Montana State's turf looks better
Don't give me all the nonsense on "The Ashtray", "Kitty Litter" and "The Streak." Try to look at this alone. Montana State's new field looks better than the new turf the University of Montana is putting down.
Photo courtesy of eGriz user FTGRIZ.
Photo courtesy of Bobcat Nation user TIrwin24.
The Washington-Grizzly turf does not look bad nor is it completely installed. I understand that. But it won't look as good as the turf in Bozeman. Please hold off on everything else, I know the rest of that stadium is mediocre and so is the team most years but on this topic alone, they have UM beat.
Montana State chose to go with FieldTurf, the industry leader for these artificial grass surfaces. FieldTurf is used by 22 NFL teams and countless Division I colleges.
The University of Montana went with Sprinturf. Washington-Grizzly stadium is the highest profile job they've done.
I do not know all the advantages and disadvantages of each. I do know one: Sprinturf is uglier.
It does look nicer. is it possible that the way the picture was taken could have influenced the look? I think I'll have a better idea of how it looks when i see it in person or on tv. I guess i don't spo much care about the look, as long as it does it's job & there are less injuries. One nice thing about the MSU pic is that it shows a beautiful Montana day.
It certainly is a brighter green at Bobcat stadium. I too will wait and see the final results. On TV the Bobcat surface doesn't look as clean. You can see the sand, so it almost looks like its natural and ready to fall apart. I like the griz surface's cleaner look. I am disappointed in the "grey" lettering in the zones. Also, looks like the expansion is staying grey, not tan in color like the rest of the stadium. I get enough guff about how grey Missoula is from by Bozeman friends.
I brought my son over to Missoula for college and in person the turf looks a lot better. Question: Have they always had the seats torn out in the student section? They are not there now and looks ugly with out people there.
why would you want seats in the student section. they should be standing. plus it doesnt matter what it looks like now it matters what it looks like when we are playing and the color doesnt matter if we are beating the cats anyways.colin start writing more we all miss the updates.you ok man?
Let's wait until UM's field is finished. As I understand it, the slam against Fieldturf (50% sand, 50% rubber) is that the sand fill eventually compacts and the field gets harder. Sprintturf is 100% rubber fill. I work PT at an NFL facility and don't see any problems with our Fieldturf field, but I don't know how old it is. I do think they need to adjust the "4" in the SE 40 yard marker though (unless the camera angle makes it look goofy).
I was just wondering how long I have missed that detail? Also, since they use the stadium for other purposes, the seats might be a good idea for other events.
The turf isn't exactly done yet. Just got a tour of the new stadium expansion. O'Day was telling me that the bear is wrong and they're getting a new one tomorrow that looks just like the old one. And the lettering in the end zones has yet to be outlined. There will be a six inch white outline around the letters. And they are getting black pellets in this week that will darken up the white lettering a bit. So don't be too quick to judge.
The reason I judge is that no matter what, we're not going to have the turf used by a majority of top-notch teams. The best team using SprinTurf is the Griz, the best teams using Fieldturf: probably the Indianapolis Colts, New England Patriots, Tampa Bay Rays... could keep going. I'm not sure what led us to go with SprinTurf. The quality already let us down and led to a reinstall. It's not a major issue but if you can go with the best in the industry, why not?
- Colin