...It certainly looks like the old scoreboard, but there's no way the field looks the way it does -- must be the new scoreboard with digital ads???? Or did someone Photoshop the old board?
Water based darker colors like our blue aborbs up to 90% of the light needed for photosynthesis, applied over several weeks would harm the grass. Oranges, yellows, reds... tend to be more reflective.I don't understand that at all. LSU endzones are loaded with purple and gold paint..same thing with Alabama, USC, UCLA, Georgia, Florida. All natural grass and all with bold endzones. I'm not bitching about the improvements..love the way the field looks but would prefer bold colors in the endzone that's all
Still have the puppy dog on the monitor? or will that be gone by game time?
Not trying to be a jerk here but I'm not buying it
I'm going to have to disagree with you. I'm pretty sure that is the new scoreboard, just with the old mascot on it. If you zoom in on the picture, it looks like the ads are from a video board. Also, if you look at the picture below, the background used to be one color, but the picture posted earlier, the background of where the screen would be compared to the background of the scoreboard are two different colors. Why they used the old husky is something I do not have an answer for.That was a picture of the old scoreboard.
I'm going to have to agree to disagree here. Just looked at them both side by side and it just looks like the original picture has the old logo with ads on the new scoreboard. Not really sure what your seeing here. Compare all three pictures and tell me which two look most alike.Do you not see the new video board in this thread? The post actually says it's the new video board. I promise you the video board in your post is the old one.
Yeah, I don't either but UConn has asked almost every year to paint the endzones and Rentschler says no
Michigan's field is artificial turf. They changed from Grass a while ago.Michigan doesn't paint there's... neither does Penn State... might be more climate related more than paint color related.
Michigan doesn't paint there's... neither does Penn State... might be more climate related more than paint color related.
Bingo. Cool season grasses like ours can't handle it. Down south they are using different species (and in CA) which are considerably more hardy, and which will be getting more sun throughout the season.
Probs has something to do with using for other events (eg, soccer)?Yeah, I don't either but UConn has asked almost every year to paint the endzones and Rentschler says no
Seating and surface[edit source | editbeta]
The stadium's original capacity was 72,000, but Fielding Yost made certain to install footings that could allow for expansion up to 200,000 seats. Initially, all seating consisted of wooden bleachers. These were replaced with permanent metal seating in 1949 by Crisler, who was athletic director at the time. From 1927 to 1968, the stadium's field was covered in natural grass. This was replaced with TartanTurf in 1969 to give players better traction. However, this surface was thought to be unforgiving on players' joints, and the stadium returned to natural turf in 1991. This too became problematic, as the field's below-surface location near the water table made it difficult for grass to permanently take root. The field was converted to FieldTurf, an artificial surface designed to give grass-like playing characteristics, in 2003.[28] In 2010, it was upgraded with a brighter and higher quality version of field turf called Duraspine.[29]