In the world of Major League Soccer (MLS), where the talents of domestic and international players converge, a unique element sets the stage apart – the playing surface.
Unlike many global soccer leagues, some MLS teams choose to borrow stadiums from other sports, notably American football arenas. As the league concludes its season post-International Break, the question of how different playing surfaces impact the game comes to the forefront.
The Turf vs. Grass Debate
The perennial debate over playing on artificial turf versus natural grass has become a focal point in soccer discussions, especially in the United States. The truth is that synthetic turf, with its consistency, durability, and all-weather playability, is favored by some teams. Yet, concerns linger regarding player injuries, ball behavior, and the environmental sustainability of producing artificial turf.
Grueling injuries on turf are typically captioned with words like ban, end, or prohibit, immediately inundating the social media ecosystem and infuriating fans everywhere. In the the process, the critical thinking that’s necessary to have this discussion typically shuts down.
German Berterame of MTY suffers a fracture in his ankle.
Brandon Bye of #NERevs tears his ACL vs Atlas.
Owners would rather protect their wallets than their product.
Ban Turf. Now. pic.twitter.com/RU9a4MILxB
— herculez gomez (@herculezg) August 5, 2023
MLS Teams on Turf
Several MLS teams have embraced artificial turf fields in their home stadiums, citing practical considerations such as consistency and lower maintenance costs. Teams like Atlanta United FC, New England Revolution, Vancouver Whitecaps FC, and FC Charlotte all play in stadiums designed for American football. The lone exception is the Portland Timbers, who maintain an artificial surface in their soccer-specific stadium, Providence Park, adding a layer of complexity to the debate.
Teams’ Performance on Turf – Decoding Home Advantage
| New England | 1.47 |
| CF Montreal | 1.47 |
| Houston Dynamo | 1.36 |
| Columbus Crew | 1.35 |
| New York City | 1.11 |
| SJ Earthquakes | 1.06 |
Examining the points per game (PPG) differentials between home and away matches for 2023 reveals mixed insights. Teams like New England and Atlanta United showcase high differentials, implying a more robust performance at home but so did Houston and Columbus – natural grass teams – who clearly played better at home this season.
For those who play on turf, Seattle and Charlotte were the two exceptions where the differential was clearly below the league’s average. This prompts a crucial question: Does the field type influence a team’s home advantage?
At first, the consistent performance of specific teams on artificial turf supports the notion that the playing surface can influence outcomes. Teams like New England and Atlanta, playing at Gillette Stadium and Mercedes Benz respectively on NFL turf fields, exhibit some of the highest PPG differential in the league, showcasing a clear home advantage for those who choose artificial surfaces over those who do not.
The durability, reliability, and all-weather playability of turf contribute to a more predictable style of play and in 2023 helped New England and Atlanta navigate tough seasons, resulting in a fringe playoff spot for each.
Considerations and Drawbacks
However, the advantages of turf come with considerations and drawbacks, as mentioned above. In certain studies, there has been a higher incidence of muscle strains and ligament injuries on athletes on turf, which have been raised when comparing the impact and severity of injuries to those occurring on grass surfaces.
The problem is that many of these studies are based on American football, a sport with much greater contact, different footwear, and, let’s face it, different athlete profiles. So, as with any analysis, the correlation cannot lead to conclusions on causation without much scrutiny of other external factors. Imagine making business decisions based on anecdotal evidence. It’s just not that simple.
And yes, other less apparent factors offer huge drawbacks to player safety, especially for young ones. The heat retention of turf, for example, causing higher temperatures on the field, can be highly detrimental to academy players, especially in warmer months in southern states like Texas, where heat exertion can be deadly. There are also environmental concerns about the mass production of the fibers.
Even the differences in ball behavior may require teams to adapt their playing style, something MLS coaches have repeatedly brought up during interviews.
All factors that give the team used to playing on the surface an edge. After all, humans are creatures of habit.
The Human Factor
The human factor remains pivotal, though. Team dynamics, coaching strategies, and individual player preferences contribute significantly to a team’s success on turf. Coaches, like LAFC’s Steve Cherundolo, acknowledge the negative impact of turf on their teams but emphasize the importance of adaptability and utilizing strengths irrespective of the playing field.
Steve Cherundolo knows his team can play on turf. They just beat Vancouver, a team whose home-field differential was in line with the rest of the league; next up for Cherundolo: Seattle at Lumen Field, whose differential is flat.
Numbers can be deceiving, though. The flat measure shows Seattle proved this year, that they can play well on turf or away from Lumen and were rewarded with the second seed in the West for that consistency.
Coaches like Cherundolo and others continue to preach that a league that wants to be taken seriously worldwide cannot play on a surface other than grass, even if that means adding a few more thousand dollars in monthly costs to a team’s bottom line.
The additional support from Apple and the league’s front office should make this no longer an issue to owners, and with a World Cup looming, high-profile billionaires like Bob Kraft, who owns the Revs and the Patriots in New England, and have been considering a move away from turf and back to natural grass should finally have enough momentum to take the plunge.
Until then, the intricate relationship between teams and their chosen playing surfaces will remain a major storyline through this offseason as the league reels in from its most important season since inception in 1996. In the ever-evolving world of American sports, pigskin football, the one we are used to watch during Thanksgiving will need to lead the charge if we’re going to ban turf from soccer in the US, since teams have no plans to stop playing in NFL stadiums, at least at the time we wrote this.
That won’t stop coaches from incentivizing change: “If you’re asking me in a hypothetical world if I want to keep playing on turf: Absolutely not.” concluded Cherundolo on the topic before moving on, downplaying it as a “minor factor” in the important Sunday playoff game against the Sounders in Seattle.
Cover: Seattle Sounders
