Dear editor,
First, I want to acknowledge how nice and pretty the "new" football field looks. I can imagine Friday nights in the fall won’t be quite the same.
But I have to play “Captain Obvious” here and inquire whether a few things were taken under consideration.
1. Was the idea ever raised about the possibility of paying homage to all the mascots that have once claimed Montgomery County home from a public school perspective? It would have been nice to see on the field, in smaller versions, the mascots of the Hornets, Wolves and Eagles.
2. Were any health issues raised as to the nature of the turf itself? It is highly treated PLASTIC, which makes it a fossil fuel product that has plenty of toxic chemicals embedded into it so it can maintain its color and texture. There are plenty of PFAS and BFAS, otherwise known as forever chemicals which have been proven to be cancerous. The field on a hot day can become at ground level anywhere to 5 to 20 degrees warmer than natural grass no matter what the actual temperature is. In fact, in places like Arizona, in open spaces, the turf can become hotter than asphalt. Good thing most of our games are in the evening, even though the turf will still be warmer than the natural turf. Injuries have proven more severe, especially anything connected from the hip on down. In fact, the injury known as "turf toe" came into existence because of the turf. Ask Deion Sanders how that one injury ended his double professional sports career, and 30 years later nearly cost him his life. Finally, lasting only 10 to 12 years considering when replaced, the turf is non-biodegradable, meaning not environmentally friendly.
I hope these issues were taken under consideration. Frankly when I think about the last 25 years, a million here, several thousand there. I just wonder why we don’t have a an up-to-date modern high school. Me, personally when I think of the turf, I'm reminded of an old Marvin Gaye song “Ain't nothing like the real thing".
Orman Knox
Winona, Miss.
