Sweetness Statue Controversy?

[CH David]

So I have caught on about this reading on ESPN.com and the CSN Chicago website, that the Chicago Park District want to talk to the Payton family about having a Bronze statue of Walter Payton at Soldier Field. The statue is already being made, but the controversy is that the District doesn't want it at Soldier Field. They feel it would be disrespectful to the soldiers memorial that the stadium is there for. But veterans from the military, some who were in the Korean War, among others, find it ridiculous that the Chicago Park District wouldn't let the statue be at Soldier Field.

This is the article if you would like to read it.

http://sports.espn.go.com/chicago/columns/story?columnist=wojciechowski_gene&id=4479003

Now it isn't imperative that Sweetness has his statue at Soldier Field. If it isn't there, it still doesn't take away from what the man named Walter Payton did for the city of Chicago in that uniform. He was a great man, and one of the league's top awards is named in honor of him. I feel that he should have it at Soldier Field where he made his career, but in regards to his legacy, it isn't necessary. He will still be Sweetness, one of, if not the greatest, running backs to ever play the game, and one of the most humble men in sports, and a statue won't add or subtract to that.

So what are your thoughts?

 

[X]

I see no reason for them to put it in Soldier Field if people are going to find is distasteful or disrespectful. It really isn't all that important for the statue to be on the premises, in Boston the famous statue of Red Auerbach isn't in or even very close to the grounds of the old Boston Garden, or the new TD Garden, and it's one of the most famous spots in the entire city for sports lovers. It hasn't detracted from people paying respects to his legacy, as it's a very popular tourist spot that gets a ton of people snapping pictures of themselves sitting on the bench next to Red on a daily basis.

Spoiler: Red Auerbach statue

I don't see the big deal here. If it's going to legitimately upset some people, why not just have it be not on the actual grounds itself? Have it somewhere around the stadium, it's not a big deal. Then again if people are going to be offended by it not being in the stadium, than conversely they should just build it on the grounds.

 

[CH David]

I see no reason for them to put it in Soldier Field if people are going to find is distasteful or disrespectful. It really isn't all that important for the statue to be on the premises, in Boston the famous statue of Red Auerbach isn't in or even very close to the grounds of the old Boston Garden, or the new TD Garden, and it's one of the most famous spots in the entire city for sports lovers. It hasn't detracted from people paying respects to his legacy, as it's a very popular tourist spot that gets a ton of people snapping pictures of themselves sitting on the bench next to Red on a daily basis.

Spoiler: Red Auerbach statue

I don't see the big deal here. If it's going to legitimately upset some people, why not just have it be not on the actual grounds itself? Have it somewhere around the stadium, it's not a big deal. Then again if people are going to be offended by it not being in the stadium, than conversely they should just build it on the grounds.

But that is the thing X. It is pretty much only the Chicago Park District that doesn't want to do it. I trust that you read the article, but I will reiterate anyways.

"Walter Payton was a great American, a great citizen, a great family man and then a great football player," said Jerry Newberry, spokesman for the Veterans of Foreign Wars national headquarters. "He represented courage and dignity. He represented some of the best things found in America. [A statue is] not disrespectful. The stadium wasn't meant to be a quiet, somber memorial -- an Arlington Cemetery or Vietnam Veterans Memorial.

"[Soldier Field] was dedicated in memory of those who served. The stadium still remains standing. That in itself should be tribute enough."

And this from Korean War vet Norm Kirst, commander of VFW Des Plaines Valley Memorial Post 6863, which is about seven miles from Soldier Field: "I wouldn't have no problem with [a Payton statue]. He was an outstanding football player. If they want to put a statue of a [war] veteran, they can still put it in there."

Actual Veterans of Foreign Wars have no problem with it. I'm not saying it needs to be there or that it shouldn't. It won't hurt Walter Payton's legacy. But the fact, why is one group speaking for another, and they are completely opposite of what they are thinking. A statue of Sweetness would serve well at Halas Hall if necessary, but I mean seriously. A statue can't go to Soldier Field, where Walter Payton made his living for his whole career, all because one group feels it will be disrespectful to veterans, even though said veterans say they wouldn't have any problem with it? I find that completely stupid.

 

[X]

I wasn't talking about whether just the veterans would oppose the statue being at Soldier Field, I was simply saying if it was going to cause an uproar (which apparently it has, even if it's from people who aren't veterans), then I don't see the problem with just putting it near the field, but not on the premises itself. But like I said, conversely, if more people want it at the field, they should go ahead and do that.

Either way, this is a pretty big non-issue. It's just a statue.

 

[stingerlegends]

Hope I'm not too late to chime in.....

I've been to Soldier Field a couple times, and the tunnel underneath the stadium is the only place where I've seen the veteran's plaques etc.

There is plenty of space in other parts of the grounds or the stadium itself to have a life-size statue of the greatest football player who ever lived.

I think there is a seperate but equal division between the memorial and the Bears legacy that resides within the same stadium and grounds, I don't see why that would be a problem.