Farewell to Funchess Hall, Where Auburn Turfgrass Grew Its Roots
Welcome to The Turf Zone podcast. This episode bids farewell to Funchess Hall, where Auburn turfgrass grew its roots.
For many members of the Alabama Turfgrass Association, just hearing the name Funchess Hall brings back a flood of memories. Maybe it was hustling to class with a cup of coffee in hand, late-night study sessions before a soils exam, or learning turfgrass management from professors whose lessons still shape your career today. Funchess may never have won awards for beauty, but for generations of Auburn turfgrass students, it was something far more important — home.
Since 1961, Funchess Hall served as the heart of Auburn University’s Turfgrass Science program. Although the turfgrass program was already more than three decades old when the Department of Agronomy and Soils moved into the then-new Funchess Hall, over the next 65 years it grew into one of the South’s premier turfgrass education programs. Auburn graduates manage golf courses, athletic fields, sod farms and landscapes across Alabama and beyond. Inside those well-worn classrooms and laboratories, students learned everything from weed science and irrigation design to soil morphology and turfgrass pest control. More importantly, they built friendships, professional connections and memories that lasted long after graduation.
Now, the end of an era has arrived.
This summer, the Departments of Crop, Soil and Environmental Sciences, Horticulture, and Entomology and Plant Pathology are officially moving out of the “infamous” Funchess Hall and into Auburn University’s brand-new STEM + Agricultural Sciences Complex. As of late May, faculty and staff are packing decades’ worth of research data, teaching materials and Auburn history into boxes, preparing for a full transition by August 1st. Once renovations to Comer Hall are complete in Fall 2026, the demolition of Funchess Hall will be scheduled. Fittingly, the move is happening during the quiet of summer semester — one of the few times campus slows down enough to reflect on the past while preparing for the future.
And what a future it is.
Auburn’s new $224 million STEM + Agricultural Sciences Complex is a stunning 265,000-square-foot facility located at 305 W. Samford Ave (part of the former Hill Residence Hall site). The three interconnected buildings will house departments from both the College of Agriculture and the College of Sciences and Mathematics, creating opportunities for collaboration unlike ever before.
The new facility includes state-of-the-art research laboratories, modern teaching laboratories, collaborative student spaces, teaching gardens and even specialized research areas for aquatic animals and insects. For turfgrass students, it represents a major investment in the future of the industry and the continued growth of Auburn’s nationally respected program.
Of course, while the building may change, the Auburn Turfgrass Management program remains rooted in the same hands-on philosophy that makes it special in the first place. Students pursuing the Turfgrass Management track still earn a B.S. in Crop and Soil Science while gaining practical experience from internships and the Auburn Turfgrass Research Unit just a mile from campus. They’ll continue learning the science and management principles needed to become leaders in the turfgrass industry throughout the country. But now students will be based at one of the most advanced agricultural teaching facilities in the Southeast.
For alumni, there is a lot of nostalgia in saying goodbye to Funchess Hall. Those green tile walls, aging classrooms and scuffed floors told a story of hard work, tradition and learning. But Auburn has always been about more than bricks and mortar. The spirit of the turfgrass program — the people, the passion and the Auburn Family — is moving right along with it.
So while Funchess Hall may be a distant memory soon, its legacy will continue to grow in every superintendent, sports turf manager, researcher and industry professional who once called it home. And somewhere inside that shiny new building, another generation of Auburn turfgrass students is about to start making memories of their own.
The departments moving from Funchess Hall to the new buildings are planning a “Farewell to Funchess” celebration on campus during the fall 2026 semester. Watch alumni mailing lists and social media for more information as details are worked out.
You have been listening to The Turf Zone Podcast. Follow The Turf Zone on X, Facebook and LinkedIn for all things turfgrass, featuring podcasts, magazines, events and more.
The post Farewell to Funchess Hall, Where Auburn Turfgrass Grew Its Roots appeared first on The Turf Zone.
July 13, 20267 min
Member Spotlight on Brian Aaron, CGCS
Welcome to The Turf Zone podcast. This episode spotlights Alabama Turfgrass Association member Brian Aaron, CGCS and his lifetime of leadership, service and turfgrass excellence.
For more than three decades, Brian Aaron, CGCS, has been a familiar and respected figure in Alabama’s turfgrass industry. After 32 years in the profession and 30 years as a member of the Alabama Turfgrass Association, Brian recently retired from his role as Golf Course Superintendent at Azalea City Golf Course in Mobile. While he may have officially retired, Brian is quick to point out that he is far too young to stop contributing to the industry he loves.
Born and raised in Opp, Alabama, Brian’s journey into turfgrass management was anything but conventional. As a high school student, he operated a small lawn and landscape business and initially planned to pursue a career in pharmacy. After transferring to Auburn University and reevaluating his career goals, a conversation with academic advisors led him to the School of Agriculture, where Dr. Joe Hood and Dr. Ray Dickens introduced him to the world of turfgrass management.
“Even though I had never played golf or been around a golf course, the idea of managing a large area of land that was meticulously maintained year-round really excited me,” Brian recalls.
That decision changed the course of his career.
While attending Auburn, Brian gained valuable hands-on experience working at Grand National Golf Club during its early development. The opportunity to witness golf course construction, grow-in, and maintenance firsthand provided a foundation that would serve him throughout his career.
Following graduation, with a degree in Agronomy and Soils – Turfgrass Management in 1994, Brian quickly advanced through the ranks. After serving as an assistant superintendent, he accepted his first superintendent position at Andalusia Country Club before helping oversee the construction and opening of Tartan Pines Golf Club in Enterprise. He later joined Azalea City Golf Course, where he spent 25 years serving the City of Mobile and building a legacy of excellence.
Throughout his career, Brian found great satisfaction in working outdoors, tackling new challenges, and seeing projects come to life.
“There are no two days that are ever the same,” he says. “I enjoy being outside and seeing the results of successfully completed projects.”
Among the many accomplishments he achieved, one project stands above the rest. In 2018, Brian identified a problematic area between holes 12 and 14 at Azalea City Golf Course that suffered from drainage and erosion issues. Rather than navigating a lengthy and expensive municipal construction process, he designed and led the project himself after attending a GCSAA drainage seminar. Working alongside his staff while continuing daily course operations, the team completed the project for approximately $11,000—a fraction of the estimated $125,000 cost had it been completed through traditional channels.
“It improved playability, prevented future erosion, and saved the city a significant amount of money,” Brian says proudly.
Brian’s commitment to professional development has remained strong throughout his career. In addition to earning his Certified Golf Course Superintendent (CGCS) designation, he recently celebrated 25 years as a CGCS through GCSAA. He also completed the Dale Carnegie Skills for Success program in 2023, where he was recognized as the course’s Most Improved Student.
When asked about the people who influenced his career, Brian points to a long list of mentors, colleagues, and friends. His parents provided a strong foundation of faith, confidence, and work ethic. Influential educators such as Gary Hall and Dr. Ray Dickens helped shape his leadership and career path, while industry leaders including Scott Hamilton, Jeff Cornelson, Wayne Bassett, Randy Bodine, Lee McCelmore, and Brett Drinkwine offered guidance and friendship throughout the years.
Brian has also devoted significant time to serving the Alabama Turfgrass Association. He joined the ATA in the mid-1990s and was asked to serve on the Board of Directors in 1998. Looking back, he credits the association with providing educational opportunities, professional networking, leadership development, and lifelong friendships.
“ATA not only offers valuable education, but also camaraderie among turfgrass professionals,” Brian says. “It’s a great place to grow your leadership skills by giving back through service.”
His advice to those considering a career in turfgrass management or ATA membership is simple:
“Just do it. ATA membership is a valuable resource for anyone involved in the many facets of the turfgrass industry. Being a member has been instrumental in the success of my career.”
Looking ahead, Brian believes artificial intelligence will have a transformative impact on turfgrass management, helping professionals become more efficient and successful in countless ways.
Away from the golf course, Brian’s greatest joy comes from his family. He and his wife celebrated their 34th wedding anniversary this year. Together, they have two daughters, a son-in-law, and three grandsons who keep life exciting. Brian enjoys traveling with family, serving in his local church and church district, supporting his homeowners association, and spending time on the golf course with friends.
His favorite motto when it comes to his grandsons?
“The answer is yes. Now what’s the question?”
And while Brian proudly earned his degree from Auburn University, there’s one fact that often surprises people.
“Most people give me the side eye when I tell them this,” he laughs. “But even though I spent three wonderful years at the Loveliest Village on the Plains, I’ve always been an avid Alabama fan. I was raised an Alabama fan, and I’ve never wavered. Roll Tide!”
As Brian begins the next chapter of his career, the Alabama Turfgrass Association celebrates his decades of service, leadership, mentorship, and friendship. His impact on Alabama’s turfgrass industry will continue to be felt for years to come.
Thank you, Brian, for your dedication to the profession and to the Alabama Turfgrass Association.
You have been listening to The Turf Zone Podcast. Follow The Turf Zone on X, Facebook and LinkedIn for all things turfgrass, featuring podcasts, magazines, events and more.
The post Member Spotlight on Brian Aaron, CGCS appeared first on The Turf Zone.
July 10, 20261 min
UConn Turfgrass Field Day
Welcome to The Turf Zone podcast. This episode previews the University of Connecticut Turfgrass Field Day.
On July 22 hundreds of industry professionals will join researchers and Extension educators for UConn’s biennial Turfgrass Field Day. At this unique event, faculty from the Department of Plant Science and Landscape Architecture and UConn Extension share their latest projects with members of the sports field management community who directly benefit from this work.
The research conducted by UConn’s turfgrass faculty is designed to address real-world problems turfgrass professionals face daily, as well as find solutions to make turfgrass more sustainable by reducing the amount of water, fertilizer, and pesticides sports field managers need to use.
“It’s an exciting Extension and outreach activity where we get to directly share our research with stakeholders. They leave the day with practical information that helps them in their jobs,” says John Inguagiato, associate professor of turfgrass science. Inguagiato works closely with members of the turfgrass industry throughout the year and helps prepare students for specialized jobs after graduation.
In addition to research talks, there are numerous self-guided research stations and many exhibitor booths featuring local vendors at the event.
Beyond discussions of the latest innovations, Turfgrass Field Day provides a networking event that supports lasting connections between researchers and those working in all corners of the industry.
For additional details contact John Inguagiato at john.inguagiato@UConn.edu
You have been listening to The Turf Zone Podcast. Follow The Turf Zone on X, Facebook and LinkedIn for all things turfgrass, featuring podcasts, magazines, events and more.
The post UConn Turfgrass Field Day appeared first on The Turf Zone.
July 8, 20264 min
Member Spotlight on Chris McGinty
Welcome to The Turf Zone podcast. This episode features a Q & A spotlighting NE-SFMA Sports Field Manager of the Year Chris McGinty – Superintendent of Parks Maintenance Division for the City of Framingham, Massachusetts.
Read from the Summer 2026 issue of New England Blade magazine.
Where did your turf management education begin?
I received a B.S. in Outdoor Recreation and Environmental Studies at Springfield College, followed by Forestry at University of New Hampshire, and I have a Certificate of Sports Turf Management from the University of Georgia.
How did you get your start in sports field management?
I began with the Massachusetts State Parks System and then took a position with the Town of Framingham as the Superintendent of Parks and Cemeteries in 1991. During my 35 years in Framingham, my job has evolved from Park Properties to all Sports Facility and Grounds for the city.
What do you like best about your current position?
The ability to provide the best experiences for the many different users of city-owned recreational facilities in our community.
What is the biggest change you’ve seen in the sports field industry?
The use of technology for so many aspects of our jobs including irrigation, lighting, and the introduction of robotics.
Who are your mentors in the sports field management profession?
Former Groundskeeper Skip Vigarolo in Belmont, MA; Ron Morrel at MDC Golf Courses; Bob Leblanc at Boston College; and Mary Owen of UMass.
What is the best business advice you’ve ever received?
Being able to accept that in the municipal arena, others can, and will, take credit for all the hard work you have put into a project or event.
What is the next game-changer you see on the horizon for the sports field industry?
The expanded use of robotics and improved synthetic turf surfaces.
What’s your favorite / most useful:
Equipment? Chainsaw and Zamboni
Product? Toro Machines
Technology? Musco Control Lighting
What advice would you share with people starting out in sports field management today?
Enhance your career path and increase your knowledge with as many licenses and certifications as possible (i.e., CSFM, hoisting, CDL, pesticide applicator).
Any industry-related volunteer service?
In addition to my tenure on the NE-SFMA board of Directors, I am head of the Landscape Program Advisory Board at Keefe Tech Vocational High School and run an annual Arbor Day of Service event in the City of Framingham.
Can you share a bit about your family and what you enjoy doing in your free time?
Maryann and I have been married since 1989. We have two children: a son who is a police detective in Framingham, and a daughter who works in Human Resources. In my free time I try to play a lot of golf, travel, read, and work on old vehicles – muscle cars and antiques.
What have you found most beneficial about being a NE-SFMA member?
When I started, I had very little sports turf knowledge and I went to many seminars, programs, and talks on the subject. When I joined the NE-SFMA, I began to interact with a lot of different people in our industry. This is when I realized that there were so many people in our organization who have diverse talents and are willing to share ideas and advice at any point. I credit my interaction with different board members through the years as helping me make a successful career here in the City of Framingham.
The post Member Spotlight on Chris McGinty appeared first on The Turf Zone.
July 6, 20261 min
Don’t Miss the MSU Turfgrass Research Field Day
Welcome to The Turf Zone Podcast. This episode previews the MSU Turfgrass Research Field Day.
The 2026 Mississippi State University Turfgrass Research Field Day and Pesticide Applicator Training will be held on September 17 in Starkville.
After lunch, pesticide applicator/CEU training will be held in the newly renovated A.B. McKay building (the old Enology Lab) up the hill from the turf facility. Attendees wishing to complete CEUs for the following states/entities must remain present until adjourned (AL, FL, GA, LA, MS, TN, TX, GCSAA).
Attendee registration and vendor sponsorship opportunities are available online (link below). Registration is $100 in advance or $120 onsite.
To register, visit https://www.mafes.msstate.edu/workshops/turf
You have been listening to The Turf Zone Podcast. Follow The Turf Zone on X, Facebook and LinkedIn for all things turfgrass, featuring podcasts, magazines, events and more.
The post Don’t Miss the MSU Turfgrass Research Field Day appeared first on The Turf Zone.
July 3, 202614 min
Anyone for Tennis – Research?
Welcome to The Turf Zone podcast. This episode features the article “Anyone for Tennis – Research?” written by Dr. Scott Ebdon – Emeritus Professor, University of Massachusetts – Amherst and Mike Buras – former Director of Grounds, Longwood Cricket Club, Chestnut Hill, MA
For accompanying tables, graphs, photos and references see the Summer 2026 issue of New England Blade magazine available on www.theturfzone.com
Tennis on Grass – USA
There are 26 million tennis players in the USA, and these numbers have increased by 33% since the COVID years. Less than 1% of tennis courts are grass with most grass courts found in the Northeast region.
Sports grass managers may not truly appreciate the intensity of traffic (wear) observed along grass court baselines. Previous research has shown that the intensity of traffic along court baselines is 6 times the intensity of elite soccer (Newell and Wood, 2000).
The term “pace”’ in tennis is the speed that tennis play (and the ball) moves and is determined largely by the vertical height of the bounce off the court. The higher the vertical bounce, the slower the play. Slower play is preferred by players. Pace on grass is notoriously fast.
Grass Tennis Research – UMass Amherst
In 2016 several studies were initiated at the Troll Turf Research Center (South Deerfield, MA). The two main objectives were (i) wear tolerance or carrying capacity (hours of play) along court baselines and (ii) the factors affecting tennis pace.
Eight turfgrass species were compared within each of three single courts (planted as replicates). The eight species-cultivars were shown to have superior wear tolerance. The grasses were planted as pure stands. The Troll Center was open to the public for daily play from 2017 to 2024. Play averaged 125 hours during the tennis season (June 1 to September 1).
Grass Court Maintenance
The maintenance of grass courts at the Troll Center used a daily mowing schedule at 5/16 inches (clippings collected), rolling 4 to 6 times per week with a 2,200 lb. roller, sprayable fertilizers (spoon-feeding) on a 2 to 3-week schedule to apply 3.15 lb. N per 1,000 ft² per season, and sprayable (preventative) fungicides. Heavy rolling and daily mowing was especially important to promoting consistent (uniform) tennis ball bounce and play. Weekly measurements were scheduled after significant soil drying – irrigation was used sparingly to prevent any visible turfgrass dehydration.
Tennis Ball Bounce
The rules for measuring vertical ball bounce were established in 1925 (Miller, 2006) and are outlined in Table 2. Higher ball bounce (slower pace) on a tennis surface is due to greater velocity of the ball in the vertical direction. Soft grass absorbs more energy indicated by greater surface deformation – less energy is available for ball bounce in the vertical direction.
Ball bounce must be uniform-consistent and representative of ball bounce across the entire court surface.
Measurements of Hardness – 0.5-kg Clegg
Hardness is measured with the Clegg impact soil tester and has been used on grass courts since the mid-1980s (Holmes and Bell, 1986) and used currently to predict tennis ball bounce (Ebdon et al., 2025). Surface hardness is measured as gravities (g, also referred to as “Gmax” in the literature).
The energy of impact using the 0.5-kg Clegg (30 cm drop height) conforms closest to the tennis ball bounce test. The 0.5-kg Clegg and the tennis ball bounce test are highly correlated compared to heavier Clegg devices used in sport grass (2.25-kg Clegg, 45 cm drop height) or devices used in golf (USGA TruFirm, 1.95-kg, 48 cm drop height). These heavier devices are not as effective for tennis (Ebdon et al., 2025).
Tennis Ball Bounce (BB) and Clegg Hardness – Courts Under Play
Over the course of this 10-year study some 3,200-ball bounce impacts and hardness measurements were taken on various grass court surfaces. The results presented in Table 3 for the different surfaces are comparable because accepted (standard) methods were used.
Wimbledon center court (perennial ryegrass courts) for the 2011 Championship were bouncing at 52 inches or 91% of concrete. All of the perennial ryegrass courts at the Troll Center and the Tennis HOF satisfied the minimum standard of 70% concrete. Kentucky bluegrass courts at the Troll Center were bouncing near 70% (69%) of concrete.
The fine leaf fescue mixture was among the highest in BB averaging 76% of concrete. This species, however, is the least tolerant of tennis traffic, discussed below. Traditional golf species such as creeping bentgrass-Poa grass courts were bouncing below the 70 to 80% concrete standard.
Tennis Ball Bounce – Uniformity
Consistent BB across the tennis surface is important for uniform play. Smooth-hard concrete is the most unform and consistent surface. All other surfaces are compared to the BB consistency of smooth concrete. The concrete surface has an average hardness of 865 g compared to Wimbledon hardness of 260 g. Smooth concrete has a BB uniformity of “1.” Wimbledon BB uniformity for the 2011 Championship was measured at “2.1” – twice the variability of concrete.
Player perception of BB uniformity (relative to concrete) is interpretated as “an odd bounce.” One consistent trend observed in Table 3 indicates that increasing surface hardness promotes uniform ball bounce and the chances for odd bounces decrease. Therefore, selecting species such as perennial ryegrass affording harder surfaces and higher BB (slower play) have a tendency for more consistent (uniform) play. Many bentgrass courts (or greens) and Poa annua courts that are prone to thatch are the least consistent surfaces with BB uniformity of “7” and higher relative to concrete.
Court Hardness to Satisfy Standards – 70 to 80% Concrete
Research at the Troll Center indicated 150 to 170 g of surface hardness is needed for tennis balls to bounce to standards – 70% (40 inches) to 80% of concrete (46 inches) (Ebdon et al., 2025). Tennis BB of 80% concrete is not easy to achieve. To that end, surface soil moisture is extremely important, discussed below.
For the 2011 Wimbledon Grass Court Championship, 100% of all BB impacts were at 80% of concrete. At the Troll Center and the Tennis HOF approximately 16 to 18% of all impacts satisfied the 80% concrete standard. Following uniform drying of the Wimbledon soil, 24% of all BB impacts exceeded the minimum standard for concrete. Tennis play at Wimbledon is ideal for the Grass Court Championships because of the slow pace and consistent BB.
Tennis Ball Bounce – Surface Soil Moisture
Soil moisture using TDR (3-inch probes) was measured weekly during the tennis season concurrently with surface hardness and ball bounce. In tennis, the ball bounce test is a surface phenomenon. This is the main reason why the low energy impact of the light weight (0.5-kg) Clegg is more effective in predicting tennis ball bounce than heavier devices (2.25-kg Clegg or 1.95-kg TruFirm) (Ebdon et al., 2025). Similarly, longer TDR (5-inch) rods are not as effective as 3-inch probes – it is the immediate surface moisture that matters in tennis ball bounce.
Soil drying will promote harder surfaces but this depends on the soil texture and the mineralogy (clay content) of the soil. Table 5 compares soil drying and surface hardness between the Troll Center and Wimbledon soils.
The gains in surface hardness from 38% soil drying are very different between the Troll Center soil (silt loam, 12% clay) and Wimbledon soil (sandy clay loam, 23% clay). At the same soil moisture deficit (38% soil drying), 60% greater surface hardness is observed on Wimbledon soil (77 g increase – Wimbledon vs. 48 g increase – Troll Center). The Troll silt loam increases in hardness only 3.2 g with 1% soil drying compared to 5.5 g with 1% drying for Wimbledon soil. For most soils it is believed that soil drying is more important in providing a hard tennis surface than soil compaction by rolling.
Any natural soil drying will promote higher ball bounce. Recent research indicates that soil drying to 40% soil moisture depletion causes minimal turf dehydration with fine textured soils (Bruan et al., 2022). Figure 2 presents 1122 pairs of vertical ball bounces and soil moisture (3-inch TDR) measured on Troll Center perennial ryegrass courts during a 17-week period. Prior to soil drying (week 1), tennis ball bounce was below standards (66% of concrete) while after progressive soil drying (week 17) ball bounce exceeded standards (83% concrete).
Species Wear Tolerance – Carrying Capacity
Grass cover after tennis play ended is presented in Table 6 along with the carrying capacity (hours of play) to wear baselines to 70% grass cover. Following 2-years of study perennial ryegrass and Kentucky bluegrass exhibited significantly better wear tolerance (≥ 65% grass cover) and greater carrying capacity (≥ 70 hrs. of play to 70% cover) compared to bentgrass and fine fescue species.
Traditional golf species (bentgrass) are comparatively less tolerant of tennis traffic compared to improved cultivars of Kentucky bluegrass and perennial ryegrass – providing the cultivars are tolerant of 5/16-inch mowing heights. Of all the species-cultivars tested, the fine fescue mixture was the least tolerant of tennis traffic (24% grass cover) with the lowest carrying capacity (20 hours).
Interestingly, the fine fescue mixture used in the tennis study was the same mixture used on the golf greens at the 2015 US Open (Chambers Bay, WA). This is further evidence as to the intensity of the traffic that is often underestimated in tennis.
The Court Playability
The highest priority should be given to planting wear tolerant grasses adapted to tennis play. Grasses with significantly lower carrying capacity will wear-down faster under the same hours of play. The loss of grass cover during the tennis season has a significant impact on tennis play (pace) and the uniformity (consistency) of ball bounce.
Table 7 summarizes approximately 3000 measurements on perennial ryegrass courts at the Troll Center. Perennial ryegrass represents the most wear tolerant species with the highest capacity for surface hardness for satisfying ball bounce standards – ideal for tennis. All areas of the court satisfied ball bounce standards (≥ 70% of concrete). However, the T-area approached 80% concrete with an average surface hardness of 143 g and BB of 45-inch.
Surface moisture was 4.4% drier at the T-area (less grass – more exposed soil for surface drying). It is the soil drying at the worn T-area and baselines that promotes an increase in hardness and ball bounce under tennis play – consistent with soil drying presented in Table 5. These worn areas will play different (slower) because of the increase in the vertical height of the bounce compared to the less trafficked service box. The soil-water relations presented in Table 7 are consistent with golf greens and sports grass under heavy play (McClements and Baker, 1994; Straw et al., 2017).
What We’ve Learned
Soil drying promotes harder surfaces and the uniformity of ball bounce approaches the uniformity of concrete. At week 1 before soil drying, BB uniformity relative to concrete was “3.7.” At week 17 following soil drying, BB uniformity across all three courts was “2.6” – approaching the BB uniformity of hard courts.
The measured results reported here are consistent with player perceptions. As eight-time Wimbledon Grass Court Champion, Roger Federer, lamented:
“This new, fresh grass, we’re not quite used to it…as you go deeper in the tournament, the grass court becomes more clay-courty, hard-courty with a bit of grass on it…the ball bounces a bit higher”
How fast (low bounce) or slow (high bounce) or consistent (uniform) a grass court plays is dependent on the tolerance of the species-cultivar to traffic and to the properties of the underlying soil and its plant-soil-water relationships.
References
Braun, R. C., Bremer, D. J., Ebdon, J. S., Fry, J. D., & Patton, A. J. (2022). Review of cool-season turfgrass water use and requirements: I. Evapotranspiration and responses to deficit irrigation. Crop Science, 62, 1661–1684. https://doi.org/10.1002/csc2.20791
Ebdon, J. S., Lu, J., and DaCosta, M. (2025). Comparison of Clegg and TruFirm surface hardness for predicting tennis ball bounce standards on grass courts under match play. Crop Science, 65, e70109. https://doi.org/10.1002/csc2.70109
Ebdon J.S., James I., DaCosta M., and Lu J. (2020). Interspecific comparisons of C3 turfgrass for tennis use: I. Wear tolerance and carrying capacity under actual match play. CropScience. 2021;61:750–762. https://doi.org/10.1002/csc2.20270
Holmes, G., and Bell, M. J. (1986). Playing surface hardness and tennis ball rebound resilience. Journal of the Sports Turf Research Institute, 62, 207–210.
ITF. (2019). Approved tennis balls, classified surfaces, and recognized courts: A guide to products and test methods. International Tennis Federation. https://www.itftennis.com/media/2016/2019-itf-technical-booklet.pdf
McClements, I., and S. W. Baker. (1994). The playing quality of natural turf hockey pitches. J. Sports Turf Res. Inst. 70:p. 13-28.
Miller, S. (2006). Modern tennis rackets, balls, and surfaces. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 40, 401–405. https://doi.org/10.1136/ bjsm.2005.023283 Medicine, 40, 401–405. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsm.2005.023283
Newell, A. J., and Wood, A. D. (2000). Selection of grass species, cultivars and mixtures for lawn tennis. Journal of Turfgrass Science, 76,53–65.
Straw, C. M., Bowling, W. J., and Henry, G. M. (2017). Rainfall versus irrigation influences penetration resistance and surface hardness on a recreational sports field. Int. Turfgrass Soc. Res. J. 13: p. 1-5.
You have been listening to The Turf Zone Podcast. Follow The Turf Zone on X, Facebook and LinkedIn for all things turfgrass, featuring podcasts, magazines, events and more.
The post Anyone for Tennis – Research? appeared first on The Turf Zone.
June 19, 20268 min
Testing Ground
Welcome to The Turf Zone podcast. This episode features the article “Testing Ground” featured in Tennessee Turfgrass magazine.
UT turfgrass researchers have invented a device to test the playability of football fields, soccer pitches, and other surfaces—with the goal of keeping athletes safe.
In 2018, the NFL scheduled a game for a neutral site in Mexico. Though the field had passed mandatory tests like surface hardness, the league’s players association had concerns about the safety of the field. So they turned to Distinguished Professor of Turfgrass Science and Management John Sorochan to represent their interests. Sorochan advised that there were too many inconsistencies in the field and that the lack of rooting was a serious issue. He argued that an inconsistent and unstable surface is an unsafe surface. And his advocacy helped get the game moved to a safer field.
For Sorochan, the experience revealed the need across multiple sports for a better way to test the playability and compliance of natural grass surfaces. Together, he and Kyley Dickson (BS ’12, MS ’14, PhD ’17), researcher and co-director of UT’s Center for Athletic Field Safety, invented a solution that has surpassed its original goal: the fLEX Device.
This portable machine realistically simulates the motion of an athlete’s foot striking the ground, using a 3D-printed foot outfitted with a real cleat.
“There were machines out there to test artificial turf—years before, Dr. Sorochan helped AstroTurf develop one,” Dickson says. “But nothing was specific to natural grass.
“We also wanted to go beyond the static vertical load, rotational, and slide tests that existing tools used,” he continues. “We put sensors around the 3D-printed foot and ankle to measure energy that would be transferred back to the athlete. This makes fLEX unique.”
Development of the fLex Device reflects the driving force behind sports turf research at UT: the human impact of athlete–surface interactions.
“Our tool to measure what athletes would feel on natural grass has turned out to be equally applicable for synthetic turf, running tracks, even basketball courts—all surfaces but ice for hockey—to understand the effects on athletes,” Sorochan says.
A Team Effort
Producing the fLEX Device was interdisciplinary from the start. Sorochan and Dickson hired metal workers to build their device, mechanical engineers to run calculations, and a recent UT computer science graduate to develop software to collect and interpret sensor data. UT kinesiology and biomechanics experts scientifically validated the device.
“At the biomechanics lab, fLEX struck the force plate like a human athlete would,” Sorochan says. “We learned how to calibrate it to simulate foot strikes for different-sized athletes, from a 350-pound NFL athlete down to a 35-pound kid playing soccer at school.”
They partnered with UT Athletics for real-world testing. After football games at Neyland Stadium, researchers would collect data from more than 70 spots across the field to form a comprehensive picture of its condition. “Neyland is probably the most tested stadium anywhere,” Sorochan laughs.
And when the Lady Vols soccer team needed to change cleats, the fLEX Device informed that decision by measuring the load different shoes put on players’ bodies.
“Being a Vol means being part of a team,” Sorochan says. “So many Vols have helped us develop and test fLEX.”
From Concept to Commercialization
Early prototypes involved manually ratcheting and releasing gears. When Sorochan and Dickson collected feedback from field managers and student researchers who used the device, everyone agreed: there were too many components and too many data points.
“To make a real-world impact,” Sorochan says, “it had to be simpler for field managers and other turf professionals to use, understand, and benefit from our device. We also needed to scale up in terms of production and audience. UT and UT Research Foundation played important roles in accomplishing that and commercializing our invention.”
In 2024, Sorochan and Dickson received the inaugural Chancellor’s Innovation Fund award. They focused those funds on automating the device and streamlining the user experience. UT Research Foundation helped them patent their technology, connect with business advisors, and put their product on the market.
Today, users set and release the gears with the touch of a button. The screen displays three key data points: surface traction, surface hardness, and amount of energy returned to the athlete. The software automatically generates a report complete with summary, graphs, and a heat map highlighting inconsistencies across the field.
International Impact
The fLEX Device’s credibility has grown with every sporting venue the team has tested over the last five years—130-plus stadiums connected to the NFL, MLB, and other professional and college leagues in five countries.
FIFA, soccer’s international governing body, has seen the value of the fLEX Device firsthand during a five-year research collaboration with UT. Billions of FIFA World Cup 26 viewers will soon watch top athletes play on natural grass pitches developed by Sorochan’s research team. Several of the host stadiums for the FIFA Club World Cup 2025 used a first-of-its-kind “shallow profile” pitch.
“It was a ‘wow’ moment when fLEX first demonstrated that the shallow construction method we were experimenting with performed the same as a standard pitch, which has 12 inches of sand underneath,” Sorochan says. “This shallow profile could enable host stadiums that typically use synthetic turf to quickly and cost effectively install safe natural grass pitches for the World Cup tournaments.”
At FIFA’s request, Sorochan’s team used the fLEX Device to gather field data before and after each Club World Cup game in summer 2025. They’ll likely use fLEX in the same way during FIFA World Cup 26: to inform real-time field management decisions that protect players and ensure uniform conditions across all 16 host stadiums.
“FIFA has incredibly high standards for these pitches,” Sorochan says. “fLEX is the right tool to make sure their expectations for consistency, safety, and performance are met.”
In May 2025, global pitch management solutions company SGL purchased the fLEX Device product rights. “SGL is an industry leader expanding its portfolio of resources and tools for improving sports fields,” Sorochan says. “They invest in quality and R&D. fLEX was a great fit.”
“fLEX represents the very best of UT—ideas that are generated and implemented locally and go on to change the world,” says Deb Crawford, vice chancellor for research, innovation, and economic development. “By leveraging the Chancellor’s Innovation Fund and partnering with private industry, Dr. Sorochan and his colleagues have expanded their impact, ensuring that UT innovations continue to have a profound impact worldwide.”
Dickson is directing product development for SGL fLEX Systems. “I’ll explore questions to make it even more user friendly, like Could it be robotic? Could we put an electric motor drive on it? Are we getting the right data for different sports?”
“This device will make all sports surfaces safer for all levels, from young kids to professional players,” Sorochan sums up. “UT’s support made this impact possible. Now, SGL is making it global.”
Delve into UT’s research to create the best and most consistent pitches for FIFA World Cup 26.
You have been listening to The Turf Zone Podcast. Follow The Turf Zone on X, Facebook and LinkedIn for all things turfgrass, featuring podcasts, magazines, events and more.
The post Testing Ground appeared first on The Turf Zone.
June 17, 20264 min
UT and FIFA World Cup 26!
Welcome to The Turf Zone podcast. This episode covers how The University of Tennessee’s research as part of the FIFA 2026 World Cup is already scoring benefits on the world stage.
When FIFA selected the University of Tennessee to oversee research for building and maintaining the FIFA WORLD CUP 26 pitches, it promised to focus worldwide attention on the university’s turfgrass science and management program. With the opening games just weeks away, UT’s collaboration with the Fédération Internationale de Football Association has already brought new recognition to the acclaimed turfgrass program.
The research—led by John Sorochan, who is the Distinguished Professor of Turfgrass Science and Management in the UT Department of Plant Sciences—is also yielding information that will result in improved parks, recreation fields and sports turfs at schools and universities.
“It’s been an incredibly important initiative,” says Keith Carver, UT Institute of Agriculture senior vice chancellor and senior vice president. “It takes the work of our faculty and researchers to audiences all over the world. But, in an equally important manner, our work with FIFA has ushered in new advances to turfgrass that have improved golf courses, yards and gardens all over the Volunteer State. The impact of this research reaches far and wide.”
In 2021, FIFA initiated a five-year project with UT and Michigan State University for help in producing optimum playing surfaces for the 16 stadiums and nearly 150 practice fields for FIFA WORLD CUP 26. Forty-eight national teams will play at venues in Canada, Mexico and the U.S., spanning four time zones and multiple climatic regions.
Since then, UT researchers have been growing test plots of grass, experimenting with ways of installing grass over different surfaces in varying conditions and testing surfaces for the best playing and safety conditions. FIFA funded the construction of climate-controlled test fields at the Plant Sciences Unit of the UT East Tennessee AgResearch and Education Center in Knoxville.
Alan Ferguson, FIFA senior pitch management manager, says the university’s research was used in the inaugural Club World Cup, an international competition organized by FIFA, held last summer at a dozen stadiums across the U.S.
“The UT turf team is well known around the world for high-quality research,” Ferguson says. “With so many key technologies already under research at UT, it made sense for FIFA to partner and extend this research.”
The UT turfgrass science and management program is expanding in other ways, as well. UT is establishing certificate programs for pitch managers, golf course superintendents and those who oversee other sports venues. The UT Herbert College of Agriculture is working to launch one or more certificate programs for turfgrass science, including specializations for sports turf. The program is intended to have a state, national and global audience and will be open to current college students.
UT Extension currently offers the non-credit, online Certified Lawn Care Professional Program on general turfgrass management. The program is tailored for working professionals who want to deepen their knowledge of regional turfgrass management and who do not need or intend to use the training for a college certificate or degree program. Participants in this program do not have to submit homework or take quizzes and exams, or develop other types of work typically associated with college programs. Participants who finish the program receive a certificate of completion from UT Extension, though no college credit or transcripts are earned.
UT also is investing in additional turf research fields, which Sorochan says could be used to test specific technologies like heating systems, vacuum ventilation and subsurface irrigation.
Learn more about these efforts, the benefits they are bringing to athletic playing surfaces throughout Tennessee, and the first-class opportunities they are bringing to turfgrass science and management students in an article in UTIA’s Land, Life and Science magazine.
You have been listening to The Turf Zone Podcast. Follow The Turf Zone on X, Facebook and LinkedIn for all things turfgrass, featuring podcasts, magazines, events and more.
The post UT and FIFA World Cup 26! appeared first on The Turf Zone.
June 16, 20262 min
Welcome, Dr. Zia Williamson to Mississippi State University
Welcome to The Turf Zone podcast. This episode features the article “Welcome, Dr. Zia Williamson to Mississippi State University” from Mississippi Turfgrass magazine.
Mississippi State University is pleased to welcome Dr. Zia Williamson as Assistant Professor of Extension for Turf and Ornamental Entomology in the Department of Agricultural Sciences and Plant Protection.
A native of Lincolnton, Georgia, Dr. Williamson grew up surrounded by the green industry through her family’s landscaping business near Augusta. That early exposure to plants, insects, and managed landscapes helped shape her academic path. She earned undergraduate degrees in entomology and horticulture from the University of Georgia, where she also gained research experience in plant production, fruit pathology, nematology, museum collections, and applied entomology. She later completed both her master’s degree and Ph.D. in entomology at UGA.
Dr. Williamson’s graduate research has focused on insect ecology and management in specialty crops, turfgrass, ornamentals, and urban landscapes. Her master’s work examined trunk-boring beetle pests in Georgia specialty crops and urban landscapes. Her doctoral research explored native bee ecology in turfgrass production farms and ornamental horticulture settings, including how landscape characteristics, floral resources, and management practices influence pollinator presence and activity.
At Mississippi State, Dr. Williamson will develop Extension and applied research programs addressing insect and pest management needs in turfgrass, ornamentals, and related landscape systems. Her work will support growers, golf course superintendents, landscape professionals, Extension agents, and other practitioners, as well as homeowners, through insect identification, science-based management recommendations, trainings, and responsive educational resources.
As she begins her new role, Dr. Williamson is eager to connect with Mississippi stakeholders and learn more about the turf and ornamental pest challenges they face.
Please drop her an email (zvw9@msstate.edu), and come see her speak at this year’s September 17 Field Day.
You have been listening to The Turf Zone Podcast. Follow The Turf Zone on X, Facebook and LinkedIn for all things turfgrass, featuring podcasts, magazines, events and more.
The post Welcome, Dr. Zia Williamson to Mississippi State University appeared first on The Turf Zone.
June 15, 202624 min
How Variability Within and Between Natural Turfgrass and Synthetic Athletic Fields Impacts Athlete Safety and Performance
Welcome to The Turf Zone Podcast. This episode features the article “How Variability Within and Between Natural Turfgrass and Synthetic Athletic Fields Impacts Athlete Safety and Performance” written by Ava Veith, Dr. David McCall, Dr. Chase Straw, Dr. Daniel Sandor, Dr. Jay Williams, Elisabeth Kitchen, Kevin Hensler, Aaron Tucker and Dr. Caleb Henderson
Authors Note and Context
Ava Veith is a Ph.D. student in the Department of Plant Science at Penn State University under the advisement of Dr. Chase Straw, where her research focuses on studying within-field variability and athlete–surface interactions. However, the research presented in this article was conducted during her master’s program at Virginia Tech under Dr. David McCall.
This study served as a foundational investigation into how variability within and between natural turfgrass and synthetic turf athletic fields influences athletes. The findings from this work have shaped the direction of subsequent doctoral research. Building on this foundation, the planned Ph.D. project aims to examine athlete lower-limb joint biomechanics across natural turfgrass, synthetic turf, and hybrid (natural turfgrass reinforced with synthetic fibers) surfaces using multi-segment inertial measurement units.
At the conclusion of this article, the next phase of research will be briefly outlined to demonstrate how it has grown from the master’s study. In this way, the Virginia Tech study presented here represents both a completed project and the starting point for a broader, ongoing effort to better understand how the playing surface can affect athlete movement and injury-relevant mechanics.
Introduction
A safe playing surface is essential for athletic competition. Natural turfgrass and synthetic turf are common playing surfaces used for field sports, and extensive research has been conducted to compare these two surface types. However, limited attention has been given to within-field variability and its impact on athlete safety and performance. Studies often classify athletic fields broadly as synthetic or natural, overlooking critical surface metrics that fluctuate both within and between fields.
Key field characteristics such as surface hardness, rotational resistance, soil moisture, thatch depth, and infill depth (for synthetic fields) play a crucial role in assessing field quality. Variability in these factors can be influenced by environmental conditions, management practices, and field usage patterns. Despite the known importance of these factors, current research often fails to account for field-specific inconsistencies, limiting the effectiveness of broad comparisons between surfaces.
To improve field safety and optimize athlete performance, interdisciplinary collaboration among turfgrass scientists, sports scientists, and sports medicine professionals is necessary. Evidence-based field management strategies must be developed to ensure more consistent playing conditions, reducing the risk of injury. Wearable technologies such as STATSports GPS trackers (STATSports, 2025) and ankle inertial measurement units (IMUs) (IMeasureU, 2019) provide critical insights into athlete biomechanics, load monitoring, and more. These technologies allow researchers to quantify how different surface conditions influence athletes during performance, offering valuable data for injury prevention strategies.
Beyond data collected by wearable technologies, athlete perceptions of field conditions also play a role in performance and injury risk. Unpredictable surface variability can affect player confidence, movement efficiency, and risk-taking behaviors, making perception-based data collection essential. Understanding how athletes experience and perceive different playing surfaces can inform future improvements in field construction and maintenance.
The objective of this study is to quantify the impact of surface variability on athlete safety and performance, both within and between natural turfgrass and synthetic turf surfaces. This research will quantify how variations in key surface metrics, including surface hardness, rotational resistance, soil moisture, thatch depth, and infill depth, affect athletes utilizing data from wearable technologies, such as STATSports GPS trackers and ankle IMUs. Additionally, to further understand the influence of field surfaces, athletes will be surveyed before and after performing drills to gather insights into their perceptions of how surface variability impacts their performance.
Methodology
Athletic Fields Tested
This research was conducted in August of 2024, where four athletic fields on the Virginia Tech campus in Blacksburg, Virginia were studied. Two of these fields were natural turfgrass (bermudagrass), while the other two fields were synthetic turf. For both field types, one field was classified as ‘low usage’, while the other was classified as ‘high usage’. This was determined based on traffic frequency, field age, and management practices.
Preliminary Data Collection
Before live athletes were introduced, surface hardness was assessed on all four fields using a Clegg hammer, with 100 measurements collected per field. The data were then analyzed using ArcGIS Pro to generate surface hardness heatmaps, highlighting variability between and within each field. These maps allowed us to identify specific locations for the athletes to perform drills, where one selected area within each field was slightly harder than the rest of the field, and the other being slightly softer. Additionally, 20 measurements of rotational resistance (using Deltec’s rotational resistance tester), thatch depth (using a soil profile sampler), soil moisture (using a TDR 350 Soil Moisture Meter), and infill depth (using a Turf-Tec Professional Model Infill Depth Gauge) were taken in both the softer and harder areas to further characterize each field and understand the relationship between surface conditions and athlete performance.
Data Collection During Athlete Involvement
Fourteen female athletes participated in the study, equipped with STATSports GPS devices (to measure running speed) and ankle IMUs (to measure lower limb impact intensity) to quantify their movements during drills. The athletes were each given new Nike cleats prior to participation to eliminate variation based on cleat configuration. They completed three drills, including a drop landing or drop jump drill, a T-drill, and a modified acceleration-deceleration drill, which were designed to replicate common athletic movements. Each drill was performed three times in both the softer and harder areas identified within each field. Additionally, each athlete completed pre- and post-performance surveys designed to capture their perceptions of field quality before and after completing the drills, providing insight into how different surfaces may have influenced their performance.
Results and Discussion
Surface Hardness Data
Heatmaps highlight surface hardness variability within each studied field. Surface hardness data (n = 100 per field) were analyzed using analysis of variance, and means were separated using Fisher’s protected least significant difference (LSD) test at α = 0.05 to evaluate statistical differences between locations.
Both synthetic turf fields had significantly harder surfaces than the natural turfgrass fields (p available in the Spring 2026 issue of Pennsylvania Turfgrass magazine). These measurements (n = 20 per both hard and soft areas within each field) were analyzed using analysis of variance, and means were separated using Fisher’s protected least significant difference (LSD) test at α = 0.05 to evaluate statistical differences between locations.
Although the fields tested in this research were not professional-level fields, it is insightful to compare the results with the FIFA natural-pitch rating system (FIFA, 2022). All rotational resistance values fell within FIFA’s ‘excellent quality’ and ‘satisfactory quality’ thresholds, which is important because excessive rotational resistance has been linked to increased lower extremity injuries due to the foot becoming entrapped in the surface during pivoting movements, and too little resistance can increase the risk of slipping. However, soil moisture values exceed 35%, which FIFA classifies as ‘unacceptable quality’. This elevated moisture is likely the primary cause of the low surface hardness values observed on the natural turfgrass fields, which were lower than FIFA’s 70-85 Gmax ‘excellent quality’ range.
Additionally, FIFA considers thatch depths over 25 mm as unacceptable, and 10–15 mm satisfactory. Excessive thatch can cause athlete’s cleats to become caught within the surface, increasing knee ligament stress. The low-usage natural turfgrass field had more thatch despite regular maintenance, while the high-usage natural turfgrass field had less, likely due to recent sprigging the summer before. Soft areas in both natural turfgrass fields exhibited higher thatch levels than the hard areas, consistent with previous findings that core cultivation reduces both thatch and surface hardness (McCarty et al., 2007; Atkinson et al., 2012). This supports the understanding that increased thatch can act as a cushioning layer, absorbing impact and thereby reducing surface hardness.
The high-usage synthetic turf field exhibited significantly less infill and greater surface hardness compared to the low-usage synthetic turf field, and the soft areas within both synthetic fields had more infill than the hard areas. This aligns with previous research indicating that infill depth decreases with use, which in turn leads to higher surface hardness (Dickson et al., 2022). Additionally, the low-usage synthetic field exhibited greater variability in infill depth between the selected hard and soft areas, likely due to its relatively young age (only one year old at the time of the study). Compared to the older high-usage field, which was approximately ten years old, the infill in the low-usage synthetic field had less time to settle, making it more susceptible to displacement from foot traffic (Fleming et al., 2016).
STATSports GPS Unit Data
In our study, STATSports GPS units were securely attached to each athlete’s upper back. These devices were used to determine if athlete running speed varied based on field type (natural turfgrass or synthetic turf), field usage level (high or low), or hardness (hard or soft areas within each field). However, no statistically significant differences were found. This consistency in speed across conditions is important because running speed can directly affect impact forces and biomechanical measurements. Prior studies have shown that faster running increases the ground reaction force and ultimately lower limb impact load (Leatham, 2004; Jiang et al., 2024). If athletes had run at different speeds on one field type compared to another, it could have affected the reliability of our ankle IMU data. However, since no significant speed differences were found across field types, usage, or hardness, we can confidently attribute the observed differences in the resulting ankle IMU data to the playing surface.
Ankle IMU Data
Ankle IMUs were utilized to record a metric called average intensity, which is defined as the mean impact intensity derived from every impact propagated into both limbs (IMeasureU, 2022). This metric is recorded in units of gravitational force (g). These devices were securely attached to each athlete’s ankle and recorded data as they performed drills on all four fields studied. After running statistical tests that accounted for individual differences between athletes, significant differences were found based on field, field usage, and hardness.
Across all three drills, field type had a noticeable impact (p www.TheTurfZone.com.
You have been listening to The Turf Zone Podcast. Follow The Turf Zone on X, Facebook and LinkedIn for all things turfgrass, featuring podcasts, magazines, events and more.
The post How Variability Within and Between Natural Turfgrass and Synthetic Athletic Fields Impacts Athlete Safety and Performance appeared first on The Turf Zone.
Is this your show?
Claim this listing to keep it up to date, reach guests who want to pitch you, and manage bookings with Guestify.
