|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Jun 13, 2020 19:55:55 GMT -8
We gonna have natural grass at Aztec stadium? Yes. Natural Grass. |
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Jun 13, 2020 19:57:27 GMT -8
If you want soccer then you better. Anyway, stupid to have the fake stuff in SoCal. We just want to make sure we are not as close to the water the as the current stadium and, hopefully, the design a good drainage system. Bigger issue will be for budget of ground crew, natural grass (my choice) more maintenance cost and Turf more upfront cost. Each will have own pros and cons. I am from the old school, sports play on grass (this is So Cal!). I think it would be cool if we were known for having one of or if not the best field in college. This maybe is a good question for the medical/biomedical experts, never really looked into the (REAL) numbers on which is better/safer or which the players and coaches like. (needs vs wants?) I am not that up on the latest technology and pricing on fields these days so this is way above my pay-grade, i just know that this field is going to used by more then just football. If I remember correctly a while back, we had the same conversation/thread. Real Grass is safer & preferred by athletes. More upkeep but worth it. |
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Jun 13, 2020 19:58:08 GMT -8
I suspect we will offer something similar to this. Also there will likely be some form of Aztec Village, AFL & Aztec Club. Plus, the stadium itself will be one giant tailgate. www.tailgaterconcierge.com/ucla/It would be great to see SDSU (or at least someone from sdsu) get in front of something like this and not some uninvolved 3rd party. I could see different groups having small to mid size set ups for meeting up with friends on the way in. They could have drop off points where you could just add to the party (byob) then get a stamp or wrist band (and "Party on Grath"). This would keep the upfront cost down until they figure out what is needed. This could all take place within Aztec Village with an entrance fee of some type (party with-in a party) *Scary though would be for all the misfits from here and Aztec Mesa all in one place (ouch!) Once this stadium gets built, the number one priority needs to be getting alumni and students involved in the University's development of the entire site. This should start with the game day experience. That means the game day experience across the board. From advertising the schedule though out the summer, Big push week of game, Best ways to commute to game (make all best possible), really make arrival something special (driving, trolley, buses, Uber...) once onsite there needs to be Aztecs game day VIBE not just an Ace employee with their hand out wanting money. Don't give me the old line "we already do this" line, what was done in the pass needs big improvement. This University needs to spend some money in the marketing department upfront, you only get 1 shot at first impressions. I think you guys get the picture, no more excuses this will be our stadium! no more cold concrete bowl half full lacking the Aztec feel. This could be (will be!) something special to see. Contact Tim Rice & JD Wicker now with your suggestions. |
|
|
|
Post by jp92grad on Jun 13, 2020 21:17:47 GMT -8
Bigger issue will be for budget of ground crew, natural grass (my choice) more maintenance cost and Turf more upfront cost. Each will have own pros and cons. I am from the old school, sports play on grass (this is So Cal!). I think it would be cool if we were known for having one of or if not the best field in college. This maybe is a good question for the medical/biomedical experts, never really looked into the (REAL) numbers on which is better/safer or which the players and coaches like. (needs vs wants?) I am not that up on the latest technology and pricing on fields these days so this is way above my pay-grade, i just know that this field is going to used by more then just football. If I remember correctly a while back, we had the same conversation/thread. Real Grass is safer & preferred by athletes. More upkeep but worth it. Not here for an argument, just wondering out loud, I come from the exercise side of things (a few lifetimes ago) and have wonder which is better, statistically speaking. Many different pros and cons, never seen a study putting real numbers in-place, please understand I prefer grass but it's not my call. There are many different things in play here: 1) Cost-(upfront vs long term)-This is the main thing that will drive decision 2) Safety-Where are the studies showing injury rate? 3) Flexiblity of use for venue- The pro and cons are numerous here people have to remember NFL, MLB and some major college programs spend BIG dollars on their natural grass field (i mean BIG dollars) will SDSU have that ability in the long run? Grass-Grass just looks bitchin and it really makes for a whole better game day experience (visually). Please don't think that all fields are nice and plushy like your backyard. If you ever been on the SD stadium field you will know it's rock hard, not flattest thing, it drains poorly, it changes from week to week, season to season and also year to year. These types of things effect injury rate. Turf-
The new stuff is nothing like the old stuff the new stuff is damn nice these day. The fields stay level and consistent remains flat and drains well in all seasons. This is where the studies are showing fewer injuries. You can not really compare studies from past generations the players of today are just bigger stronger and faster then prior years. Technology allows for more contact, lighter weight and better traction in all aspects of the game. Bottom Line- San Diego (So-Cal) should be GRASS! PS-I just hope they can afford it. |
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Jun 13, 2020 21:54:44 GMT -8
Bigger issue will be for budget of ground crew, natural grass (my choice) more maintenance cost and Turf more upfront cost. Each will have own pros and cons. I am from the old school, sports play on grass (this is So Cal!). I think it would be cool if we were known for having one of or if not the best field in college. This maybe is a good question for the medical/biomedical experts, never really looked into the (REAL) numbers on which is better/safer or which the players and coaches like. (needs vs wants?) I am not that up on the latest technology and pricing on fields these days so this is way above my pay-grade, i just know that this field is going to used by more then just football. If I remember correctly a while back, we had the same conversation/thread. Agree with Den60. If you don't have natural grass, you can forget having international friendlies in soccer. I would think some of the better worldwide teams, playing tune-up matches before their season started overseas, would be great draws in the new stadium. And after seeing the occasional match on the Sportsdeck, I am amazed at how good that field looks. I would think SDSU would have no trouble maintaining an excellent grass field for the new stadium. Yes, higher up on the site will mitigate some of this but even if the grounds were flooded heavy rains wreaked havoc on the field. Good drainage is a must. |
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Jun 13, 2020 22:01:00 GMT -8
Bigger issue will be for budget of ground crew, natural grass (my choice) more maintenance cost and Turf more upfront cost. Each will have own pros and cons. I am from the old school, sports play on grass (this is So Cal!). I think it would be cool if we were known for having one of or if not the best field in college. This maybe is a good question for the medical/biomedical experts, never really looked into the (REAL) numbers on which is better/safer or which the players and coaches like. (needs vs wants?) I am not that up on the latest technology and pricing on fields these days so this is way above my pay-grade, i just know that this field is going to used by more then just football. If I remember correctly a while back, we had the same conversation/thread. Agree with Den60. If you don't have natural grass, you can forget having international friendlies in soccer. I would think some of the better worldwide teams, playing tune-up matches before their season started overseas, would be great draws in the new stadium. And after seeing the occasional match on the Sportsdeck, I am amazed at how good that field looks. I would think SDSU would have no trouble maintaining an excellent grass field for the new stadium. And it is better for football as well. This field will not be getting a lot of use so maintaining a grass field is no big deal. Even were we to get a MSL team their season doesn't overlap the collegiate football schedule. And, for international friendlies you won't find a market if you play on the fake turf. The stadium being 35K would be attractive to this with only having Mexico playing would we feel the stadium isn't big enough. |
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Jun 13, 2020 22:16:16 GMT -8
Agree with Den60. If you don't have natural grass, you can forget having international friendlies in soccer. I would think some of the better worldwide teams, playing tune-up matches before their season started overseas, would be great draws in the new stadium. And after seeing the occasional match on the Sportsdeck, I am amazed at how good that field looks. I would think SDSU would have no trouble maintaining an excellent grass field for the new stadium. And it is better for football as well. This field will not be getting a lot of use so maintaining a grass field is no big deal. Even were we to get a MSL team their season doesn't overlap the collegiate football schedule. And, for international friendlies you won't find a market if you play on the fake turf. The stadium being 35K would be attractive to this with only having Mexico playing would we feel the stadium isn't big enough. Actually, MLS DOES overlap the college football season. The regular season ends in early October, and the playoffs go through the remainder of October, with the final in early November. |
|
|
|
Post by jp92grad on Jun 13, 2020 22:48:05 GMT -8
And it is better for football as well. This field will not be getting a lot of use so maintaining a grass field is no big deal. Even were we to get a MSL team their season doesn't overlap the collegiate football schedule. And, for international friendlies you won't find a market if you play on the fake turf. The stadium being 35K would be attractive to this with only having Mexico playing would we feel the stadium isn't big enough. Actually, MLS DOES overlap the college football season. The regular season ends in early October, and the playoffs go through the remainder of October, with the final in early November. You have to remember they will be using this stadium for other things ($$$) high school football, concerts, motocross.... |
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Jun 14, 2020 7:07:46 GMT -8
Actually, MLS DOES overlap the college football season. The regular season ends in early October, and the playoffs go through the remainder of October, with the final in early November. You have to remember they will be using this stadium for other things ($$$) high school football, concerts, motocross.... Yes they will, but if you really want soccer played there, you will use real grass. |
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Jun 14, 2020 11:10:46 GMT -8
If you want soccer then you better. Anyway, stupid to have the fake stuff in SoCal. We just want to make sure we are not as close to the water the as the current stadium and, hopefully, the design a good drainage system. With the stadium situated in the NW corner of the property (the only part of the property that didn't flood in 2010 the day before the Poinsettia Bowl), flooding shouldn't be an issue. I meant to write "water table." Where the current field is you only have to go down 12-14" to hit standing water IIRC. Being higher up on the lot should help but the big reason the field would go bad so quickly after some rain is that it didn't take much for the ground was completely saturated. |
|
|
|
Post by AzTex on Jun 14, 2020 12:40:10 GMT -8
With the stadium situated in the NW corner of the property (the only part of the property that didn't flood in 2010 the day before the Poinsettia Bowl), flooding shouldn't be an issue. I meant to write "water table." Where the current field is you only have to go down 12-14" to hit standing water IIRC. Being higher up on the lot should help but the big reason the field would go bad so quickly after some rain is that it didn't take much for the ground was completely saturated.That's always going to be a problem in Southern California. Most of the soil is clay and cobble stone. Where we live in Florida for a few years the rainfall totals averaged about 4.5 feet per year. The summer months averaged 10 inches per month. Not unusual for a single storm to bring 2 or 3 inches in a few hours. The soil is very sandy, so an hour or so after a rain storm the only standing water you could find was in the drainage ditches and retention ponds. Roads didn't flood for the most part. And if they did it wasn't for long.
Here in California a half-inch storm makes the national evening news with stories of flooding. I one inch storm almost brings on a state of emergency.
I'd bet that there will be plenty of drainage built under the playing field to avoid problems.
|
|
|
|
Post by jp92grad on Jun 14, 2020 12:40:31 GMT -8
Actually, MLS DOES overlap the college football season. The regular season ends in early October, and the playoffs go through the remainder of October, with the final in early November. You have to remember they will be using this stadium for other things ($$$) high school football, concerts, motocross.... Just saw the JD Wicker clip and was also talking about Rugby and LAX, This is really starting to get exciting. |
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Jun 17, 2020 7:57:48 GMT -8
The next step in the process is at 2 PM today in council chambers.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2020 8:20:00 GMT -8
I would be very surprised if there is not an MLS team (with red and black as colors of course) in that stadium by 2025. We very well could have C. Ronaldo playing a game in Aztec stadium.
|
|
|
|
Post by lighterside on Jun 17, 2020 9:07:24 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by aztech on Jun 17, 2020 11:12:51 GMT -8
Bigger issue will be for budget of ground crew, natural grass (my choice) more maintenance cost and Turf more upfront cost. Each will have own pros and cons. I am from the old school, sports play on grass (this is So Cal!). I think it would be cool if we were known for having one of or if not the best field in college. This maybe is a good question for the medical/biomedical experts, never really looked into the (REAL) numbers on which is better/safer or which the players and coaches like. (needs vs wants?) I am not that up on the latest technology and pricing on fields these days so this is way above my pay-grade, i just know that this field is going to used by more then just football. If I remember correctly a while back, we had the same conversation/thread. Real Grass is safer & preferred by athletes. More upkeep but worth it. Everyone seems to forget that turf raises the field temp. When they host concerts in usually mild San Diego weather, wouldn't you prefer sitting on natural grass for that reason? |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Jun 17, 2020 14:13:05 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Jun 17, 2020 14:54:21 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Jun 17, 2020 15:07:35 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Jun 17, 2020 15:15:01 GMT -8
Sherman gave the impression he was pretty happy with the way things had been going lately between the city and SDSU West. But...according to Fox 5, the lone no vote was...Squirmin' Scott Sherman. What an absolute tool. |
|
