Revolution Stadium Groundbreaking "12-24 months" Part X

I wasn't sure if it was listed as one or not. Soldier's Field was listed and it received a major renovation (edit: they did lose their listing after the renovations and rightfully so, even though I think it was a great renovation job that preserved history while making it functional). So, it's possible. However, Harvard isn't going to get rid of a historical listing for some money. They don't need money. I don't think they'd sell out their history for the Patriots, let alone the Revolution.

The only other school in town with a big enough football stadium is too big (BC). So, unless Tufts or Bentley want a 20,000 seat stadium for their D3 teams none of this will work. I do like the idea of renovating Harvard Stadium or Nickerson even though I know neither is possible.

 

As a former Harvard student who has spent some time in the stadium in Allston, I suspect the only reason we are even talking about Harvard Stadium in this thread is because of the land underneath it, not because of the stadium on top of it. The stadium itself is a white elephant and almost exactly what you would expect out of a college football field constructed something like sixty years before the first Super Bowl. It would probably take a massively complicated and expensive reconstruction project to make Harvard Stadium suitable for pro soccer, probably along the lines of rebuilding the major infrastructure from scratch and completely redoing all the seating, which is probably about as expensive as building a new stadium. And if the Krafts are paying for it, you get into all sorts of complicated questions over who has rights to the stadium after. The Krafts would have to accept a situation where they sink the cost of a new stadium into renovating an existing stadium they will not own, and the university would probably have to relinquish a lot of its control over long term scheduling and leasing rights in order to reduce the enormous risk that comes with, so both sides would deal with a lot of risk and not a lot of gain. I realize you're probably interested in the area mainly because it is some prime real estate, but given all the expenses and risks, I don't see any sensible way to relocate the Revolution there long term even on top of the fact that Harvard Stadium is a historic landmark that probably won't receive any character-changing alterations for a long time.

 

Yeah, seeing as way back when, football was thought to be getting too dangerous, so President TDR , a school alumnus, got a number of schools together to change the rules and make the game safer. It was thought widening the field would make the game safer, but Harvard said no, due to their stadium (and I think Yale too), and instead the forward pass was invented. With a history like that, they'd never alter the stadium for soccer.

 

The only reason people are mentioning it is because it is a stadium, one in the Boston area, and because desperate people are willing consider anything they might come across. People have even mentioned the stadium at Tufts, one which would get laughed at by many a high school in other parts of the country, and even some in Massachusetts.

 

Definitely agree with all of you that it wouldn't work. I like the idea of having a multiuse stadium that works for everyone. It would make things a lot more tractable. There just isn't a good option in the Boston area. If only UMass were located in Boston. That would be the perfect partnership. I know a lot of you don't like the football lines, but if there were a way to get a 25,000 seat grass stadium in Boston, I'd be okay with some extra lines on the field. Alas, it's not going to happen.

 

We're in the 10th thread on the same topic with no new developments. That's why I'm mentioning it. I know it's never going to work, I just really like the idea and wish it could work.

 

I used to see the TeaMen play there in the seventies!

 

The Teamen were suppose to play at old Foxboro Stadium (Scheafer Stadium back then). But before they could, they got evicted by the racetrack next door.

They then moved to Nickerson for one year before making a deal with the racetrack and moving into Foxboro. Because the deal involved them never having a home game on a racing day, they lost many weekend dates.

The Boston Minutemen also played at Nickerson if memory serves (although I think they played a ton of different places if memory serves).

 

I'm pretty sure the Tea Men played at Schaefer for their first few years then moved to Nickerson prior to moving to Florida. Saw them play many times in Foxboro.

 

I looked this up. The Tea Men played 3 years in the Boston area

1978 Foxboro
1979 Evicted from Foxboro and played at Nickerson
1980 Reached deal with race track and returned to Foxboro but not allowed to play on race days

They moved to Jacksonville after this.

 

Thanks for clearing that up! Didn't remember them at the racetrack.

 

Did it receive that distinction before or after they came in like a wrecking ball to a quarter of the stadium several years back?

Either way, they couldn't just level it and gift Bob Kraft a SSS on school grounds.

 

They never played at the race track. But the old race track was right next door to the old Foxboro stadium and they had some legal course to stop the Tea Men from playing there that one season.

 

Yep, but they could if they needed money and wanted to renovate it. Of course neither of those fits here.

 

They did play some of the Olympic soccer games at Harvard for the Los Angeles Olypics in 1984. I wasn't living there then, so I don't know how it worked out, but they certainly had a grass field at the time. I wonder if they let it slide on the width, as I don't think it could fit a 70-yard wide field.

 

I don't have a big problem with his seeking tax breaks, but it just points out the hypocrisy of his statement about how they were going to do it without public money.

I'm just responding to someone who pointed out that Beckham, unlike Kraft, is trying to get it done without any public assistance. I call BS on that.

I do have a few issues with Becks, which I guess make up my "agenda":

- one, as I pointed out that I learned from Wahl's book, he and his people undermined the LA coaching/management and had people who weren't even part of the organization making key decisions. I think that's embarrassing for MLS and I personally have a lot of respect for Frankie Yallop and I think he got a pretty raw deal there.

- two, on the field I always felt like Beckham was the ultimate prima donna - claiming school boy innocence whenever he fouled anyone and then get outraged should anyone dare touch him. Not the first, certainly not the last, but not a performance that earned any respect from me.

- third and least, is the whole hollywood/spice girl crap.

FWIW, I loved watching him play when he was on his game, but when he came here, he became more of this brittle thing who demanded special treatment and protection.

Of course you will, because you'll be taking it out of context.

Like I said above, it's not so much him trying to get some public help, it's the fact that he's doing so while announcing he's not going to do exactly that.

I saw the games there and loved it. I think the whole field standardization was a much looser deal back then - teams had to be ready to play on short and/or narrow fields. And, the stadium as ancient as it was even then, still added to the charm of the whole event. You may be sitting on cement, but it looks and feels like it's the coliseum.

The atmosphere during those games was very much like what I think most of us hope for in an urban stadium for the Revs. It seemed like the whole crowd warmed up in Harvard Square, marched en massed to the stadium and then poured back into the square afterwards. I made the Wursthaus my before/after goto.

 

Well, the whole 'why I don't like Beckham' thread has gone beyond boring for me, but I am curious about this particular point. You've heard rumors that Beckham might have been searching for tax breaks, so you say that means he's trying to get public money, and these rumors that you've heard you're taking as totally true. Yet you're also positive that the Krafts don't want any public assistance, and if a stadium is ever built, you're positive that no public money whatsoever will go into it - I guess if it was offered you think Kraft would refuse it, because he's morally opposed to it - even though there have been references in this board to quotes which seem to imply that they do want public money? I would love to know your sources and lines of reasoning and logic, to so clearly see what is BS and what isn't, so that I can become as confident as you.

And I also have to say, I used to give the Krafts the benefit of the doubt regarding trying to get a stadium, and said so, as we all agree doing so is very difficult in the Boston metro area, but given how long this has been going on, and given the utter and complete dearth of any information about them doing anything whatsoever on it, I would love to know what information leads you to so strongly believe they're actively trying to do anything?

 

Don Garber has already stated they are looking for public support. It has never been a question of if they need public support, it is a question of how much.

"This is one of those cases where we're trying to get public support, because it's hard to think about moving out of a stadium where you've already invested money for your football team and have your soccer team play in it and now you have to invest even more money downtown.

 

I don't think I ever said that - and I certainly don't believe that.

I'm pretty sure that the Krafts would love to get some public assistance with a stadium project. I seem to recall commenting on whether they would require it - and to that I would say not necessarily (depends on the entire financial picture IMO).

I also think that the reality in this region is that it is very, very unlikely that a pro sports team is going to get direct financial preferences to help build a stadium - and the Krafts would understand that as well as anyone. That said, there are ways that public funds (or tax breaks) can be used to further the public good, while also helping make a private project viable.

I think CMGI/Foxboro is a perfect example. IMO the state had a responsibility to improve the transportation infrastructure around the proposed site, since a stadium was already there and there were already existing transportation issues.

 

Just a thought I had while reading that Everett was considering seizing a large parcel of property via eminent domain and then selling it to Steve Wynn.

What if Wynn buys the parcel in question, and then doesn't get the casino license? Could he then sell the land to his old business partner, Bob Kraft? Still a somewhat problematic location, but it's essentially dead land at the moment. There's no T station there, but one could be added relatively cheaply.

Food for thought.

 

Wellington is pretty close.

 

I don't know that area - how far - like walking distance close?

 

20ish minute walk, if you cut through a parking lot.

 

Nice. Thanks. Would be cool if they had game day ferries from Assembly Square - let folks park or take the T there and simply cross the river.

 

The sideline stands are also closer together than the too close together Harvard Stadium stands.