked the NFL to schedule a road game that weekend. "We always tell (the NFL) we don't want a game that weekend," Steelers president Art Rooney II told the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review earlier this month. "Last year they called us and talked to us and said it will screw the schedule up if we can't put you at home that weekend. We said we'll live with it but we don't want to do it on a regular basis. They know that's not a weekend that we want to be home."

Wait, I thought that there wasn't a problem.

 

[kevinray]

Looks like common sense might finally be sinking in:

Heinz Field could avoid scheduling fiascoBy Kevin GormanTRIBUNE-REVIEWMonday, February 25, 2008 The scheduling fiasco that saw Heinz Field turn to a muddy mess after playing host to six football games in one weekend this past November likely will be avoided this fall, as Pitt will play at Cincinnati the weekend of the WPIAL championships and the Steelers also have requested that the NFL schedule a road game. There was concern when the Pitt-West Virginia game was scheduled for the Friday after Thanksgiving that it would interfere with the WPIAL football finals, which have been played on that day the past few years, but the WPIAL championship games are scheduled the weekend before, Nov. 21-22. With Pitt away, the WPIAL finals could be played on a Saturday for the first time in a few years. "We are elated by the opportunity to go there," WPIAL executive director Tim O'Malley said. "The date of availability will be dictated by the scheduled use of Heinz Field. Our day of preference would be to play on Saturday, if they let us, because we're in school on Friday. This year, it wasn't an issue. It's not conducive to anything we're supposedly about if we play on Friday when the kids are in school. If we have no choice, we would make other arrangements. Pitt's away and if the Steelers are away, it shouldn't be a problem." It was a problem that drew national attention last fall, when the WPIAL played four championship games Nov. 24 and Pitt played host to South Florida the following day. The Steelers placed sod over their DD Grassmasters surface after the Pitt game, but a torrential downpour turned it into a quagmire for their Monday Night Football game against the Miami Dolphins. Heinz Field executive director Jimmy Sacco was out of town and could not be reached immediately for comment, but the Steelers have already said they asked the NFL to schedule a road game that weekend. "We always tell (the NFL) we don't want a game that weekend," Steelers president Art Rooney II told the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review earlier this month. "Last year they called us and talked to us and said it will screw the schedule up if we can't put you at home that weekend. We said we'll live with it but we don't want to do it on a regular basis. They know that's not a weekend that we want to be home."

Wait, I thought that there wasn't a problem.

No you thought the field wasn't up to NFL or NCAA standards. But we've gone down that road and I'm not going to be the one to debate you on it again.

 

[Idiot Boxer]

redman, you're better than this.

Overuse of the field is a problem. It is not a problem over which the Steelers have any control. They don't own the stadium and it has always been part of the deal that Pitt play there, as well as the WPIAL championships. The NFL hasn't really considered that in its game scheduling, though they should.

 

[zDwinger]

The Rooney's need to stop being so cheap and not allow other sporting event to happen there.

I think the grass surface is actually more expensive in the long run. The Steelers resod the field twice each season at a cost of > $100K.

You got a link to that

Artificial turf would be the cheap route. Cost plays no part in the decision to go grass. Why exactly is a muddy playing surface an embarrassment? who cares.

Exactly. I don't see why everyone wants perfect conditions to play the game.

 

[zanti8]

playing in the elements is what makes football fun imo . if all fields were the same it would make the sport boring . playing on grass, mud, sleet and snow makes the sport interesting . all teams that play in domes / stadiums with "retracktabel roofs" , which also give the game an enclosed and sterile view i wish upon only failure !

hats off to the steelers organization !

 

[redman]

The Rooney's need to stop being so cheap and not allow other sporting event to happen there.

I think the grass surface is actually more expensive in the long run. The Steelers resod the field twice each season at a cost of > $100K.

You got a link to that

Artificial turf would be the cheap route. Cost plays no part in the decision to go grass. Why exactly is a muddy playing surface an embarrassment? who cares.

Exactly. I don't see why everyone wants perfect conditions to play the game.

GB apologists. There's mud, and then there's soup. They had soup.

 

[Godsbrother]

The Rooney's need to stop being so cheap and not allow other sporting event to happen there.

I think the grass surface is actually more expensive in the long run. The Steelers resod the field twice each season at a cost of > $100K.

You got a link to that

Artificial turf would be the cheap route. Cost plays no part in the decision to go grass. Why exactly is a muddy playing surface an embarrassment? who cares.

Exactly. I don't see why everyone wants perfect conditions to play the game.

GB apologists. There's mud, and then there's soup. They had soup.

Because they had 3" of rain in the two hours leading up to the game. I have watched games played in soupy conditions in Miami as well.