Most of the time Nature is a much better engineer than Man.

I also bet they paid for a specific outcome to that study as well

Maybe. Maybe not. I will bet that the NFLPA would much rather play on the safer surface, since that's how they're all going to get paid the most, if more of them can actually play instead of getting injured.

Turf has always been more dangerous than grass. Maybe there's some technological advancement that came along in the last few years, but since the first turf field hosted a game, turf has always caused more injuries than natural grass, for the reasons stated above. It makes you a bit faster, allows players to cut faster, and generally be more athletic, but it comes at the cost of more soft tissue injuries.

This is a slippery slope imo. Of course artificial turf is a little more injury prone. But what also causes probably even more injuries? A 17th game. Thursday Night football where players are able to get little rest. Playing games in subzero temps. Using existing helmets compared to more cumbersome ones they could opt to use.

Indoor grow houses seem to do ok. I’m sure the trillion dollar NFL could come up with something that works.

I don't enjoy watching turf games. I want to see grass and mudd in helmets and on jerseys.

That said, they should go further and look at WHERE the most injuries are happening. Are there 2-3 stadiums where most of the knee injuries happen? Is it a certain style of turf or field turf?

That's something that SHOULD be done and the league should require a change if it's the case.

Raiders have real grass, they roll it outside for sunlight.

Agree here. This is really something that should be done for more than just surfaces. With the wealth of resources the NFL has, and the massive, multi-million dollar investments they make in their players there should be a powerful analytics-driven system to isolate where the problems are with player safety and address those which can be improved.

We did a study whether to switch to artificial turf or keep grass.

Grass was far cheaper with with the 4 month season we play and we live in a desert.

Now, if you have a stadium that gets pounded over and over with activities other than football turf will hold up better during the year.

As someone who designs stadiums and fields....synthetic turf isn't going anywhere.

The crumb rubber and all artificial infills will be gone in the next 10 years and replaced with organic infills. The European Union has banned them in new fields. That is the only thing that will be going away....

Do you find my post above to be correct?

We figured on 40-50k/ year average for artificial turf (considering 10 years at 500k per cycle).

Yes.

The reason why natural turf is no longer viable is because of the durability as you pointed out.

Stadiums these days are very seldom used just for one sports. The athletic surfaces get used daily...multiple times a day and natural turf cannot withstand this sort of use.

Heavy use of the natural turf field would result in compaction of the duff layer and subgrade making gmax and HIC values difficult to achieve on game day.

Many injuries on synthetic turf fields are a result of the field crews adding too much infill resulting in a soft field. Soft fields lead to lower body injuries. This is what was happening 5 or so years ago in New England when like 5 players blew out their knees on one of their practice fields. It was later found their practice field had a shock pad AND crumb rubber which results in a spongy field.

As mentioned, the crumb rubber is being replace with organic infills which in turn require a shock pad to meet HIC requirements.

New England used both...because they didnt know what they were doing.

Seems like the Chiefs do okay with it.

Meh, just have two sets of grass. One just for NFL football, and the other for everything else. Problem solved. Turf sucks.