The grass vs. turf debate continues, even if from the perspective of active NFL players there is none.
Not a single current player has expressed a preference for turf over grass. Not any. Not one.
But it’s still being framed and pitched and presented as a debate.
Most recently, NFL executive V.P. of communications Jeff Miller appeared on the Ross Tucker Football Podcast, featuring Ross Tucker of the Ross Tucker Football Podcast, to address the grass vs. turf issue.
Miller explained that the NFL and the NFL Players Association work together on this effort, and that they share the same statistics regarding injury rates on the various types of surfaces.
“From a structure perspective, we and the [NFLPA] have a joint committee on surfaces which is mandated in our Collective Bargaining Agreement,” Miller told Ross Tucker Football Podcast, featuring Ross Tucker of the Ross Tucker Football Podcast. “So me and their representatives and a bunch of engineers, you know, people much more well-versed in this area — subject-matter experts — than I am, plus a number of field managers from around the league get together to talk about it. So the first answer to your question is the data is the same. Now, the data varies from year to year and from surface to surface. My contention, and I think the committee feels the same way and the experts do, is that there’s a lot of work to be done on both synthetic surfaces and natural grass to drive injuries down. If you’re playing in a cold-weather natural grass field in December or January, what’s the injury rate there compared to what an injury rate might be in say a good synthetic surface, you know, that same time of year. Those are the sorts of questions you have to answer. What are the characteristics about each individual field?”
But how much work needs to be done on the fundamental question of grass vs. turf? The NFLPA needs no further research or data. The NFLPA, which has the same data as the NFL, wants all grass fields now.
The performance of grass in December or January is a different issue, one that goes to the question of the features in place to keep the field heated and soft. Which requires money. Money which plenty of owners don’t want to spend.
Miller’s latest comments are similar to things he said during a media conference call last week, when the Aaron Rodgers injury caused some to wonder whether it would have happened if his foot was planted on grass, not turf.
“We work very closely with the Players Association on surface research,” Miller said on Tuesday, September 12. “In fact, it’s mandated by our Collective Bargaining Agreement to do so. And we share all the injury information. They have all the same data we have. We have terrific experts who help research and understand what we can do to advance safety of all surfaces, both synthetic and natural grass. And I think I’ve said previously, we have stadiums where we have certain natural grass where there’s a lower injury rate than synthetic and some synthetic fields with a lower injury rate than natural grass. So, our effort is to try to drive down those rates on both surfaces and working with a bunch of experts, the Players Association and others to innovate in those areas is something that’s really important to us.”
But data on injury rates can be massaged and twisted. Injuries happen, regardless of the surface. An obsession with injury rates obscures the undisputed anecdotal evidence.
Players want to play on grass. It’s softer. Cleats don’t get stuck on it. It absorbs forces from, say, a helmet striking the turf in lieu of allowing those forces to ricochet back into the brain.
Obsession over interpretations of data helps the effort to create the impression of an actual debate when there is none. And the biggest flaw for the NFL continues to be the fact that, data notwithstanding, when FIFA demanded grass fields for World Cup venues in 2024, owners of stadiums like turf fields (such as Jerry Jones of the Cowboys and Stan Kroenke of the Rams) quickly and gladly agreed to comply.
When the specific issue of installing grass fields for soccer was raised with Miller last week, he said that he believes this has not yet happened.
“Help me out with which surface was replaced for natural grass at the NFL? For a soccer game?” Miller said in response to a question from Jarrett Bell of USA Today. “I don’t know if I know of one. If there was one, that’s fine. You know, we do spend a lot of time thinking about surfaces and their injury rates and how those relate to how our game is played in the particular-use cases for football. And as I mentioned, a great deal of analysis has gone into this and there are certain natural grass surfaces that from an injury-rate perspective have a lower injury rate than synthetic surfaces and some synthetic surfaces that have a lower interest rate than natural grass.”
Regardless of whether it has happened, it will happen next year. FIFA has demanded it. And owners/operators of turf-field venues will comply with it, in order to host World Cup matches.
There’s another issue to keep in mind here, one that we’re told the NFLPA eventually will raise. Miller is both the top executive at the league office for health and safety AND public relations. This cross-pollination of departments between which there should be a healthy tension creates a potential problem for the league.
This is not a criticism of Miller or an attack on his integrity. It’s inherent to the blending of two departments under one executive. The issue would exist even if Mother Teresa held the two positions.
As it is with any company, public relations is fundamentally focused on making the league look good, not bad. Health and safety should be about doing what’s right for the players, even if it cuts against the interests of the league. To have both departments tied together under one person creates a framework in which the health and safety data will often be presented in the light most favorable to the league’s overall interests.
As it relates to the players’ unanimous (as far as we’ve seen) preference for grass and the unwillingness of the owners to pay the price for putting high-quality grass fields in every stadium, the overall interests of the league point directly to talking-points into existence a fair debate over grass vs. turf even when, from the perspective of the men who currently play the game, there is none.