The feud between the NFL Players Association (NFLPA) and the NFL over grass and turf fields is nearing a boiling point. George Kittle has been one of the more outspoken players about pushing the NFL to require all 32 teams to play on natural grass playing surfaces. FIFA has every NFL stadium that is hosting a World Cup game fitted with a natural grass playing surface that meets their standards. If they can enforce that—and make it doable and temporary—why can’t the NFL enforce that for player safety?

“We’ve made it clear that we prefer grass fields,” Kittle said, posted to the NFLPA’s X account. “We know it’s better on our bodies. And clearly we know it’s possible based on everything that went into putting down grass fields for the World Cup in each stadium.”

This shouldn’t be an issue for the NFL considering 92 percent of players preferred to play on grass, per an NFLPA survey. The NFL can do the right thing here, and that’s all Kittle and the NFLPA are pleading for. The fact that it’s been seamless for FIFA proves it’s doable for the NFL.

Why the NFL is pushing back … or rather not pushing at all

When you look at these NFL stadiums, they aren’t just hosting NFL games during the season, they’re hosting a litany of events. To continue to remove and replace the sod field before each home game would defeat the purpose of switching to the grass fields in the first place. The stadium owners aren’t going to sacrifice more money for the sake of switching a playing surface they feel isn’t a problem, and the NFL feels no need to go against that. 

“No, we have more flexibility with the way we handle our surface at the stadium. We have no belief that it’s any safer to play on a grass [field] or a turf. We are ambiguous as to the safety of it,” Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones said per an ESPN story.

Miami is the one team that has a multi-use stadium that uses a grass playing surface. Per ESPN, they have their own sod farm, which makes it easy to grow it. The story added that the playing surface gets changed just about every month. Just because it can work for them doesn’t mean it will work for the 15 NFL stadiums that still use artificial turf playing surfaces.

Will the NFL actually learn from FIFA’s grass field success?

FIFA rolling in their own grass for the World Cup in the seven NFL stadiums is more than just being able to transition between grass and non-grass surfaces. It’s about the research that FIFA does to keep the playing surfaces at peak performance. The colder weather grass surfaces use a different grass mix than the warmer weather ones. It’s more than just putting grass in the ground. 

The fact that FIFA goes to that length is what the players are pleading for. If the players want the grass playing surface, why wouldn’t the NFL do more research and see if it’s worth experimenting with? That’s not to say they haven’t looked into it, but the players feel slighted, which is why they’re continuing to push for grass playing surfaces. 

If the NFL won’t seem to take an interest in it, maybe this is a chance for the NFLPA to look more into what FIFA has been able to pull off. The more they find out, the stronger their argument can be. And if not convince the league commissioner, then convince the team owners because they can make the decision just like the NFL can enforce a universal rule. 

The grass vs. turf debate is going to linger on until one side finally caves. The fact that the NFL has the resources to look into what it would take and hasn’t really cared much about it, it makes sense why the NFLPA feels slighted. At the same time, the NFL also wants what’s best for the players. The NFLPA feels a contradiction, and now that FIFA has shown it’s possible, the feud re-ignites. 

More NFL offseason news and analysis

Add us as a preferred source on Google

Follow