Wisconsin ponders grass vs. turf debate

The Badger Herald MADISON, Wis (U-WIRE) -- The recent artificial turf debate swirling about the Wisconsin Athletic Department has all the makings of a good court case. It's got star witnesses and expert testimony, hearsay and circumstantial evidence. Heck, it's even got a high profile judge. All rise, the Honorable Tommy Thompson presiding. Wisconsin's governor donned the robe and gavel when he discussed vetoing a move by the Wisconsin Athletic Department to replace the surface at Camp Randall Stadium with improved turf. Thompson suggested the department look into replacing the existing turf, worn out from eight years of use, with a grass field. The governor's discussion touched off a heated debate, one whose verdict contains significant implications for the future. Artificial turf appears to have the high-priced defense team, with powerful Wisconsin football coach Barry Alvarez leading the charge. "As we studied it, and looked at all facets, [a new artificial surface] is the best situation for us," Alvarez said. Alvarez has years of experienced counsel backing him up, including Athletic Director Pat Richter, Associate AD Al Fish and Director of Facilities and Game Management John Chadima. Their defense hinges on the three main points, the first of which is the substantial financial responsibilities that come with installation, maintenance and repair of a grass surface. The costs of replacing the artificial surface have been estimated to run anywhere from $750,000 to $1.2 million, though the athletic department hopes that the intact subsurface will keep the costs to a minimum. Installing the grass would be comparable, but the real costs come later. "Financially it's twofold," Chadima said. "Number one, you're looking at an annual maintenance cost, which is most likely to be incurred by the athletic department, of anywhere from $50,000 to $100,000 for a grass field. "The other thing is the revenue that you might lose from the possibility of having up to two concerts a year in the stadium, the high school games and any other events that we host. It could be anywhere between $500,000 to $1 million of lost revenue if all those events do not occur here." Regardless of the surface, the bill will be split between the athletic department (70 percent) and the state, which will handle the other 30 percent. The university spent just $8,000 maintaining the stadium's turf last year.