Aaron Rodgers’ Injury Is Reigniting The Natural Vs. Artificial Turf Debate

It’s a feud as old as artificial turf itself. Some say real grass is inherently better while others marvel over the resilience and easy maintenance of the fake stuff.

So which side is right? Or is the issue too complex to determine one type of turf better than the other?

A brief history

You’ve probably heard of “astroturf,” which got its name from being installed at Houston’s Astrodome way back in 1966. Although fake grass has come a long way since then, that hasn’t stopped naysayers from insisting that nothing can compare to natural grass.

Nevertheless, artificial turf has some clear advantages, which has led most college stadiums to make the switch.

But when millions of dollars are on the line in the big leagues, it’s crucial to ensure that athletes are performing on the most appropriate surface available. And that brings us to the devastating Achilles heel injury that took QB Aaron Rodgers out for the season just a few plays into his first game as a New York Jet.

The doctor is in

The game in question was being played on artificial turf, but there’s no clear indication that the surface had anything to do with Rodgers’ injury. To understand the inherent risks associated with each type of turf, it’s helpful to hear from experts who deal with the facts on a daily basis.

Dr. Calvin Hwang, for example, is the team doctor for football and soccer players at Stanford University.

Although he believes that real grass is the safer option, he also acknowledged that his opinion could change in light of new information.

“The newer generation turfs may be safer than older generation turfs,” he said. “And so studies that were done five or six years ago may not be including some of those newer generation turfs.”

Chris Agee October 12th, 2023

Share this story: