Agreed. But what I meant was that the platform he wanted to build over the field would kill the grass for the three weeks that the ****kickers are in town.
Then renovate the Astrodome to use for the Rodeo. It's a once a year thing and IMO isn't as important as football....this coming from someone who grew up with a whole lot of high ranking ties to the Rodeo. I think "the world's richest rodeo" can drop some coin to pay for a permanent venue that they fully control......AND we'd have an answer as to what to do with the Astrodome.
I don't think the grass can actually get enough sunlight in the stadium. With the angle that the sun comes in, it either doesn't get the entire field or doesn't get sections long enough for it to work. Never mind that the field has to be removable for other events. Same thing in Arizona, but they had enough forethought to build the stadium so an entire field could be grown outside and then slid under the seating and into the stadium.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the rodeo brings in just as much if not more money than the Texans do with their home games. They're far from the red headed stepchild and can't just be banished to the old decrepit building next door.
I wasn't saying that they don't bring in money, just that I don't find them to be as important as football. I don't think the quality of playing surface should have to suffer simply to pacify the rodeo. Also, with renovation, the Astrodome could be awesome again.....and they do bill themselves as the world's richest rodeo, surely they could drop some coin to realize that, couldn't they? The Astrodome was ridiculously over-engineered when they first built it, to this day it's a stronger structure than NRG is. It would cost a lot of money, but IMO it would be worth it to the city as a whole if they separated where the Texans play and where the Rodeo happens.
The rodeo brings MORE economic impact to Houston than the Texans do. They also have more power with the county than the Texans do.
Even Arizona has problems, as evidenced by last week. I've posted a pic of the field in full sunlight.., but I think it goes beyond that since there's no wind circulation/etc. Like trying to grow grass in a canyon. Then again, I know they've made advances in hybrid strains that need very little ideal conditions to grow. The grass used to be horrible at MMP as well, but the new strains have done wonders.
It's arguable as to whether or not they bring more national prestige that being a NFL city does. Just not sure how to quantify that. Push comes to shove, and you had to choose only one, which would win?
If I personally got to choose, I'd choose the Texans because I'm not into the Rodeo. If it were up to the county? They'd choose the rodeo. There have been studies done on the impact of the rodeo on Houston and it exceeds any of the sports franchises. Employs more people, more ticket sales, restaurant/hotel boosts, etc.
Yes, the rodeo is awesome, which is why they should have their own venue, just like the Astros and Dynamo do.
It's arguable. What do you think would win if it were put to a vote of all county taxpayers? That is who the county should be most concerned about and apply the tax payers dollars appropriately. If the rodeo is so huge, they can afford their own venue.
Sunlight coming in to a shorter park with a much larger roof opening is easier to grow grass in. The NRG grass doesn't get enough sunlight. The tray system is fine, the people taking care of the grass are crap.
Just curious, is there any other "tray system" at work in sports (or anywhere in the world, for that matter)? It doesn't seem like we have a big enough sample size to rule the tray system as feasible. Also, has the Texans grounds crew been the same for 10+ years? Cause that is how long the field has sucked butt.
Yes, the Texans are awesome, which is why they should their own venue, just like the Astros and Dynamo do. The Rodeo is a big part of the reason NRG exists. As for it's impact being "debatable," I'd like to see someone post information from either a study or other reputable source that "debates" the impact of the Rodeo or says the Texans bring a great financial impact to the city of Houston. A poster saying "debatable" when commissioned studies by economists say otherwise is not very impressive.
You have several inches of damp turf on top soil. They water and roll it. The seams are visible but not stepped. You are basing it "sucking butt" on the parts that look brown which is just a result of the grass dying not an uneven surface. Leave it in the stadium longer gives you a more consistent field, moving it in at the last minute gives a greener field that could be more inconsistent. I wish they would get turf just so people will stop being little b****es about brown grass. Then go home and scalp their own lawn because that is how they did it when they lived boston and all grass must be the same.
