Playing Surface (Or: Why we need to evolve as an organization)

Yes, the loss is still stinging for all of us, but let's take a moment to get our minds on something else:

Since forever, Washington D.C. has been a city which was characterized by it's blue collar, tough football team. In the 80's and long before that, our great teams- though capable of passing the football with the best of them, have almost entirely been comprised of gritty, tough nosed, unspectacular athletes. Other teams had men with the agility and elusiveness of a greased pig, the speed of race horses. Almost uniformly throughout our history, at all positions which were not skill positions, the Washington Redskins have had the human version of a WW2 German Tiger Tank.

Take a look at the playing surface in any playoff video from Redskins history at RFK. It's a brownish-green, sandy mess. A combination of a grind it out running game, and generally dreary weather from October through December wreak havoc on our natural grass. This was not a problem with Riggins, Byner, Riggs, and passers such as Mark Rypien, throwing to guys such as Art Monk.

RG3 did not injure himself initially because of the playing surface, but I feel that today, especially prior to his 2nd touchdown pass (the turning point for our offense), RG3 hurt himself with an awkward plant on our crappy and unstable turf. The Seahawks kicker injured himself just trying to line up and kick it. This brought back memories of the NFL films video from the 1983-84 championship game against the 49ers where each team missed a crapload of field goals because the kickers couldn't even plant properly to kick.

Here is another thought: statistics on how our offense performed on different playing surfaces (I will use averages)

In a dome: (Superdome, St. Louis, Dallas)

(W/L): 2-1

263.6 Pass yards per game

159.33 Rush yards per game

35.3 Points per game

Outdoor Synthetic Turf/Grass-Turf blends: (Met Life, Lincoln Financial)

(W/L): 1-1

208.5 Pass yards per game

188 Rush yards per game

25 Points per game

Natural grass: (FedEx Field x8, Raymond James, Cleveland Stadium, Heinz Field)

(W/L): 7-4

184.5 Pass yards per game

154.58 Rush yards per game

23.33 Points per game

Now, the number of games played is higher for grass of course, and it is possible that over the course of a season, playing in a dome, our numbers would average our much lower than they are here. Still, how about this alarming fact:

Games on the FedEx Field surface:

177 Pass yards per game

186.75 Rush yards per game (Sounds like what we used to do in RFK)

25.75 Points per game

------------------------------------------------------------

Conclusion:

Let's just go based off what our eyes told us. Our passing game on turf and in domes this season was quite dominant and explosive. On grass, it was far less successful. Our running game was good regardless of the playing surface used, though we averaged the best on artificial turf.

Our passing game averaged out to be worse on our home surface this season than anywhere else...in fact, on surfaces which were not FedEx field we averaged the following:

250.75 Passing yards per game (177/G @ FedEx)

139.375 Rushing yards per game (186.75 @ FedEx)

28.74 Points per game (25.75 @ FedEx)

I feel that we are not the organization we once were in terms of identity. RG3 is an electric player who plays his best football on artificial turf and indoors. Our receivers play better indoors as well. At the very least, the actual playing surface of FedEx field is atrocious, and is hampering what should be an explosive passing game. Anybody remember the Bengals home opener? Josh Wilson slipped and sandy dirt came kicking up- the same crap they put onto the field in most places late in the season when things are falling apart.

Here is RG3's scoring productivity on turf vs. grass:

2.16 TDs per game

1.4 TDs per game

While I have made it clear in the past few weeks that I'm really rooting for a new stadium sooner rather than later, I can't stress enough how badly I think we need a new playing surface. I think that installing a synthetic surface at FedEx field, sacrilegious as it may sound, will benefit our offense greatly during 2013, and may even help prevent an injury or two.

I'm not going to hold my breath on this though. It took us about 15-20 years longer than every other team in the NFL to get a practice bubble, and when it comes to spending a relatively small amount of money on something which would greatly benefit the team or fans, suddenly Dan Snyder gets all weird about it.

I don't think there's gonna be a new stadium any time in the near future... the skins are tied to fedex until 2030 or so from what I read here before..

They just meed to do something about keeping the grass in better condition going forward

I don't think there's gonna be a new stadium any time in the near future... the skins are tied to fedex until 2030 or so from what I read here before..

They just meed to do something about keeping the grass in better condition going forward

Or go the obvious route and tear up the grass and put in a synthetic surface where they won't have to worry about it getting ****ed up...

Nice work No Pressure! Thought it would be spring before we threw some stats together but will definitely be a hot button topic this offseason. I have said it before, these are not Joe Gibbs' Redskins. These are not the Hogs. We have RGIII, Garcon, Moss, Morris and hopefully Helu back and we practice on turf. Time to embrace the future.

Either go the route of New England and get that woven material; under the grass that holds it together or go with the synthetic stuff. The surface is horrible looking and was an obvios factor of several injuries the past two weeks.

I remember when New England, Pittsburgh and Cincinnati got their new stadiums. They had initially tried to put grass in them, but they had the same problem we have. NE and Cincy went to the fieldturf and Pittsburgh still puts grass out, but they seem to have solved their issue.

Go like Philly and Green Bay: hybrid system. It has artificial surface with real grass as well. You get the grass stains and the feel of grass, but when the grass dies you still have turf left to play on. FedEx was painted dirt yesterday.

If the players and coaches think there's a problem I bet it will get solved. If they don't think it's a problem, then they will leave it as is. None of us have any clue what the players and coaches really think.

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfceast/post/_/id/48145/obviously-redskins-should-fix-their-field

ESPN knows how ****ty our field is. I really do think that this offseason Dan will have the surface replaced.

I would be shocked if nothing is done to the playing surface.

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfceast/post/_/id/48145/obviously-redskins-should-fix-their-field

ESPN knows how ****ty our field is. I really do think that this offseason Dan will have the surface replaced.

News broke today that the Skins will stick with grass... but they simply have to get the supporting technologies fixed. The NFLPA is involved now as well and you can bet that if one more person gets hurt on our field Snyder could not only have them but also other owners pissed at him. I wouldn't be surprised to see the NFL come out with stricter standards that all fields must adhere to. What we currently have is in no way acceptable. I played on high school fields that were better... and he has tons of $$ to take care of this issue.

News broke today that the Skins will stick with grass... but they simply have to get the supporting technologies fixed. The NFLPA is involved now as well and you can bet that if one more person gets hurt on our field Snyder could not only have them but also other owners pissed at him. I wouldn't be surprised to see the NFL come out with stricter standards that all fields must adhere to. What we currently have is in no way acceptable. I played on high school fields that were better... and he has tons of $$ to take care of this issue.

That's the thing, too, it isn't expensive. My high school raised the money to re-do our football field in my last year there to something which was college/professional grade. I think it was a few thousand to get it done. To Dan Snyder, this is chump change, he's probably spent more on bath tubs or something stupid like that.

That's the thing, too, it isn't expensive. My high school raised the money to re-do our football field in my last year there to something which was college/professional grade. I think it was a few thousand to get it done. To Dan Snyder, this is chump change, he's probably spent more on bath tubs or something stupid like that.

Which just shows complete ignorance of the issue... or intent to have it be as ****ty as possible to gain advantage. Either way, it's not worth getting young guys hurt like this.

Might as well dome the stadium an make them a indoor team...Greatest show on turf remixed!!

The field was never an issue because we were always the bad team on the field. It worked to our advantage to slow the field down to help us play up to our competition.

RG3's injury had nothing to do with playing on grass.

When you factor in Clemmons knee and Seattle's kicker spraining an ankle, that's 2 players out of 60 getting hurt in one game.

That would happen in any game on any surface.

As usual, the media blows it out of proportion and a large majority on ES follow suit.

RG3's injury had nothing to do with playing on grass.

When you factor in Clemmons knee and Seattle's kicker spraining an ankle, that's 2 players out of 60 getting hurt in one game.

That would happen in any game on any surface.

As usual, the media blows it out of proportion and a large majority on ES follow suit.

The field was not responsible for any injuries, but that field was in bad shape. It's just a matter of time before someone blows something because of that field though.

The field was not responsible for any injuries, but that field was in bad shape. It's just a matter of time before someone blows something because of that field though.

This is not directed at you DM72, but I read alot of posters that think playing on grass is outdated and we need field turf.

Fire the groundskeeper and get someone in here that's competent to fix the field. Problem solved.

To those people wanting field turf I say: Horse Hockey!

No one cared about our grass field in the 80's when we were in contention every year and putting Lombardi's in the trophy case.

And no one gave a damn about our field for 20 years until last Sunday.

Alot of bloviating going on over a back burner issue.

RG3's injury had nothing to do with playing on grass.

When you factor in Clemmons knee and Seattle's kicker spraining an ankle, that's 2 players out of 60 getting hurt in one game.

That would happen in any game on any surface.

As usual, the media blows it out of proportion and a large majority on ES follow suit.

Could you read my original post please? It deals with how we played better statistically on non-grass fields because we're no longer the hogs and John Riggins. There is a tiny point about injuries of course, but I'm interested in playing field as a competitive advantage, and it is- for a fast young team with an offense like ours.

This is not directed at you DM72, but I read alot of posters that think playing on grass is outdated and we need field turf.

Fire the groundskeeper and get someone in here that's competent to fix the field. Problem solved.

To those people wanting field turf I say: Horse Hockey!

No one cared about our grass field in the 80's when we were in contention every year and putting Lombardi's in the trophy case.

And no one gave a damn about our field for 20 years until last Sunday.

Alot of bloviating going on over a back burner issue.

I agree, there's nothing wrong with playing grass "as long" as it's kept up. Last Sunday, the field was a mess. And you bring up The point that "no one cared in the last 20 years." Over the last 20 years we had very few late season high profile games. That's probably about to change. I suspect we will have our share of high profile home games over the next 10 years. I'm sure you don't want our field to be a laughing stock. I don't.

Your Front Office might want to consider using Field Turf like we have here in Cincinnati at Paul Brown Stadium. Washington DC and Cincinnati have basically the same weather throughout the season and Field Turf is terrific. It feels just like grass and since the designs are sewn into the field, no painting and repainting is ever necessary. In Cincinnati we even have a feature most other stadiums don't: A heated field. Pipes under the turf keep the surface warm so we never have to worry about snow sticking to it. Most of all, it looks great on TV!

I've been a traditionalist on this issue, but I think I'm turning around on it. Artificial surfaces are so advanced now, it makes logical sense to go there - aside from any advantage it gives an RG3-led team for the next 10 years. And somebody tell Mr. Snyder about the huge amount of money he'll save on field maintenance by making the switch.

FieldTurf is fine by me, especially since it's not like FedEx is some storied stadium, like RFK, Fenway Park, etc. It's FedEx, and I think we're all aware of its limitations. Let's see a rehabbed Griffin and this exciting young team out there on a new playing field. Grass is fine, too, as long as the grass actually exists. No more ice rinks.

Great research. Here's a question: does the impact our field has on our offense balance out with the impact our field has on opponent offenses? I like the idea that we at least know our field, and can get used to it, and gain advantage, comparative to other teams, with that. But, as you said, we're building a different kind of team now, and maybe it's better to accentuate our strengths than to minimize our opponents?

Could you read my original post please? It deals with how we played better statistically on non-grass fields because we're no longer the hogs and John Riggins. There is a tiny point about injuries of course, but I'm interested in playing field as a competitive advantage, and it is- for a fast young team with an offense like ours.

I appreciate your original post for this very reason. No need to discuss the injury perspective of the surface, but simply the competitive advantage it may offer our current on field product. Before your post I was somewhat resistant to the push to change the surface as just a byproduct of the RG3 injury. But putting the stats to support the argument makes a strong case. No doubt there was a different offense in New Orleans than there was a FedEx. Makes you wonder what may have been trotted out on Sunday if we had made it through to Atlanta. Good post