You know, it's not hard for these teams to find a grass surface to practice on. In fact, Portland has an artificial turf AND grass field at its practice facility. Vancouver has two artificial turf fields and three grass fields. Seattle has seven artificial turf and five grass fields at their complex. So, yeah, they, uh, have grass to practice on.
Completely understood, and never meant to claim otherwise. The contention is that the PNW teams are accustomed to playing (a majority of) their competitive league matches on turf. Training and match play are two very different things. There is some honest truth to the idea that, of the remaining Western Conf teams, FCD would be best prepared for a trip to RBA and a cup final on that field there. On the whole, MLS "home artificial turf" teams have yet to achieve the ultimate success in the MLS post-season. That will likely change at some point, and an MLS Cup final may indeed be hosted on an artificial turf field in some year, but I do not think 2015 will be that year. Not that I know anything or can predict the future.
Let's see if facts interfere with assumptions. Here's how Cascadia teams have done at Red Bull Arena during the regular season (won-draw-loss): Vancouver = 2-1-0, 2.33 ppg Portland = 1-0-2, 1.00 ppg Seattle = 1-1-2, 1.00 ppg Cascadia overall = 4-2-4, 1.40 ppg Vancouver is undefeated in their history at Red Bull Arena. Seattle has gotten a result in half of their games. Overall Cascadia teams have won as many as they have lost. I don't think Cascadia teams are ill-equipped to play on grass. Winning as many as you lose on the road is not at all a bad result. In fact, it puts you in the upper tier. Meanwhile, Dallas has never won in Red Bull Arena during the regular season (won-draw-loss): Dallas = 0-1-2, 0.33 ppg Vancouver is undefeated at Red Bull Arena, Dallas winless. Every Cascadia team has a better record at Red Bull Arena than Dallas. So naturally you assume Dallas, because they play on grass, has the advantage over Cascadia teams in Red Bull Arena. Facts schmacts.
Yup. Because none of the Cascadia teams have natural grass fields at their practice facilities that they can use to prepare to play on a natural grass field with.
Turf teams can practice on grass fields all they want, but they're built to win on turf. They're built to take advantage of the fast bounces and the quick overall pace created by playing on that flat surface. Grass fields are never the same from city to city, knowing where there is lose sod matters, knowing any dips or rises matter, knowing which length cleats best to use on said field matters, type of grass, length of grass, size of field, affects of rain, etc., etc., etc.
The above is one of the reasons I laugh at folks who talk about the 'bounce of the ball' on grass fields. It's different on each and every one! Different species of grass, different soil compositions, different degrees of wear, different cutting heights, and so on... Each turf field is different from others, also. Because, turfs age, have different underlay systems, are of different compositions in the first place. All the arguing about it is kinda lunacy, I think. I genuinely believe that soccer players allow themselves to be 'psyched out' by knowing they are on turf fields. That's not to say they are awesome, because the rug burn and potential infections problem of them is real. The chemical off gassing and rub-off are possibly issues. But, I'm unconvinced of injury rates (studies are fairly variable in their findings on that for soccer players) and cry me a bucket for the ball bouncing differently because they are freaking professionals. Adjust dammit, that's what you get paid to play a children's game to do.
Some light reading for you https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilbert_du_Motier,_Marquis_de_Lafayette#American_Revolution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/France_in_the_American_Revolutionary_War
Wait ... there's grass practice fields in PNW? That can't be right. I've been assured that grass fields are impossible there.
Yup. There's one! One French warrior. Tennessee alone has like three dudes like him. HAHAHA!!! Davy Crockett or Sam Houston much Sounders78...
The land that the Marquis de Lafayette was granted, a series of townships in Florida, was the land they built Tallahassee, the state capital, on. And I said that without looking in the articles.
Damn that subset of facts. Now, let's take a look at just this season, or the last six months. And do a bit of a broader analysis to compare the PPG statistics for all of the remaining Western Conference teams home and away and on grass or on artificial turf. Maybe my assumption is again incorrect. Yes. And in 2015, I still think FCD is the best team in the Western Conference and will likely advance to the MLS Cup final. (And they may end up hosting it.) But if the final is indeed at RBA, I would think the best and most-level (and most enjoyable to this fan) match-up would be FCD v NYRB. They did finish level on points this season. And honestly no one, save for those wackos in the PNW who can live with and appreciate the regular matches on artificial turf, wants to see a PNW team play for or win anything of significance in 2015. So I'll stick with my prediction of NYRB over FCD in the final. But since this is MLS, some interesting things will happen in the next 4 weeks and quite possibly neither or both of those #1 seeds will make make it to the Cup final. So my back-up predictions are MTL will win at Portland (or CLB will win at VAN) to claim MLS Cup for the mighty East -- since I hear they have artificial turf training fields in and around Columbus and Montreal, and in fact Montreal plays some of their best games on a home turf/domed field.
Almost true. Technically, I am still a bit better than turf, which for professional soccer is indeed the worst.
And I genuinely believe that players who play at home venues with artificial fields allow themselves to be 'psyched out' by knowing they are playing away on a natural surface.
Seriously? You think people who have been playing on grass all their lives just freak the f*** out when they leave their artificial fields? You think it takes more than eleven seconds into warmups to get acclimated to the real stuff again? I played outdoor co-rec ball on grass and indoor ball on FieldTurf for a few years. The amount of time it took me to make the adjustment EITHER WAY could be measured in seconds.
That's rec league, not pro. That split second you lose by wearing the wrong gear, won't be punished in rec league.
But again -- isn't that what warmups are for? Figuring out your footwear and getting the feel of the field? I'm not saying there isn't ANY possibility of getting fooled, but tab's trying to make it sound like playing on grass is like learning a foreign language.
This is funny too. WW2, US was just as unprepared for war (probably less) than France. Sure, the danger was more immanent for France than US, but FDR had to basically allow Pearl Harbor for the US to get involved, and even start a war effort. What is kinda badass about that part of history, is how DeGaulle managed to put himself nearly on equal footing with FDR and Churchill holding 2-7 unsuited.
So do it. Science, natural and social, works by putting forth hypotheses and then collecting and analyzing data with which to test the hypotheses. If the data does not support the hypotheses we ditch them and get new ones. What you do is throw out ideas, never test them and dismiss any data that goes contrary to them. In the world of science you're a biblical creationist arguing the pyramids were grain storage silos, contrary to all evidence. You have decided it is true and therefore believe it must be true regardless of the actual facts. As it stands, the presented evidence rejects your hypothesis.
All valid points. Working on the calculations from the game logs. (Might be worthwhile to have someone confirm, since I can't find a source that presents grass/artificial-turf results, so I am hand entering the results.) Here's FCD, Vancouver, Portland and Seattle (for the 2015 regular season, all records as W-D-L) :: FCD at home (on grass) = 13-2-2 = 2.412 PPG FCD away (on grass) = 4-3-5 = 1.250 PPG FCD away (on synthetic) = 1-1-3 = 0.800 PPG VAN at home (on synthetic) = 9-2-6 = 1.706 PPG VAN away (on grass) = 5-1-7 = 1.231 PPG VAN away (on synthetic) = 2-2-0 = 2.000 PPG POR at home (on synthetic) = 8-6-3 = 1.765 PPG POR away (on grass) = 7-2-5 = 1.643 PPG POR away (on synthetic) = 0-0-3 = 0.000 PPG SEA at home (on synthetic) = 11-2-4 = 2.059 PPG SEA away (on grass) = 2-4-8 = 0.714 PPG SEA away (on synthetic) = 2-0-1 = 2.000 PPG