It looks like they are playing in a parking lot.

I feel like that's a trademark that wouldn't stand up to legal challenge (and the author of that article agrees).
Heck, Eastern Washington has had a red field for years (since 2010 actually, according to wikipedia)

The only field/court worse than EMU's football field is NIU's basketball floor. Both make it harder to watch a televised game.

This is kind of hard to look at........

https://ucasports.com/sports/2010/8/9/FB_0809101221.aspx

Ooooo
Honestly it looks like a large swimming pool from the linked picture

Maybe I'm old school, but black is NOT a school color. Don't mind it as a one-off jersey...but I don't need it on the field.

I've had a couple of clients look into using other then green turf for their football/soccer fields.

One concern is "buyer's remorse".
You decide on the turf's colors from a computer simulation.
Once you order,that's it.

Kind of like a car.
That "unusual" color,a few years ago safety yellow was popular out here,looks great the day you get the car.But, after a while, people were asking "what the
f _ _ k was I thinking".

Thing is,with a car you can either sell it or paint it.

With turf,its yours for 15 years or so.
Unless you want to spend the money to replace the mat.

So far,after thinking about it,every client I've worked with has decided to go with green turf.
The only "crazy colors" they've tried are in end zones.

Even with end zones,we've had a couple of projects where,after a year or two,they took out the end zones,we designed them to be removable,and went to conventional colors.

For Ohio, the only way I'd do that is if they did two shades of green in those stripes. Personally, I feel like leaving the field green is the best way to go, and then do different things with the end zones.

Happy to answer.
Engineers like me live for this stuff.

All of the synthetic turf fields I've done are Field Turf,so I can only talk about their products.

1.None of the permanent markings are "painted".
They're actually sewn into the turf.
Used to be that the permanent markings were all installed on site.
You'd "shave" the turf and then sew in the markings.
Now I'd say at least 85% of the permanent markings are installed at the factory.

2.You can "paint" temporary markings on the turf.
Most fields we do have permanent football and soccer markings.
Some schools now use the fields for lacrosse or field hockey too.
So that means temporary markings.
You use latex paint.
Field Turf tells you what type of paint to use.
The also give you a "dilution ratio" for how long you want the markings to last.

3.Changing permanent markings and repairing synthetic turf is always an issue.
The area around bases wears much faster then the rest of the turf,so they have be replaced at least a couple of times over the life of the rest of the turf.
We always recommend replacing the turf around all of the bases,so the colors match.There will be some differences with the rest of infield,if its supposed to look like "skin",but you do the best you can.
Sometimes we'll use a contrasting color,around the bases,to "hide" the difference.

Green turf is tougher.
In addition to fading,the "model" of turf may no longer be available.Field Turf is constantly upgrading their products.So, in addition to an exact color match,"texture" may also be different.
That's happens a lot,when you have to try to repair "older" (5+ years) turf.

4.As far as the same field being used for different teams.
Some high schools,like Birnie Crum in Allentown have dual logs.
If you have a limited budget,you get "blank" turf and paint the logos as needed.

If you're the NFL,you do like Metlife.
They had,don't know if they still do,several "sets" of end zone turfs in trays (Jets,Giants,"blank").
Just "zip" (literally) one out and put another one in.
Just takes a couple of hours each.
If not, you have to remove the "infill",roll up the mat,roll out the alternate
mat and reinstall the infill.
Takes just bit longer.

Interesting story about temporary markings.
At one time,Giants Stadium was used for some soccer games.
The used to paint temporary markings.
Thing is,the NFL requires NFL football markings only.
That meant "scrubbing" off the temporary markings after the game was over.
Then the field had to be inspected to assure none of the markings were visible.
Any sign of a marking,re-scrub.
Needless to say,that cut the turf's useuful life way down.
way down.

In that case I would vote to go with the Tennessee enzone, but in green and white.

The issue of having multiple field markings isn't money.
In fact,it really doesn't affect the cost much at all.
From my experiences,it comes down to just a couple of things:

1.Egos

2.Confusion

1.We've done 2 fields for schools where football is king.
The football coaches and boosters made it very clear to the school boards that
this was "their field".
The only permanent markings they wanted were for football.
In both cases the school board went along.
In fact,in one case,soccer is only allowed to use the "football" field (its the only field with lights) for 1 or 2 games a year.
What the school boards eventually did was convert a natural turf field to
synthetic.


B.To try to please everyone,we had to design a field that had permanent markings for football,soccer,field hockey and lacrosse.
Even using different color markings,there were nothing but complaints about how "confusing" the field was.
Just replaced that synthetic turf this past summer.
They learned their lesson.
Just football and soccer markings on the new turf.

Actually no, being involved on several field projects, to many schools the issue is money. I have actually worked with fields that did not even have the hash marks put in due to the cost, and simply painted them each week. It's all personal preference on lines, same with a basketball court, do we paint VB lines each week or have them down. However, economics do factor in for some.