NFLPA calls for 'immediate replacement and ban' from slit-firm turf field

[THE BARON]

NFLPA calls for 'immediate replacement and ban' from slit-firm turf fields | Fox News

"The NFL Players Association wrote a letter calling for the "immediate replacement and ban" of slit-film turf fields throughout the league.

The league uses three types of turf: slit-firm, dual fiber, and monofilament, but it's the slit-firm surface that has proven players to miss more time due to injuries, which happen at an increased rate on it as well.

"Advocating for safer working conditions is a core job of our union, and there are few greater examples of this than raising the standards of the fields we practice and play on," NFLPA President JC Tretter wrote on Saturday.

"Week after week, we have heard players sound off on the need to improve our fields, too often after a player suffers an injury. This week, we have seen the NFL PR machine go into overdrive to spin a more favorable narrative to what the union and players know is a problem.

"If the NFL is serious about their claims that they make data-based decisions and that they care about player safety, then we have some actionable items for them."

Six stadiums (and seven teams) use slit-firm turf. Tretter wrote that the NFL has acknowledged that slit-film fields are more detrimental to players' health than other surfaces. However, Tretter says that "the NFL has not only refused to mandate this change immediately, but they have also refused to commit to mandating a change away from slit film in the future at all."

"The injuries on slit film are completely avoidable -- both the NFL and NFLPA experts agree on the data -- and yet the NFL will not protect players from a subpar surface," Tretter said.

Tretter also called for the raising of field standards and testing the safety and performance of all surfaces.

"Until we have those standards in place, the NFL needs to be much more conservative when we have visible issues with the fields. The current field inspections do not account for performance and safety, so we should stop saying that these fields are safe to play on based on the fact they passed said inspection," Tretter wrote, adding that the inspection standards are over 13 years old."

[THE BARON]

And yes.  MetLife has slit-firm turf.  Perhaps Breece and a few others would have been spared with better turf ??? Just a thought.

[ChewyandtheJets]

I think there’s some truth to this.   Regarding Breece specifically he was hurt in Denver so can’t blame our field for that unless Denver has the same type of surface. 

[65 Toss Power Trap]

Crazy that turf hasn't been replaced. Everyone has known the issues for years.

30% higher rate of non-contact injuries on turf. 

[LionelRichie]

I don’t get the pushback from the nfl on this.  If the players want to get rid of slit turf, just get rid of it I don’t understand what the big deal is. 

[Coffee Is Great]

3 minutes ago, LionelRichie said:

I don’t get the pushback from the nfl on this.  If the players want to get rid of slit turf, just get rid of it I don’t understand what the big deal is. 

Money. The answer is always money. Owners don't care about the health of their players outside of quarterbacks. They'd rather save the money as natural grass fields are more expensive to maintain. 

[THE BARON]

11 minutes ago, ChewyandtheJets said:

I think there’s some truth to this.   Regarding Breece specifically he was hurt in Denver so can’t blame our field for that unless Denver has the same type of surface. 

Indeed.  That was a dumb comments on my part.  Denver does not have split-firm turf.  They have real grass.  Kentucky Bue Grass.  I was just thinking of all the knee and ankle injuries in general and had Breece in mind. 

[THE BARON]

7 minutes ago, Coffee Is Great said:

Money. The answer is always money. Owners don't care about the health of their players outside of quarterbacks. They'd rather save the money as natural grass fields are more expensive to maintain. 

Id love to see the Jets bail out on that nasty stadium once the lease is up and renew the push for their own stadium on the west side. 

[jayrad01]

11 minutes ago, Coffee Is Great said:

Money. The answer is always money. Owners don't care about the health of their players outside of quarterbacks. They'd rather save the money as natural grass fields are more expensive to maintain. 

That makes no sense considering how much the owners pay their player's. 

[Barry McCockinner]

6 minutes ago, THE BARON said:

Indeed.  That was a dumb comments on my part.  Denver does not have split-firm turf.  They have real grass.  Kentucky Bue Grass.  I was just thinking of all the knee and ankle injuries in general and had Breece in mind. 

I wonder if these type of injuries are built over many weeks rather than just a sudden occurrence. Point being, yea it happened on a grass surface but all offseason, preseason, practice and home games leading up to that may have caused unknown damage previously.

Hoping one of our medical geniuses on here can speak this.

[THE BARON]

1 minute ago, Barry McCockinner said:

I wonder if these type of injuries are built over many weeks rather than just a sudden occurrence. Point being, yea it happened on a grass surface but all offseason, preseason, practice and home games leading up to that may have caused unknown damage previously.

Hoping one of our medical geniuses on here can speak this.

That is a great point.  Does playing and practicing on a bad filed regularly cause some sort of accumulated wear that can make a catastrophic knee or ankle injury more likely ? 

[Hex]

Unfortunately that change isn't going to happen for a while. Refusing to change the turf isn't going to reduce the league owners' income enough to motivate them to change it.

[KINGDIRK]

Billion dollar business. Figure out a way to get everyone grass.

[JoJoTownsell1]

5 minutes ago, jayrad01 said:

That makes no sense considering how much the owners pay their player's. 

With revenue sharing, you could argue that owners are less likely to be concerned about winning and losing so the players don't matter as much as they used to. 

While nfl teams do make some extra money via ticket sales, it's negligible vs tv deals and other nfl revenue streams that are shared equally. 

[Copernicus]

37 minutes ago, Coffee Is Great said:

Money. The answer is always money. Owners don't care about the health of their players outside of quarterbacks. They'd rather save the money as natural grass fields are more expensive to maintain. 

But this i dont get. How much is it to maintain 100 yards of grass for a season as opposed to medical bills for player injuries?

[Hex]

2 minutes ago, Copernicus said:

But this i dont get. How much is it to maintain 100 yards of grass for a season as opposed to medical bills for player injuries?

They're going to have to pay a lot of medical bills anyways (If they even do to begin with), the grass just reduces the chances a lot. Probably not enough to warrant  change in the owner's eyes. Grass fields need to be mowed and watered and uniforms have to get cleaned a lot more rigorously. While injuries might add a little extra expense, changing it out looks more costly. I know it's weird

[Larz]

I’m all for it, but it’s probably more complicated than rolling it out on a Wednesday.
 

I bet the turf companies have contracts with the stadiums etc etc. 

seems like an off season deal  

 

[Barry McCockinner]

7 minutes ago, Copernicus said:

But this i dont get. How much is it to maintain 100 yards of grass for a season as opposed to medical bills for player injuries?

I think most fields would be just slightly more cost to use real grass. The real challenge is fields used by multiple teams and the timing/scheduling of fixing the field when it gets badly worn.

[Barry McCockinner]

1 hour ago, Larz said:

I’m all for it, but it’s probably more complicated than rolling it out on a Wednesday.
 

I bet the turf companies have contracts with the stadiums etc etc. 

seems like an off season deal  

 

if they have solid data on these type of fields and the NFL is serious about player safety they should bit the bullet and buy out whatever contracts they need to.

[THE BARON]

13 minutes ago, Hex said:

They're going to have to pay a lot of medical bills anyways (If they even do to begin with), the grass just reduces the chances a lot. Probably not enough to warrant  change in the owner's eyes. Grass fields need to be mowed and watered and uniforms have to get cleaned a lot more rigorously. While injuries might add a little extra expense, changing it out looks more costly. I know it's weird

real grass is real football.  

[Coffee Is Great]

43 minutes ago, jayrad01 said:

That makes no sense considering how much the owners pay their player's. 

The joy of non-guaranteed contracts in the NFL.

[Hex]

3 minutes ago, THE BARON said:

real grass is real football.  

I agree. Some of the owners apparently disagree.

[frankiepapa]

Money. The answer is always money. Owners don't care about the health of their players outside of quarterbacks. They'd rather save the money as natural grass fields are more expensive to maintain. 

But what makes no sense is that the practice facility has like 3 grass fields...

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[clayton163v]

Sign me up.  And I know exactly what we need to do.

We will grow grass on trays.  Yes.  You see these trays will fit together like a jigsaw puzzle.  And whenever one of them is worn out, we can replace it with an identical tray with some fresh turf.  If we keep a few trays of grass around, we will have a beautiful playing surface.  Why soon the entire league will be playing on Woody's trays of grass. 

What could possibly go wrong?

[Larz]

17 minutes ago, Barry McCockinner said:

if the have solid data on these type of fields and the NFL is serious about player safety they should bit the bullet and buy out whatever contracts they need to.

Right I’m just saying that it’s likely more complicated than just installing it 

[TokyoJetsFan]

NFLPA President JC Tretter said Saturday the league should ban “slit film” playing surfaces that are used in

Cincinnati

Detroit

Indianapolis

Minnesota

New Orleans

New York (Jets and Giants)

[Trotter]

When World Cup comes to MetLife in a few years, they will only play on grass.

have to figure out something by then

[Embrace the Suck]

2 hours ago, Coffee Is Great said:

Money. The answer is always money. Owners don't care about the health of their players outside of quarterbacks. They'd rather save the money as natural grass fields are more expensive to maintain. 

The players, even non qbs, are worth far more (their contract value and worth to the team on the field) than the cost of great turf, or grass. Some teams just make poor choices without seeing the obvious. It's not as if the team is like "buy the crappy turf, but only the cheap stuff that doesn't hurt qbs"...

 

 

[Bungaman]

2 hours ago, LionelRichie said:

I don’t get the pushback from the nfl on this.  If the players want to get rid of slit turf, just get rid of it I don’t understand what the big deal is. 

With turf, the stadium can quickly host other events that require rolling foldable seating or other equipment right over it with minimal damage. Grass needs recovery time between uses. As others have said, follow the money: the owners would rather have the money and pay for surgery than not hold concerts and other high revenue events at the same venue.

[batman10023]

2 hours ago, THE BARON said:

And yes.  MetLife has slit-firm turf.  Perhaps Breece and a few others would have been spared with better turf ??? Just a thought.

You not doing much thinking given breece injury was not at MetLife 

[batman10023]

7 minutes ago, Bungaman said:

With turf, the stadium can quickly host other events that require rolling foldable seating or other equipment right over it with minimal damage. Grass needs recovery time between uses. As others have said, follow the money: the owners would rather have the money and pay for surgery than not hold concerts and other high revenue events at the same venue.

Bingo

[Doggin94it]

2 hours ago, THE BARON said:

Id love to see the Jets bail out on that nasty stadium once the lease is up and renew the push for their own stadium on the west side. 

There's no space there anymore; that's Hudson Yards. Let it go

[LionelRichie]

13 minutes ago, Bungaman said:

With turf, the stadium can quickly host other events that require rolling foldable seating or other equipment right over it with minimal damage. Grass needs recovery time between uses. As others have said, follow the money: the owners would rather have the money and pay for surgery than not hold concerts and other high revenue events at the same venue.

I’m not talking about grass, just about swapping out the slit turf for what the turf the players prefer.  Putting down turf isn’t that expensive.  

[Barry McCockinner]

can't say I remember the NFLPA ever calling for something to be done immediately. Not saying it never happened, I just don't remember it. Seems like they're pretty serious about it.

[Integrity28]

3 hours ago, THE BARON said:

And yes.  MetLife has slit-firm turf.  Perhaps Breece and a few others would have been spared with better turf ??? Just a thought.

Breece got injured in an away game, but in general I agree that it needs to be addressed. The franchises from NY should set the bar in excellence.