Ben Roethlisberger's idea to fix the field at Acrisure Stadium? Evict Pitt!
Former Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger has an idea to fix the issue of the playing surface at Acrisure Stadium.
Evict Pitt.
“You can’t have a professional football team — not just the Steelers, but the opponents — play on a surface like that. You’re paying them a lot of money, and if people get hurt, it’s not a good thing,” Roethlisberger said on his most recent “Footbahlin’” podcast. “I’ve been saying this for a while. I don’t think Pitt should play there anymore. I understand there are high school games — the (championships) — there. That’s not a big deal. Concerts, things like that. I’m saying this for Pitt’s sake as well. I firmly believe that Pitt should put a 35,000-person stadium up (in) Oakland. Pack that thing, because when you’ve got 65,000 or 70,000 in Acrisure and it’s only half full. What’s that look like?”
Roethlisberger was just getting warmed up.
“Have it like, just bumping crazy, loud fans everywhere. The students won’t have to drive anywhere. They can walk to the stadium, walk back to their dorms, and then you keep them off of that field for the Steelers,” Roethlisberger continued. “I know it was probably part of the deal. The taxpayers, when they built the stadium, when it was Heinz Field, it was like, ‘OK, we’re going to do this. And part of the deal (is), both teams are going to play here.’ But somehow, some way, they have got to figure out how to separate those things and make that feel better.”
Big Ben on the field conditions at Acrisure:
"Idon't think Pitt should play there anymore. I firmly believe Pitt should put a 35,000 person stadium in Oakland." #steelers
???? Footbahlin with Ben Roethlisberger pic.twitter.com/94Kkk3r14O
— Matthew Luciow (@matthewluciow92) October 14, 2025
Now, I know Roethlisberger thinks he has all the answers on this one. But his theory that moving out Pitt will fix everything has more holes in it than the playing surface itself.
I’m just wondering if Roethlisberger has bothered to ask himself — or anyone else — these questions?
• Where exactly in Oakland are they going to put it?
• Who exactly is going to pay for it? (Although “Roethlisberger Field at UPMC Stadium” certainly has a nice ring to it, Ben. Feel like making a donation?)
• Where will people park?
• Is 35,000 seats really enough? Only Wake Forest and SMU have smaller stadiums than that in the ACC.
• How are the remaining six years of an agreement rewritten with the Stadium and Exhibition Authority if the Steelers are the only tenant in the building?
• If a new stadium is built in Oakland (probably closer to 45,000-50,000), will Pitt fans even be able to fill that regularly?
Related
• Mike Tomlin calls Acrisure Stadium field conditions 'poor' for game against Browns
• Steelers special-teams ace Miles Killebrew suffers 'significant' injury in win vs. Browns
• Mark Madden: Mike Tomlin is wrong: Andrew Berry did what's best for the Browns
Of course, the answer to that last question is, “No.”
The tired, recycled “Pitt needs an on-campus stadium” trope started the minute the last slab of concrete from old Pitt Stadium was removed and the Petersen Events Center opened. It’s a red herring in the discussion about what needs to happen to make Pitt into a national title contender again.
It’s something for old Golden Panther types to grouse about on the drive back up I-79 after losing in Morgantown.
If Mason Heintschel truly becomes the next Dan Marino, and the Panthers are a preseason top-10 team before he goes to the NFL, they’ll be able to sell out Acrisure for their biggest games and come close with the others.
Yes. If the stadium is on campus, it’ll be easier for the students to go. But it may not be easier for a lot of the alumni and non-students to attend. Unless parking and public transportation around Oakland magically improve, the tailgating scene will be nonexistent, and you’ll just regenerate the old complaints about how hard it is for old folks and families to get around Oakland to get to the stadium.
Last time I checked, student money isn’t what keeps the doors open at college stadiums. It’s alumni dollars.
That’s just Pitt’s side of the story, not to mention the Steelers’ responsibility to maintain the field better and the lease agreement complexities mentioned above.
Hear me out, Big Ben. Instead of kicking Pitt to the curb, they could just figure out how to grow the grass better.
Which, quite frankly, has largely been the case for the last five to 10 years at Acrisure Stadium. The playing surface issues really haven’t been the major talking point that they were when the building first opened in 2001, and how Roethlisberger probably remembers it from his rookie year of 2004.
Because, let’s remember, the last game that Pitt played at Acrisure was a full eight days before the Steelers hosted the Browns, and the weather hasn’t been wet or cold.
Maybe that’s been part of the problem. Maybe, like the rest of the region, it’s been too warm and dry this late into the calendar, and the grounds crew is having a tough time adjusting.
As referenced above, Acrisure hasn’t been the mud pit it used to be back when when Heinz Field was is its infancy. In Game 1 at home for the Steelers, Kaleb Johnson had a bad day. In Game 2, the grounds crew did. It happens.
I don’t have a perfect answer, but here is what I do know:
If just six total home games between the two teams — with no snow or high school activity yet — from Labor Day weekend to Columbus Day is causing the field to deteriorate, then kicking out Pitt isn’t going to fix the problem.
Tim Benz is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Tim at tbenz@triblive.com or via X. All tweets could be reposted. All emails are subject to publication unless specified otherwise.
Remove the ads from your TribLIVE reading experience but still support the journalists who create the content with TribLIVE Ad-Free.