Ben's comment on (field turf)

They were talking about Willie Parker not Ben.

 

He was talking about Willie Parker, against the Rams a few seasons back.

 

Haha! I could care less what surface they play on. I don't think there is any significant difference in injury numbers between natural grass and FieldTurf (the old artificial turf -- that's another story). Anybody want to put up numbers rather than speculate? I'd love to see 'em. I honestly don't know if there is a difference either way (which is my entire point -- not defending FieldTurf, just suggesting there isn't any hard evidence to suggest that ACL injuries happen more frequently on it). Rhetoric isn't going to win any debates on this subject. Concrete numbers might. The only two significant ACL tears that I recall from last season both happened on natural grass (Peterson and Forte).

And I also merely brought up a counterpoint that Urlacher suggested they tear out all the natural grass and play solely on FieldTurf. He's merely a future HOF linebacker. You suggested "no way a regular fan is so protective of a fake surface." How 'bout a future Hall of Fame linebacker? Urlacher wants all natural grass torn out. I could care less either way.

To complain about is moot unless statistical data shows that ACL tears are GREATLY increased on artificial surfaces. Until then, you can bank on the fact that the entire league is moving towards artificial surfaces.

 

You're talking about "will" and we're talking about "should." Am I the only one that can see that? But you're right, no one should ever fight for what's right unless it seems clear they're going to get it anyway. Freaking babies, whining about what they believe in... Seriously, what kind of reaction was that to what Ben said? "Well he better get used to it and stop complaining!" Why is it so important to you that he not give fieldturf a bad name?

And where are your numbers? I don't know if the statistics support my beliefs or not, but the notion that grass is safer than fieldturf is what I believe based on experience and, frankly, common sense. Would you like me to tell you that your opinion and your telling us to shut up is moot until you have statistical data to prove that major injuries happen with identical consistency on both grass and fieldturf? Or are you going to get into predictions about what will happen again, ignore the fact that we're talking about right and wrong, and tell me that since I'm the one that wants to change things, I'm the one that needs to supply evidence?

By the way, I didn't realize that ACL tears are only significant when happening to star players. That's interesting stuff. Also curious that you couldn't remember the 3 ACL tears that happened to this team in the final two weeks of the season. Uh oh, those were on grass. I guess now I have to name a bunch that happened on fieldturf to even myself out??

Alright, after a whopping ONE google search, I have found three articles of interest. One is subtitled, "Roethlisberger incorrectly blames FieldTurf." http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-s...isberger-blames-fieldturf-161622012--nfl.html ...I thought you'd like that one, but then I realized the reason he's incorrect is that the artificial grass in Buffalo is a different brand. It's called "A-turf," but it's basically the same thing. Then I found two studies; each supporting one of our theories. Here's the one that supports me:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/03/12/study-finds-acl-injuries-more-common-on-fieldturf/ ...It's from the "NFL Injury and Safety Panel," whoever those chumps are. It says ACL injuries are 88% more likely to happen on fieldturf, in addition to other injuries being more likely as well. The president of FieldTurf called the study "flawed."

Here's the one you'll like. It's titled, "College Study Proves FieldTurf Safer than Grass":

http://www.fieldturf.com/artificial-turf-news/college-study-proves-fieldturf-safer-than-grass/ ...Aaaaaand check out that domain name. I'm sure the folks at http://www.fieldturf.com did their best to remain unbiased and that this study was flawless.

And you're right, there are a number of players that want to do away with grass, just like you said. Why? Urlacher is frustrated with the speed grass "provides." He wants his team and himself to run faster, and needs fieldturf to do it. Grass is not good enough for him. To run on. There goes any lingering respect I had for old Brian. What a man's man he is... And kicker Robbie Gould, who doesn't like the messy field conditions that come with grass in bad weather. Hmm, why would a kicker feel that way??? Neither man made any claim that fieldturf is as safe as grass. They both have their own personal reasons for bettering their careers. Yes it's easier for Robbie to kick on fieldturf, but it's also easier for his opponent. The same for Urlacher. But they still want what they want because of what's good for them. No matter how competitive he may or may not be, from a personal and financial standpoint, Robbie couldn't care less if his opponent makes as many field goals as him. That doesn't affect his contract. He wants to make his. So sure, he's got good reasons. But when thinking of the whole sport, those good reasons disappear. Why do away with any kind of interesting parts of the sport, like slippage and mud? Why is that seen as an imperfection? Why do we have to use technology to maximize performance? Why can't we call a nice kick in the mud a good performance? Why can't we just play a game and leave it at that?

Urlacher, by the way, actually implied that grass is safer in his comments. He said that the injury situation with fieldturf is "not as bad as it used to be." He was pretty clear that he's willing to sacrifice some injuries in order to take better advantage of what he considers a fast Bears team.

 

Wow. Breeeeeaaaaathe . . . Breeeeeeeeeathe . . .

I've merely taken on a point of devil's advocate and you're taking years off of your life fighting to defend . . . what? I'm not even sure what you're arguing. And you're arguing with somebody who has clearly stated he doesn't care either way. Doesn't it feel strange getting all defensive and then attacking somebody who stated he has no preference? All I suggested is that our qb should embrace the current conditions and the inevitable transition to artificial surface in most stadiums because I'd rather have him concern himself with football and let other people (owners) concern themselves with the other things. And you can rest assured if the injuries on FieldTurf start to (they haven't yet -- which, again, makes this all moot) dwarf the numbers of injuries on grass, the owners WILL protect their investment (safety of players they have invested millions in) regardless of what overzealous fans think they SHOULD do.

I am intrigued by your 'experience' playing on FieldTurf and would like to hear more about that. What years did you play in the NFL? Did you ever get rolled up on by a 330lb man?

Just because I didn't 'mention' other ACL tears doesn't mean I didn't 'remember' them. Again, I'm not trying to take a position either way. I just want Ben to spend less time running his mouth off to the media (it seems like every time the dude opens his mouth, controversy falls out) and more time focusing on football. And I don't know that the theory that DeCastro's injury is the result of FieldTurf is completely accurate. I merely opened up the conversation to suggest that the perceived 'cause' didn't necessarily produce the effect.

ACL injuries are 88% more likely to happen on FieldTurf than natural grass yet . . . the only ACL injuries anyone can think of offhand occurred on natural grass. You brought up the 3 at Invesco, I mentioned the Peterson and Forte injuries, Brady's was at Kansas City . . . I think I found the source of the '88%' statistic: someone's ass.

All I got out of the weird Urlacher paragraph was that you favor poor field conditions "slippage and mud" over "maximize(d) performance." Interesting. That 3-0 primetime shootout against the Dolphins at Heinz where the punt stuck in the mud must have been orgasmic to watch, huh?

 

"I think I'll compromise with myself. I'll ignore the grand questions, like "Why were you arguing with me?" and just do the very specific stuff.

"The only two significant ACL tears that I recall from last season both happened on natural grass (Peterson and Forte)." --You, just a little while ago.

So, there's that... wait, is this because I said "remember" instead of "recall"? Damn you're good. What else? Oh, you asked for hard numbers, got them, then dismissed them because "no one" (that means you) can think of a single injury to ever occur on fieldturf. Did it occur to you that I didn't name one because I don't need to? No, that's silly. You're right. I can't think of a single injury, including ACL tears to ever happen on fieldturf. For you see, I am 6 weeks old and new to this sport. The NFL Injury and Safety Panel is making the NFL look bad for fun, I guess. Damn, I still can't think of one! And the internet is right here!

"I am intrigued by your 'experience' playing on FieldTurf and would like to hear more about that. What years did you play in the NFL? Did you ever get rolled up on by a 330lb man?"

This says almost everything we need to know about you: that you're a piece of... something.

"All I got out of the weird Urlacher paragraph was that you favor poor field conditions 'slippage and mud' over 'maximize(d) performance.'"

The fact that that's all you got out of that paragraph says the rest of everything we need to know about you: poor reading comprehension skills. You got one thing out of like 8 points, and that one thing was completely wrong. Nice work. Hey, did you hear about when Ben Roethlisberger broke his leg against the Rams?

People who are failing badly to win over their case use the word "WE" quite often . . .

When I don't mention the 3 ACL's in Denver, I didn't "remember" them.
When you don't mention any other ACL's, you "didn't name one because you didn't need to."
When I mentioned I did remember them but merely didn't mention them (didn't know I "need(ed) to" either), you smugly laughed it off as semantics.

People who are failing badly to win over their case also refer to name-calling: I'm a piece of shlt (Wow. Did you really just go there? Two Steelers fans talking about FieldTurf vs Grass and you call me a piece of shlt?), you say you must only be six weeks old, people who agree with you must be babies for arguing their case, I have poor reading comprehension skills . . .

People who are failing badly to win over their case also embellish their credentials (see: 'experience' with FieldTurf). Please elaborate on your experience. Do I recall a mention of one game in high school played at the spoiled rich kids' posh facility? (or was that someone else that made that reference?). Did you tear an ACL? Did a teammate? An opponent? Did you almost? What was your, ahem, 'experience?'

My failing to address your every point . . . honestly dude, I have very little interested in doing little more than glossing over your lengthy diatribes (see: me not seeing the Willie Parker reference). This most recent post looks like you knocked over a box of Alphabits (I had to delete most of it to save the board space). I don't have the time (nor the interest) to gloss over your 2,000+ posts. Sorry. Cue more insults regarding reading comprehension skills, apathy, and whatever else you wanna throw my way.

The reason I don't respond to some of the fluff is because of the way you frame it. To paraphrase: "My article is from a specialized NFL committe condemning field turf and 'your' study is from . . . FieldTurf.com. Hahaha!! Need I say more?" I'm really supposed to respond to that? What's your next study? How black qb's are less intelligent than whites while you draw some Harvard study and link 'my' study to the KKK? It's just silly to even address your 'research.'

Maybe there is middle ground . . . Perhaps ACL injuries to skill players are more the result of standard in-game activity (honestly, AP's injury was more like McGahee's helmet-on-knee hit in college) while ACL injuries to interior linemen are more the result of legs being rolled up while being engaged with someone else and the feet grabbing tightly to the FieldTurf because it doesn't give as much as natural grass and yadayadayada . . . Or, maybe that isn't middle ground at all. Maybe that DOES illustrate your belief that FieldTurf is the work of Satan himself. I don't know. And, frankly, I really don't give two shakes.

Wow. Sorry. Was scanning through trying to address more of your comments (didn't wanna get blamed for more reading comprehension challenges) but it was really just a lot of how you ("WE") feel about how wrong I am and then there were a few more insults thrown in my direction so, I'm checking out of this conversation. You probably can't accept this, but there really is no 'right' or 'wrong' here.

 

"I laughed out loud when I read that, seriously? FIrst of all, I really don't think that simple staement is interfering with Bens ability to focus on football and secondly, you really think that was an example of "Ben opening his mouth and controvercy falling out"? Really???? Old School, Shaner, help me out here, as 2 people who are openly critical of Ben, you guys didn't even have a problem with that did you?"

That made you laugh out loud? Wow. You're easily entertained.

You really embellished that comment. You did a nice job of painting a picture that Ben is holding a picket sign outside of FieldTurf central instead of studying his playbook. Did it create a 'controversy?' Well, it IS making headlines. I'm looking at two right now:
1.) "Ben Roethlisberger Blames FieldTurf . . . "
2.) "Ben Roethlisberger Wrongly Blames FieldTurf . . ."
I didn't view those specific comments as 'controversial' but, now that you mention it, it seems to have created contradictory viewpoints both here and in the media.

Did I say THAT statement created a controversy? No, I didn't. I said that Ben is known for talking about stuff that has nothing to do with playing the game that makes people want Ben to just leave it alone (his phantom injuries that appear after playoff losses, his open discussion about teammates injuries, etc). He really needs a 'Crash' course on interviews from Crash Davis himself. All athletes should be forced to watch Derek Jeter interviews.

You're grasping at straws.

Whoops. I think I'm supposed to do some silly little icon in an effort to belittle you.

Are you really grasping at straws like this??????????

 

You know what, FeelTheSteel, you're right. I take it all back. I don't know what I was thinking.

As for my personal experience, which you do seem curious about, that was me who made that reference. I only played a handful of tackle football games on fieldturf (I believe 4), all on the same field, in addition to probably 20 or so summer games, which were flag. I did not tear my ACL or get injured at all, except for the weird thing on the back of my wrist. When I spoke of experience, I wasn't referring to experiencing exactly what David DeCastro did. I was talking about experiencing fieldturf. Running on it, cutting on it, playing with it. Doing footbally things on it in a game situation, just like I would on grass. I guess maybe like 40-50 hours worth. I consider even 1 hour to be experience, and I didn't expect that to be refuted. But I really don't think that should matter, because it's not like it takes long to feel the difference anyway. After 2 minutes you know exactly how it differs from grass. It's harder, less slippery. Easier to stop and start. All those things make it easier to get around in wet conditions, but harder for your body to right itself in dangerous conditions. Dangerous conditions ike a knee buckling a weird way, or an offensive tackle falling on you. I played a skill position, so I was less at risk of getting rolled on and more at risk of hurting myself Jamaal Charles-style, or Willie Parker-style.

I was not in the NFL. I still have an opinion based on what I thought was experience though, invalid as it may be by my lack of credentials. I also mentioned common sense, but I think we waved bye bye to that long ago.

 

Can't we all just get along?

Ben made a comment about his lineman. So be it!

 

I just FIGURE that Field Turf is more dangerous. I don't know that it actually is but I just figure that when most people grow up playing sports they just do it on good old fashion grass and their body is used to that. I also figure that it might hurt worse to land on Field Turf as opposed to grass. Field Turf just looks kinda sharp to me. Maybe SNACK can confirm what I'm saying. Does it hurt worse to fall on than grass? Is it kinda like getting a carpet burn?

 

So basically what you are saying is that you are NOT an "expert" but you DID save 15% on your car insurance by switching to Geico? Dude why didn't you just say that from the start? Sheesh.

 

So is it safe to say that you have less of a problem with grass and more of a problem with Ben and his comments? Don't mean to but into this debate but it seems like you are being kind of irrational. That being said IMO GRASS > FIELDTURF.

 

Well, there's a reason they don't use it in place of grass at tennis courts, rugby stadiums, soccer stadiums...etc.

 

Lets see here, i rather fall on dirt/sod or plastic carpet/concrete. i'm not sure....

 

i can't wait for Augusta to change to field turf for the masters
no burned greens
not too slow not too fast
save a ton of money in care

wimbledon would be pretty too through out the whole tourney

 

I take that back there are some soccer tilts that have gotten it at the professional level and there are plenty of lower level fields. (MLS has a program to install it for youth leagues)

 

I'd be a sissy to if one acl tear ends my job.
Knees in the NFL get injured a lot. The severity is usually large.

Think garrison hearst(sp?). He was on his was and boom. I bet he is looking for money now. Lawyers and agents etc cost a lot.
I saw, on nfl live, Barry Sanders holding a Xbox madden 13 in his hands talking to the guys on the show. You think he is doing it because he loves madden?

I think not