Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

It's time for the NFLPA to stand up for field conditions


TheCasillas
 Share

Recommended Posts

The Lions reportedely hated our field and the condition of it.. they were quoted saying it felt like landing on concrete. 

In all honesty owners are going to continue to take advantage of the turf field option until its outlawed. Its time for the NFLPA to stand up for their players. This is the game of checks and balances, and the NFLPA needs to put their foot down this offseason. Until they speak up, it's no one person's fault but their own. By no means am I standing up for the owners of the NFL, but I am expecting the NFLPA to do their jobs and fight for the players this offseason. 

https://www.mlive.com/lions/2022/12/lions-trash-field-conditions-in-carolina-i-didnt-think-that-was-actually-legal.html

  • Pie 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get that the NFLPA is looking out for their members but honestly when you look at the product on the field their efforts have made it objectively worse.

By limiting practices, in particular full contact practices, the NFLPA is directly responsible for the lower quality of play that we see week in and week out.

If they decide to take up the cause of the playing surface I can only assume that they will find a way to fug it up too.

 

And Im a very pro-union guy.  Just in the case of the NFLPA I think they have had a long run of extremely myopic leadership.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, uncfan888 said:

The ground was frozen. My yard isn't turf and it feels like concrete. They need to stop bitching

If the ground underneath turf freezes it feels harder than regular frozen sod.

Basically if water collects under the turf in the layer of soil and freezes. You are basically playing on a thin layer of carpet on an ice rink. 
 

Where as natural grass adds that barrier of water absorption. 
 

Edited by Harbingers
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Harbingers said:

If the ground underneath turf freezes it feels harder than regular frozen sod.

Basically if water collects under the turf in the layer of soil and freezes. You are basically playing on a thin layer of carpet on an ice rink. 
 

Where as natural grass adds that barrier of water absorption. 
 


image.jpeg.777f4da0f1bda0ac7a77e5eddc7b4fca.jpeg

 

Drainage isn’t the issue. Everything just froze and became very hard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Harbingers said:

If the ground underneath turf freezes it feels harder than regular frozen sod.

Basically if water collects under the turf in the layer of soil and freezes. You are basically playing on a thin layer of carpet on an ice rink. 
 

Where as natural grass adds that barrier of water absorption. 
 

Yesterday was exceptional though.  At 8 degrees, the ground is rock hard regardless.  The Bears were also complaining about the field conditions in Chicago, and it is grass. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Davidson Deac II said:

Yesterday was exceptional though.  At 8 degrees, the ground is rock hard regardless.  The Bears were also complaining about the field conditions in Chicago, and it is grass. 

Chicago did switch their sod this year. But they also heat their field. I highly doubt we have a heating system currently. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/25/2022 at 1:17 PM, Harbingers said:

If the ground underneath turf freezes it feels harder than regular frozen sod.

Basically if water collects under the turf in the layer of soil and freezes. You are basically playing on a thin layer of carpet on an ice rink. 
 

Where as natural grass adds that barrier of water absorption. 
 

Not in 14 degree weather.  

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.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Did we take over a thread about who you'd take #1 by having a debate on who you'd take #1? Basically you still don't want to answer my question, probably because your answer would be either T-Mac like myself, or Hunter, which taking a CB #1 overall is even crazier on the surface than what you're saying I'm stupid for in wanting a WR there. As I've said before, it's a season without a traditional clear top pick(s).  It would be great if we could trade back if we got #1, but if not, there's nothing wrong with taking a truly elite WR and build out our roster correctly for once instead of always trying to find the quick fix and it backfiring. 
    • I just thought of an interesting comparison for what I'm arguing with taking T-Mac and how to build up to hopefully being a contender. The mid 2000's Arizona Cardinals In 2003 they took Anquan Boldin early in the 2nd, kinda a decent comp for Legette with style of play and being more of an elite #2 than a true outside #1 (they also took a WR in the 1st too who didn't pan out). In 2004 they took Larry Fitzgerald #3 overall, the true outside #1. Their QB's at the time, Jeff Blake and Josh McCown The QB they passed on to take Fizgerald, Philip Rivers. They were in the Super Bowl a few years later after they found their QB in Warner to slot into an already built out roster of elite weapons. Cam, you asked how it would look if we passed on a QB who pans out for a WR, well, do you think the Cardinals regret taking Fitz over Rivers?  I highly doubt it. Our roster is more than one offseason away from contending.  I'm not looking for the quick fix because there isn't one with the state of this franchise at the moment, I'm looking to contend for a decade. I don't think a QB in this draft class is good enough to take 1st overall with everything else we still need.  My next preference would be an elite pass rusher, but again, I don't see one of them in this draft either. My personal bias aside, I very honestly think T-Mac is the most can't miss offensive prospect in this draft (Hunter would be that on defense).  He is the WR we've been trying to get since we lost Smitty.   Brooks, T-Mac, Legette, Coker/FA, Sanders would have the potential to be one of the best offensive weapon sets in the NFL.  Sure, hopefully we could hit on a superstar QB in the next draft, but even if not, if those guys pan out, with them all are in their prime together, we wouldn't need a Mahomes or Allen to contend, we'd only need to find our Jared Goff. and spend all our FA money the next couple offseason on Defense.
    • Competent QBs can read defenses presnap, see where their best matchups are and already know where they're going with the ball. Then have good footwork with fast fundamentally sound dropbacks. See the field well and decisive with their decisions on where to go with the ball. And an NFL caliber arm, get the ball out quickly and deliver it with velocity. Bryce can do none of these things.
×
×
  • Create New...