Just wondering, why is everyone here so against the idea of field turf in Tiger Stadium? It seems to me that lots of football players are in favor of the new field turf. Just curious, that's all.
Most players with half a brain cell know you need to wear longer cleat in those situations. Hell even my high school teammatess 15 years ago knew that.:lol:
Such a mishap would be the equipment manager's fault. How you can blame it on the players is waaaaaaaaaaaay beyond me.
For the same reason why so many are against changing our uniform ... tradition. Football is suppose to be played outdoors on natural grass.
Fine, but I think changing uniforms and changing the turf we play on are two entirely different things. Football may supposed to be played outdoors on natural grass, but if there is a better alternative, especially when weather has been such a factor in some big games, why not switch to it? Using tradition as an excuse for that is ridiculous, in my opinion.
I don't personally care. I like the look of grass better. If our players & coaches would prefer turf because they believe it will enhance their ability to win, I'm all for it. The plan is to compltely replace the field this off season, so now would be the time to do it - but I think it's highly unlikely that we go to turf. PS: Keep the Saints away.
I like dirt and mud and grass stains on the unis ... that is how the game was meant to be played. Turf is for wussies who don't want to get dirty!:hihi:
who's at fault is irrelevant after the fact. The point is don't blame the wet field. How much more grip do you honestly think field turf has after a monsoon like the one before that Oregon St. game?
Turf is for teams with superior speed that actually want to showcase it instead of splashing about in a quagmire. I wish people would quit making excuses that are linked to history and tradition. It is those kinds of people that keep us away from a playoff system.
