Grass vs. Turf: Is There a Significant Injury Difference on Each Surface?

Through the midway point this season, there have been three more in-game ACL tears on grass than turf, according to data compiled by our staff.

Although the data is limited, it did not show a significant difference in ACL injury rates on turf vs. grass.

During the regular season, there have been 18 total ACL tears with 9 on turf and 8 on grass, plus 1 in practice.

In the preseason, there were 17 total ACL tears with 6 on grass, 2 on turf and 9 in practice.

Of 35 totals ACL tears, 11 are on turf and 24 have been on grass, although 10 of those 24 came in practice.

Five stadiums are tied with three total ACL tears this season. Three are turf fields (Ford Field, Sofi Stadium and Metlife Stadium) and two are grass (Mile High Stadium and Hard Rock Stadium).

Yes it is just a half-season of data, but the numbers are not astronomically skewed towards turf as the more dangerous playing surface.

There is a slightly higher risk on turf because of its lack of give, but that risk is not nonexistent on grass fields.

After Rashan Gary’s ACL tear, De’Vondre Campbell took to Twitter to speak about the difference between the two playing surfaces.

ESPN’s Kevin Seifert published a story Tuesday stating that recent rate of non-contact injuries to the knee, ankle and foot is roughly the same on natural and artificial playing surfaces.

Anecdotal evidence hints towards a slightly higher rate of non-contact injuries on turf rather than grass, about 1.5 more per team per season, according to the Pro Football Docs with decades of past NFL experience as head team physicians.

Despite the public outcry, the NFL has no immediate plans to change all playing surfaces to natural grass, Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones said Tuesday morning on 105.3 The Fan.

At this point, regardless of the data the owners’ word and pressure by the NFLPA are the only deciding factors that matter.