The NFL CBA doesn’t expire until 2031, but there is major work set to take place on the current deal. The league is looking to add an 18th regular-season game by 2028 as a way to expand revenue, which will lead to negotiations over compensation — but the biggest battle might not be over money, or how often players take the field, but what the field is made of itself.
“You look at FIFA,” Tretter said, “owners will roll out the green carpet for soccer players.” The criticism comes as NFL players overwhelmingly prefer playing on grass, but owners have moved to installing turf in more stadiums due to its lower maintenance costs, as well as consistency. That cost-cutting and reliability comes with a price, with players believing that field turf leads to more injuries, has a worse feel, and is generally less pleasant to play on. For the 2026 season a total of 15 NFL stadiums will use grass, 15 use artificial turf, and two use a hybrid system between the two.
It’s here that the NFLPA seems to be casting its lot knowing they have the power in the 18-game schedule negotiations.
Discussion of grass vs. turf from union leaders like Tretter and former NFL players like McCown isn’t coincidental — it’s a future bargaining chip. This is a subject being mentioned because we can expect it to be a point of emphasis from the player’s association when they sit at the table to hear proposals over the new expanded schedule. It’s highly possible we see the league move to an 18-game regular season schedule, with the financials being worked out on the back-end through revenue sharing — but with the major ask from players being quality of life improvements.
These will include requiring NFL teams to have grass surfaces, and could be expanded to mandatory facility minimums, with information garnered from the yearly player report cards.
There is no question football should be played on grass, but it’s a move that isn’t without its challenges. While the NFLPA is highlighting the use of temporary grass for the World Cup as NFL owners going above and beyond, it’s a slightly disingenuous argument. Owners aren’t doing this out of the goodness of their hearts, but rather because FIFA mandates that playing surfaces be traditional grass. Top-flight soccer players don’t play on turf, period, typified by Lionel Messi’s arrival in MLS when he refused to play away games for Inter Miami at several stadiums which had turf playing surfaces.
In addition, there’s a reality that grass simply doesn’t hold up as well, especially with the challenges of having real grass inside domed stadiums. It’s one thing to wistfully remember when every NFL stadium had real grass, while conveniently forgetting occasions where grass would be worn and uneven, which is further stressed as more stadiums become multi-use venues.
It’s relatively easy to maintain grass for dedicated soccer pitches, but decidedly more difficult in a sport where players are digging their cleats into the surface and pushing off for leverage regularly. Teams which use real turf often need to replace the entire field mid-season to ensure its integrity, which represents a major challenge when trying to maintain the replaced sod in the middle of winter.
Still, it’s a fight that is absolutely worth having for the NFLPA if it means fewer injuries. Studies have shown that artificial surfaces are worse for athletes, and there should be standardization of playing surfaces across the NFL. If every team is committed to one universal surface, it will allow for consistent cleat innovation, safer play, and a better overall feel — now it’s about making the owners come to the table and fix the problem if they want their 18th game.
