The Bobcat Nation

How much does it cost to put in FieldTurf or SprinTurf? I love football played on grass as much as anyone, but with the quality of the new synthetic fields and the weather in Montana being so harsh on fields I think it is time for MSU to install some turf. There is a high school stadium in Montana with this stuff, so I think its about time we spend the money on it. That is the 1st thing we should do in terms of facility improvements, but I have no idea the cost. Does anyone know?

rtb wrote:How much does it cost to put in FieldTurf or SprinTurf? I love football played on grass as much as anyone, but with the quality of the new synthetic fields and the weather in Montana being so harsh on fields I think it is time for MSU to install some turf. There is a high school stadium in Montana with this stuff, so I think its about time we spend the money on it. That is the 1st thing we should do in terms of facility improvements, but I have no idea the cost. Does anyone know?

I think the stuff at Daylis Stadium in Billings cost $1 million.

EDIT: It was actually only $750,000.

Didn't we just have the field re-seeded this year? It looked awesome to start the season, but by this weekend it was already looking pretty rough. Don't get me wrong, natural grass is great to watch football on, but you need a full time crew to keep the field in great shape and it just seems that we really should make the switch, pay the upfront cost, and reduce the back-end costs.

SenorWeezer wrote:Grass Rules!

I agree, just fiz fans cry about the field. I like to see dirt on the uniforms. Football should be played on grass with some mud if it's wet.

I say keep the grass. I'm a traditionalist. I also have to concur with Weltercat's response.

In addition, having a muddy, sloppy field has the potential of creating a competitive advantage when playing against opponents who are used to playing on a perfectly manicured and prepared field week in and week out. This advantage is completely ethical and should be taken advantage of to the fullest extent possible.

Cledus wrote:I say keep the grass. I'm a traditionalist. I also have to concur with Weltercat's response.

In addition, having a muddy, sloppy field has the potential of creating a competitive advantage when playing against opponents who are used to playing on a perfectly manicured and prepared field week in and week out. This advantage is completely ethical and should be taken advantage of to the fullest extent possible.

If you're being serious, cledus, you just gave credit to the griz excuse cat fans so readily dismiss

I would like to see spin turf put in. You can practice on it and don't have to worry about ripping the field up before a game. Also it conditions the players to the field conditions.

I used to be one of those guys who always said football needs to be played on grass, uniforms should be dirty, etc, & etc. However, I have been doing some serious thinking about this issue and there are several things that are starting to make me change my mind.

1) The shape of our field by the end of the season sucks. You can make all the excuses you want about that's why we beat the Griz, and it's fun to hear the Griz whine about the field, but let's face it - that field sucked and it took too long of a time for it to recover. For the UNC game, it was in bad shape and it showed. We clearly have more team speed than the Bears, but a slow surface brought us down to their level of speed. Slowed the game down and let their DBs play with our wide-outs. And besides, if and most likely, when, we get to a point where we are hosting playoff games, we are going to need a decent surface to bid on home games and have a playable field.

2) I am not sure of the expenses, but one would think with all the maintenance that goes into a grass field (re-seeding, re-sodding, watering, mowing, fertilizing, etc.), that by the time you spend the money in putting a spin-turf type field in, eventually you would have a break-even point in overall cost.

3) I am hearing more and more that we are thinking of constructing an indoor practice facility. Most likely, the playing surface in that would be artificial. Wouldn't you want you game-day field to mirror your practice field? I would think that there would be quite a difference in practicing on one type of field and then turning around and playing your games on a different surface.

4) Kramer has shown that he wants to build teams on speed. This is evident in all our 1-A drop-downs, our linebackers, our RBs, etc. Look at how our offense has performed this year on artificial surfaces. If we are going to continue recruiting this type of football player, it would only make sense to have surface that plays to their abilities. Besides, with a grass surface, you must have a crown in the field for drainage, and our field has a pretty significant crown. This is a hinderence is a down-field passing attack.

Artificial surfaces have come along way from the old days of astoturf. They play more like natural surfaces, and the instances of injuries, namely serious injuries, has gone down. As much as I thought I would never say this, maybe it's time to look into this.

1BadBobcat wrote:

2) I am not sure of the expenses, but one would think with all the maintenance that goes into a grass field (re-seeding, re-sodding, watering, mowing, fertilizing, etc.), that by the time you spend the money in putting a spin-turf type field in, eventually you would have a break-even point in overall cost.

That was one of the major point when we got our turf.

I coach football down here in Texas and we recently checked into the cost of Sprinturf for our football feild. What was found is that within 6 years the cost of the the new turf would be paid for by not having to pay water, upkeep and all the other fees that are involved.

We also contacted 3 area school that have turf and found those calculations to be true.

In the area that I coach there are only a few High Schools that do not have turf. Our grass feild is the exception and because soccor is also played on the feild it is a disaster. Right now the middle part of the feild is really only dirt.

I dont write this as a whinny Griz fan but only to give some prospective.

As a coach I approach every game with this thought. "Both teams are on the same feild, its up to me to make it our advantage."

What I don't understand is the arguments that grass slows a fast team down and takes away their advantage. If you are two steps faster than someone on turf would not both players slow down. The whole game may be slower but you would think the faster player would still have a speed edge.

If the player doesn't have to make a direction change you are correct. The faster player is going to beat the slower player. However if they make a cut the player is going to have to slow down to try to stay on his feet. I think the quicker player may not be able to or want to go full speed because they might lose their footing. I think spin turf would be an advantage not a disadvantage.

I think the cost saving due to lower maintance costs would also be great.

I was big time disappointed when they announced Wash-Griz was going away from natural grass, but after doing some research, and walking and running on the field I fell in love with it, and wished I had been able to play on a surface like that.

I miss the mud and the muck, and stained uni's, but really like having consistency of surface. I also like that sprinturf basically takes away the field as a problem in certain weather, and evens the playing field. It might reduce a small amount of home field advantage, but I can live with that.

Just out of curiousity, what kind of life expectancy does sprinturf have? To date, how is WaGriz's holding up? Do they have to re-install certain areas? Lines? Other painted areas?

barechestcat wrote:Just out of curiousity, what kind of life expectancy does sprinturf have? To date, how is WaGriz's holding up? Do they have to re-install certain areas? Lines? Other painted areas?

I did a little research yesterday after posting this. Both SprinTurf and FieldTurf have 8 year warranties. Also SprinTurf just recently changed their materials as the older stuff wasn't holding up like the FieldTurf brand does. It looks like both products are now very similar and hold up extremely well. I don't know what the life expectancy is, so if someone finds that I would be interested to see that.

From SprinTurf's website:

4. How long should a field last?

A good field can last 15 years or more depending on use and abuse. One thing is for sure - a field is only as good as its components. Only four components make up an infill turf field - the fiber, the primary backing, the secondary backing and the infill. The better the components - the better the field is. Some manufacturers sacrifice quality on the four important components for a fifth - big time Madison Avenue advertising and endorsements. Sprinturf puts its dollars into the product

10. What will a field cost and are there financing programs?

A Sprinturf field is the best value in the industry. You buy directly from us. We design, manufacture, install, warrant and service our fields - there are no middlemen or distributors. We also offer tremendous finance programs for every budget with as little as no money down and interest as low as current municipal bond rates for up to 10 years. (See financing section.)

I have replaced the grass in my yard with it. I can tell you I don't miss watering or mowing. Plus it is great for neighborhood pickup games.

MM7CAT wrote:I have replaced the grass in my yard with it. I can tell you I don't miss watering or mowing. Plus it is great for neighborhood pickup games.

No Way! That is some sweet isht.

I do know they have to brush the field, and when they brush it they brush in additional "rubber" pellets. Not sure how often this is done, probably yearly. Surely there is more to it than that, but the Griz turf appears to be holding up very well to me.

Alright....I don't really have it in my yard but how cool would that be? I think you are right about having to redistribute the pellets once per year but if you were not actually running on it with cleats I think it would be less often.

MM7CAT wrote:Alright....I don't really have it in my yard but how cool would that be? I think you are right about having to redistribute the pellets once per year but if you were not actually running on it with cleats I think it would be less often.

I just had my yard done in field turf:





...just kidding, not my house... but it is possible.

http://www.tourturf.com/installations/i ... esidential