1 Here in Cincinnati--don't say it, but I'm a native Chicagoan--the Bengals are removing natural turf for a synthetic turf that looks like grass, performs like grass, and is easier on the body than the Astroturf we've come to love/hate. The reason--the footing w/natural turf is terrible, and saw a couple of players hurt their knees when trying to cut, slipping in the process.

2 I, for one, think all Super Bowls should be played in Green Bay. Or perhaps Fargo.

3 After ten years of marching band, I have to say that I hate astroturf too and am glad to see it going away. With all the dance techniques involved in colorguard, astroturf is the WORST thing to perform on. Especially wet/damp/mildly unhappy astroturf. And real grass doesn't rip your skin when you fall on it. Now, on the other hand, the ridiculously deep, lush grass at Soldier Field pre-renovation was pretty damn tough to perform on, too. Can't we have a happy medium?

4 Unfortunately there are still other artificial turf companies out there. But, there have been some other interesting options that are being tried. The Detroit Lions and others have put in a new surface: http://www.fieldturf.com/ It's too new for me to have played on, but it's got to be better than the old style of artificial turf.

5 Mmmm, AstroTurf.

6 Yes, grass is definitely softer on the feet and more comfortable for marching band. However, the athletic department will usually not let the band or anyone else even close to the field for rehearsals.