Harvard and the Professionals

The University is considering the rental of Harvard Stadium to a newly-formed professional football team to house its first two seasons, in 1960 and 1961. Leasing the playing field could prove attractive financially, especially since the Department of Athletics has been forced to curtail monetary support of several minor sports. Conceivably the HAA could receive enough from the rental to put minor athletic teams back on a University supported basis, as they should be.

Yet, if permission is granted, Harvard would become a significant part of the scheme and would put its faith in the venture of a pioneering group. The syndicate admits that it plans frequent mention of the Harvard name, raising the question of whether Harvard, which sponsors only amateur athletics, should be connected so directly with commercial sports. Furthermore, the University could not easily deny the use of its property later to other professional groups, once it allowed the Boston team to play in the Stadium.

But the University cannot refuse the offer for such high-minded reasons alone. This holier-than-thou attitude would only raise the ire and resentment of Boston-Cambridge residents who have much at stake in the future of the new professional team. There are, however, several practical considerations that would satisfactorily justify to all concerned the University's refusal to rent the Stadium.

The addition of another, simultaneous football season at Soldiers Field would result in irreparable wear and tear on the playing turf. Even if the professional team reimbursed the HAA for the damage, no amount of money can recondition a field after two football games within 48 hours, in time for the next game a week away.

As if college football did not have enough to battle in student apathy, television, and high expenses, the University would be inviting more trouble by renting the Stadium to professionals. Fans who have no emotional attachment to Harvard football would much rather pay about $1.50 on a Sunday (the pros generally price tickets on a sliding scale) for the same seat that costs $4-$5 on a Saturday (Harvard, like most colleges, has a uniform rate).

Other, less important, complications would also arise in the conflicting interests between an amateur college football team and a recently organized professional team. The tax-free status of the University property may be questioned, if not eliminated. Students may be deprived of using the whole Soldiers Field plant on certain days. The pros may need practice space on the already crowded property. Involved procedure might be required to permit the sale of alcoholic beverages, as much a part of pro football as two-way radios.

Harvard has the upper hand in these negotiations and must first have a guarantee that most of the mentioned handicaps could be readily overcome and that the assured minimum rental would be sufficient to help Harvard athletics substantially. Only with these guarantees, should Harvard even consider the offer.