ACHPF / Shutterstock.com
FIFA spent months prepping seven NFL stadiums with brand new grass for the 2026 World Cup. Now, right as football season kicks off, that grass is getting ripped right back out.
Talk about timing.
Fox4 reported on the removal process, and it’s happening fast. Eleven NFL stadiums hosted World Cup matches this summer, seven of which normally use artificial turf. Six of those seven have already had their temporary grass torn out. Only one stadium still has grass sitting on the field right now – MetLife Stadium in East Rutherford, New Jersey, home to both the Giants and Jets.
That’s also where Sunday’s World Cup final between Spain and Argentina is set to take place.
Once the final whistle blows, crews will tear that grass out too. And here’s the wild part: you can actually buy a piece of it. Fox5 DC shared details on how FIFA is selling chunks of the field to fans as souvenirs. After that, the turf that so many players have complained about goes right back in.
(Saturday’s third-place match between England and France skips this whole mess entirely – it’s being played at Miami’s Hard Rock Stadium, which uses real grass anyway.)
NFL players have noticed the timing, and they’re not happy about it. Bears quarterback Caleb Williams is among those who’ve jumped on the hashtag #WorthTheCost, which has been spreading across social media as a not-so-subtle jab at the league. Even players whose home stadiums already have grass are chiming in support, arguing this is bigger than just their own situation.
Grass vs. turf: a fight that’s been brewing for years
This isn’t a new argument. The NFL Players Association has pushed for grass fields for a while now, and the numbers back them up – at least from the players’ side. A 2023 NFLPA survey found that 92% of players prefer playing on natural grass over turf.
The league sees it differently.
NFL officials have pointed to data suggesting injury rates are actually higher on grass, not turf. There’s also a cost argument: turf tends to hold up longer and requires less maintenance than natural grass, especially in stadiums that host events year-round.
NFLPA executive director J.C. Tretter isn’t buying the league’s reasoning. “We have to make sure we’re having good surfaces,” he said, pushing back on the idea that turf is simply the safer, more practical option.
Some teams are already making moves on their own. The Steelers, for example, are swapping out their current grass – which has graded poorly in player surveys – for a more weather resistant strain at Acrisure Stadium this coming season.
Changing surfaces league-wide, though, is going to be a slow process. The current collective bargaining agreement doesn’t expire until after the 2030 season, so there’s no mechanism for a sweeping change anytime soon. Any shift toward more grass fields will likely happen team by team, not through a league mandate.
Right now, the split sits at 15 grass stadiums and 15 turf stadiums leaguewide. But that number is a little misleading – two of the turf stadiums each host two franchises (SoFi Stadium with the Rams and Chargers, and MetLife with the Jets and Giants). That means slightly more actual games get played on turf than the even split suggests.
As for cost, comparing the two surfaces isn’t simple. Climate, stadium design (including whether there’s a retractable roof), water and energy expenses, local sustainability rules, and even the specific type of grass used all factor into it. Stadiums that host concerts, other sporting events, or trade shows on top of football games face different maintenance demands too.
Generally speaking, grass costs more to maintain over time.
FIFA covered the expense for all these temporary grass installs at NFL stadiums, and it clearly wasn’t cheap. Still, it raises an obvious question: if FIFA could make it happen, why can’t NFL teams do the same if there’s enough pressure to do so?
That’s exactly the argument behind #WorthTheCost. Players are essentially accusing team owners of prioritizing cheaper maintenance over their safety and comfort. Whether that message actually leads to change is a different story – one that’ll likely play out stadium by stadium, contract by contract, over the next several years.
