(07-22-2018 02:04 PM)ClairtonPanther Wrote:  In a way, I think the three major forms of football (association, American, and rugby) and their fields/pitches drove the dimensions of track more-so than track driving their dimensions. The three forms of football's field sizes are generally about the same, with a meter or foot difference on width and length. I could certainly be wrong. But I've seen soccer pitches across Europe with tracks around them as well.

I would guess there were compromises in dimensions for both football and track to accommodate placing both in a multipurpose stadium. Fields have to be relatively narrow to fit inside a standard running track.

Until recently (the 1970s?) soccer had a large variance in the permitted width of any field. The historical minimum was (and is) 50 yards, but the minimum width for any field that hosts international matches is 70 yards. Even the smallest fields used in MLS, let alone in top European leagues, are at least 70 yards wide, and thus couldn't be surrounded by a conventional running track.

By comparison, the standard American football field width is 53 1/3 yards and can still be fit inside a 440-yard or 400-meter running track.

(07-22-2018 02:42 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  Pretty sure that designing a track around a football field was the work of the father of the man who designed the multi-purpose football/baseball stadium and the grandfather of the man who designs the current 1.5 mile oval tracks being built in NASCAR.

Yeah, if I had to guess it would be a matter of conveinience and space saving rather than anything else.

I can't wait for the track to be gone from Kidd Brewer Stadium. It should be relocated off campus by next fall.