The playing field is sunk under ground (which is a huge cost saver overall, and its better for the environment, so win-win there), and they're offsetting costs by having all the different offices and other complexes around the stadium so there's not really anyway to have a rolling field that isn't going to probably push the costs into the 3 billion dollar range. Stan is going to go cheap on the surface, we'll get the latest and greatest turf. Most of the stigmas about turf are actually false. The science points to turf actually being safer for players.
Hey bluecoconuts, I thought that "most" of the recent studies still seem to indicate that a good grass field is still safer than a good turf field. (Especially as regards the most serious injuries, like ACL tears). And I assume you meant "
Isn't going to go cheap," right? (-- or did you mean Stan is gonna be "cheap" as regards avoiding grass, but he'll still get the "best" artificial turf?)
If it were feasible, I'd prefer to have a high-quality grass field at Inglewood. But if the costs truly are prohibitive, I guess a high-quality artifical turf will have to do.
As of a survey in 2010, NFL players overwhelmingly prefer grass to artificial turf. Granted, the study was awhile ago, and players go by how it "feels" as opposed to the scientific research. But I think "feel" is still an important metric. I have had three knee surgeries myself, and I definitely prefer grass to even the soft-and-cushy modern artificial turf.
Here's a couple links I found that still prefer grass:
http://sites.psu.edu/siowfa16/2016/09/08/grass-vs-turf-which-is-safer/
https://www.drdavidgeier.com/ask-dr-geier-acl-tears-on-natural-grass-or-fieldturf/
I do believe that the quality and safety of artificial turf keeps getting better and better, but in my personal opinion they have not yet surpassed the safety of a high-quality grass field.
I don't care about pigeons.
