Public or Catholic turf ?
Is this a case of the rich getting richer or just different strokes for different boards?
WHEN HAMILTON
THE high school football season kicks off this week, two teams will be playing their home games on brand new artificial turf fields. Both from the Catholic board. Bringing the total number of turf fields on that side of the ball to, well, all of them.
Meanwhile, two years from now, the public board will have four of its 13 schools equipped with turf fields while the others will have professional-grade natural grass surfaces.
Is this a case of the rich getting richer? Is this proof that there’s a growing athletics gap between the two boards?
“I don’t think so,” says Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board chair Todd White. “I think a lot of our schools have strong facilities.”
The fact that turf isn’t omnipresent at his
schools simply comes down to dollars and cents. While White acknowledges the current trend is toward turf fields — they can be used in inclement weather and throughout the year, and let’s be honest, they look sharp — there are other issues on his agenda that are at least as pressing.
The public board’s schools tend to be older and in greater need of upgrades. Yet the same pot of money that goes into athletics facilities has to be used to pay for other infrastructure improvements. The trustees have identified a few big priorities for their schools including science labs, learning commons and replacing gym floors, along with new fields. On top of everything else, he says the board is expanding gymnasiums in a number of older elementary schools to enhance athletics programs.
“Our revitalization backlog is much larger than the Catholic board,” he says.
Plus, the public board has 13 high schools compared to the Catholic board’s seven. The budget for each grass field is $1.25 million, he says. For turf it’s as much as $2 million. Meaning choosing the latter would cost millions more.
Sir Winston Churchill now has artificial turf. Nora Frances Henderson will in a couple years. Waterdown District is going to be outfitted with turf soon. And the yet-to-benamed high school by Tim Hortons Field — likely to be named at a board meeting on Monday — will have its turf-covered field at the old Dominion Glass site. The rest of the schools will all have newly built natural grass fields within two years.
White says this is a massive step up from a decade ago when there wasn’t a single one that rose to that level. Plus, the mix of natural surfaces (favoured by soccer players and some other athletes) and turf fields will be an advantage.
“Ultimately, I think the balance will keep us competitive,” he says.
Yet there are practical reasons turf is often the preferred option. Beyond just visual appeal.
Hamilton Catholic board chair Pat Daly says the advantages are obvious. Weather isn’t a factor. You can play games or practise in rain or even snow without chewing up the grass. Teachers, he says, have called the new fields outdoor classrooms because there’s certainty they can be used all through the year regardless of outdoor conditions.
On top of that, maintenance isn’t as complicated or costly since there’s no grass to cut, water or fertilize. And the field doesn’t need non-use time to recover.
“The obvious one thing it has done is extended use of playing fields,” he says.
Not just for students, either. As soon as school teams are done their game or practice, the fields can be rented out to community sports organizations through the evening which generates revenue for the Catholic board. That money is then put into a reserve fund to help pay for replacement turf 12 to 15 years down the road.
Daly says the cost to build the fields ranged from $1.2 million to $2 million-plus. But that’s for all the underground infrastructure as well as the green covering. The cost to simply replace the turf would be $400,000 to $500,000. So then, does the Catholic board indeed have a massive leg up on its public school brethren?
Anthony Macaluso is vice-principal at Bishop Tonnos Catholic Secondary today after spending 13 years as teacher and championship-winning football coach at Cardinal Newman. Newman was the second school in the city to put in an artificial turf field. In his time there, the Cardinals were always among the best in the city and won six city championships — three senior and three junior.
Did having artificial turf provide a competitive advantage?
“I don’t know if it’s much of a competitive advantage,” he says. “At the end of the day, the players are the players and the coaches are the coaches and you make do with what you have.”
The program supervisor of public school athletics shares that view. Michael Grobe says there are rules when football teams can begin working out — the week before the start of the school year — so better conditions in February don’t mean much.
No coach has ever complained to him about a competitive disadvantage based on the type of field available to them. Besides, he points out, nearly half of NFL teams play on natural grass. It can’t be that problematic.
Either way, Daly says the decision to go with turf was simply to benefit his students.
Has it?
“I think, clearly.”