Bosa social media tweets should be a cautionary tale

Sometimes irony strikes where you least expect it.

Take the San Francisco 49ers. Three years ago, the franchise had a
quarterback, Colin Kaepernick, who led a controversial social movement
of kneeling during the National Anthem. The purpose of Kaepernick’s
gesture was to protest police brutality against black people and the
systemic racism those people have experienced in the United States.

Several players throughout the NFL followed Kaepernick’s lead to the
pleasure of some and chagrin of others. Kaepernick has not played in
the NFL since 2016, in part because he was trending down as a player
and teams believed that “the baggage outweighed the passenger.”

Fast forward to the 2019 draft and the franchise selects Ohio State
defensive end Nick Bosa with the second overall pick in the draft. The
selection is significant because the 49ers are counting on Bosa to bolster
their defense in an effort to improve on a 4-12 season in 2018 and most
importantly gain an uptick in Kyle Shanahan’s third season as San
Francisco’s head coach.

Bosa’s selection gained news on another front. He is a known supporter
of current United States president Donald Trump. To suggest that Trump
is polarizing would be like saying water is wet. Trump also spoke out
strongly against players kneeling during the National Anthem, calling
them SOBs (and I don’t meant Sweet Old Bill) and suggesting that they
should be fired from their jobs.

Within the past six years, Bosa sent tweets referring to Kaepernick as a
clown. He also referred to Beyonce’s music as “trash.” Beyonce is a black
singer, actress, song writer, record producer and dancer.

At his introductory press conference, Bosa addressed his past tweets.

“I’m sorry if I hurt anybody,” Bosa said. “I definitely didn’t intend for that
to be the case. I think me being here (San Francisco) is even better for me
as a person, because I don’t think there's anywhere, any city, that you could
really be in that would help you grow as much as this one will. I’m going
to be surrounded with people of all different kinds, so I’m going to grow
as a person. I'm going to be on my own. I’m going to grow up, I’m gonna
learn a lot of new things. It’s exciting.”

On what his feelings are toward Kaepernick today, Bosa said: “No. It wasn’t
directed toward that. It's not like I’m saying his stance and what he was
doing -- that’s not what I was talking about at all. It was just a specific
thing that happened, and me, as a young kid, a thought popping into my
head and, boom, decided to tweet it out. Bad decision. I respect what he's
done. If it empowers anybody, then he's doing a good thing. I apologize
for that.”

For Bosa’s part, I’ll give the young man his due, he answered the questions
in a forthright manner, never once appearing on the defensive, which is
more than I can say for Golden State Warriors superstar Kevin Durant.
While Durant is an overwhelming talent, he can be hypersensative toward
questions from the media.

Is Bosa’s apology genuine or rehearsed? That’s in the eye of the beholder
but if nothing else, he made the optics look good, which will buy him some
breathing room. The result of Bosa getting out in front of the issue is that as
long as he keeps his nose clean, he is less likely to get questioned. As a
lifelong 49er fan, I personally do not care who he supports -- or what he
tweets -- as long as he sacks Jared Goff, Russell Wilson and Kyler Murray.

I’m not here to tell anyone who they should or should not support in the
political arena because it is our individual right. That is the beauty of the
United States of America. All I ask is that you do not choose company
time to advance your agenda, a la Kaepernick. If Trump loses the 2020
election and Bosa decides to take a knee during the National Anthem,
you bet your tail I’ll be raking him over the coals. However, regardless
of which side of the aisle you lean, Bosa’s aforementioned social media
posts should serve as a cautionary tale.

Is posting political points of view worth the headache? I am only
speaking for myself but I would say no. However, if you think it’s worth
it, knock yourself out because it’s your account, just be aware that
ramifications come with it. We live in a world where you can post an
opinion, substantiate it with fact but people will a) Still lose your
message in translation and b) Assume that if you like one side, you
automatically hate the other even if you never stated anything to the
effect.

I would utter the same message if Bosa was a Hillary Clinton supporter.
Given that Bosa was raised in a Republican household, should it surprise
you that he is a Trump supporter? On the other hand, would you expect
Nancy Pelosi’s kids to be anything other than Democrat?

Perhaps the most comical social media post I saw was, “He’s a Trump
supporter, he’d better produce.” Really? Bosa needs to produce because
he is the No. 2 overall pick in the draft. There is no reason other than
that one.

Regardless of how much irony strikes.

The outrage of Armijo being the latest to change Indian mascot

Oh how the political correctness monster strikes one more time.

How blasphemous can you get with the parade of these cacamaimy
acts?

This time, it hits Fairfield, CA, specifically Armijo High. In an online
report that surfaced in today’s Fairfield Daily Republic, there was a
unanimous vote Thursday by the Fairfield-Suisun School District board
to accept the mascot committee’s recommendation that the Indian name
be replaced.

The Daily Republic also reported that public speakers supported both
sides of the issue with those favoring the change slightly outnumbering
those who wanted to keep the name. The cost of mascot removal and
other branding would range from $250,000-$500,000 with the costs
spanning a 3-5 year period.

Committee chairman Tim Goree told the Daily Republic that the group
sought input from the Yocha Dehe Wintun Tribe, which is the closest to
Fairfield. The tribe’s stance was strong on insisting the mascot removal.

It is not yet known when the name Indians will be removed and it is
also not decided what the next mascot name will be.

It’s also not the first time we’ve seen events like this, which have become
common nationwide but for this writing, I’ll limit the focus to Northern
California in the interest of space. One year ago, Napa High, which was
the Indians, became the Grizzlies. Vallejo High, which was the Apaches,
became the Redhawks in 2016. Kelseyville High was the Indians and
has since become the Knights. Salesian High (Richmond, CA) has gone
from Chieftans to Pride.

Having seen these changes take place and become more common, my
outrage has not waned. I thought it was horrible the first time I saw it,
and I think it is horrible now. Those in favor of such moves normally
make arguments that include but are not limited to using Native
American names and images being offensive and racist to indigenous
people. Supporters of such mascot names insist that the names honor
Native Americans rather than stereotyping them in a negative light.
Such people also lambaste those in favor of the change because of
political correctness.

The view on mascots and what they represent is in the eye of the beholder.
That said, I am not in favor of changing such mascots but to those who
oppose my view, I’m not going to change them. While I’m a firm
believer in everyone having the right to their point of view, the pitfalls
are that regardless of issue, too many people think their opinion
represents all.

It does not, it only represents yours and those who share your point of
view. I have met those with Native American roots say they don’t like
what the mascot depictions represent, which is to be expected. However,
I have met countless others utter things to the effect of “I’m part Choctaw,
Mayan Indian, etc, and I don’t find it offensive.” My point is, if it doesn’t
bother them, why should it bother me?

Changes like this appear well-intended on the surface but serve as an
opening to undraw other lines. What’s next, bird lovers don’t want names
like Cardinals or Eagles? Atheists don’t want names like Saints? Can you
say “slippery slope?” I could name countless other examples but in the
interest of space, I won’t.

As one who graduated from the University of Nebraska, I was there when
the marketing staff began making a push to go from Cornhuskers to
Huskers. The perception was that those on the coastal states thought of
Nebraskans as a bunch of hayseeds. As if changing the mascot name
was going to suddenly change people’s perceptions.

Another reason for the changes being idiotic is because of the
aforementioned costs. While I am not privy to FUSD’s current financial
temperature, the district is routinely in bad shape. With housing costs
driving families out of the Bay Area as well as California, that situation
is not likely to change any time soon.

Does the phrase, “putting the cart before the horse” mean anything to
you? While we’re at it, does the phrase of “spending money you don’t
have” mean anything to you?

This change is also bound to have some other unintended consequences.
Here’s a story that should serve as a cautionary tale. I was talking to the
Vallejo High Athletic Director Josh Ramos two years ago when covering
the American Canyon-Vallejo football game as a freelance writer for the
Napa Valley Register. I covered Ramos at a different point in my career
(early 2000s) when he was a student-athlete at Vallejo while his father
(Tony) was the athletic director at crosstown rival Jesse Bethel. Ramos
told me that Vallejo High lost a lot of alumni support as a result of their
mascot change from Apaches to Redhawks.

It made me think of what we endured here in Napa. As a result, both
schools have seen alumni support diminish, though Napa’s advantage
over Vallejo is that it has a booster club.

Loss of support also adds up to loss of dollars. The lost support could take
multiple decades to regain.

Examining differences between anger and competitive, stoic and not caring

There are many sports axioms that people assume are assets on
the surface but when you examine them on a deeper level, they
are liabilities.

Having been involved in competitive sports for most of the 46 years
I have been alive, either as an athlete, reporter, fan or parent, I am
amazed at how much people assume that all emotions are like
branches from the same tree.

To give you context, those who are outwardly demonstrative are
viewed by some as everything from “competitive,” to “win at all
costs,” to “lacking perspective.” Those who are not outwardly
demonstrative are viewed as being aloof or indifferent. You would
think there is no in between. Take coaches like Tom Landry, Tom
Osborne or Tony Dungy to name a few. With their sideline stoicism,
you couldn’t tell if their team was ahead or behind by 40 points.
However, those coaches were every bit as competitive and wanted
to win just as much as their opposites like Mike Ditka or Jon Gruden.

Then you take a coach or player who regularly evokes anger, that
quality is somehow viewed as competitive. What people fail to
realize, however, is that there is a difference being competitive
and angry. The former exudes a good balance between wanting
to win, hating to lose and having self-control. The latter lacks the
ability to make the distinction and in the process interprets being
angry as “It’s better to care too much than not at all.” Granted,
angry people may outwardly demonstrate that they care more
than those who are aloof but that doesn’t mean they deserve a
free pass either. Those people can cost you wins on the field just
the same as those who are do not care. They just take a different
route to screwing up team chemistry.

I’m the first one to rail against those who want to get rid of
scoreboards at Little League games. I believe we should preach
to youngsters that there is a scoreboard in life and let’s not run
from it. Granted, having fun should be part of the equation as
well but point being, I’m anti-participation trophies. You earn
trophies at practice, you pick them up after winning on the field.

The difference between being angry and competitive should lie
in a couple of examples. There are many but I’ll limit it to a few
in the interest of space. NFL wide receiver Odell Beckham Jr.
and college football coach Bo Pelini. Beckham is considered
in a very select group of receivers along with Antonio Brown,
who was traded from the Pittsburgh Steelers to the Oakland
Raiders, and Atlanta’s Julio Jones. Like Brown, Beckham was
traded this offseason in large part because his former team,
the New York Giants, deemed that the baggage outweighed
the passenger, Beckham was traded to the Cleveland Browns.

Beckham makes spectacular catches and puts up tremendous
numbers but has been equally known for conduct on and off the
field that demonstrates lack of self control. Giants general
manager Dave Gettleman recently referred to Beckham as a
cancer. Beckham later went on a twitter rant saying words to
the effect of, “I am a cancer to a place that’s OK with losing.”
The Giants and Gettleman might be a lot of things but OK with
losing? I don’t think so. NFL franchises that win four Super
Bowls are not OK with losing.

I use Pelini as an example because I am a University of Nebraska
alum and fan. Pelini coached the Huskers from 2008-2014,
compiling a 67-27 record. While Pelini’s winning clip was good
but not great, he is remembered more for his low points than
high points. The examples include embarrassing losses at
defining moments and emotional outbursts that crossed the
line with referees and media. Pelini, who was fired after 2014, is
now coaching at Youngstown State.

Those who espouse people like Beckham and Pelini would say,
“Look at them! They are so competitive! They hate to lose!”

Don’t misconstrue lack of self control with competitiveness. We’ve
all been around teammates like this. They’ll pound their chest
and bellow, “I just want to win, man!” Well, so does everybody
but being angry is not being competitive. In fact, in a roundabout
way, it is being selfish.

I also question player’s (or coach’s for that matter) motivation
behind getting angry. For example, take a wide receiver or running
back. Are you mad because you are not getting touches or are
you mad because your team are losing?

The difference between competitive people and angry people is
that the former knows that there is a time to get angry and a time
to be part of the solution. For the most part, solutions are not based
on anger. In fact, getting angry usually results in mistakes. That
aspect is true in any walk of life, both personally and professionally.

Granted, we are humans not robots and it’s OK to have moments
of frustration. Having such moments is part of reality, especially in
emotion based sports.

In football, the best advice is “play with intelligence and hit with
anger.”

I am all for competitiveness but don’t sell that anger is the same
as competitiveness. Equally, don’t misconstrue lack of emotion
with not caring.

The blessed feeling of leaving a career on your own accord

Some decisions that you make in life are ones you know are the right ones
even before the outcome translates into reality.

However, when you see subsequent events, it further re-affirms that you
made the right decision. To make a sports analogy, it’s like a quarterback
who calls the play in the huddle, gets to the line of scrimmage, sees that
the play won’t work against that defensive front and audibles into another
play.

To give you context, in December 2014, I left behind my career of sports
reporter, the only one that I knew in my post college life. For the last four
and a half years, I have worked as a delivery driver for Alhambra Water.

The reasons for the move were plentiful, none the least of which were a)
Pay was not very good, and I’m being kind, b) Scattershot schedule was
not conducive for family life and c) The industry continues to shrink and
become de-emphasized. Part C is quite evident as you see many long time
newspaper employees get bought out and offered early retirement packages
as a form of cost-cutting.

Two weeks ago, I received a phone call from Marty James, who is approaching
40 years of employment with the Napa Valley Register. The publication is a
community daily in Napa, CA, that also produces three weekly editions
(Weekly Calistogan, St. Helena Star and American Canyon Eagle) Marty has
worn many hats over the years from reporter, editor, executive sports editor
and senior sports reporter.

Yours truly worked for and with Marty for 14 years. So I am on my lunch
break in Concord, CA, when Marty called. I did not pick up so Marty left a
message to call him back. When I finished eating, I returned Marty’s call.
He informed me that the Register was offering any editorial employee over
the age of 55 with over 10 years of experience incentive to retire now.
There are six of such employees that fall under that umbrella. To date, only
Marty and now former photo editor J.L. Sousa accepted the severance
package.

Kevin Courtney, who has been a Register reporter for 47 years, was one that
did not take the buyout package, which was two weeks pay for every year
of service with a maximum of 26 weeks. The downside of not accepting the
buyout is running the risk of getting let go later with no severance. I’m not
going to cast judgment on Kevin’s decision because it’s not my place but
he expounded on his reasons in his Sunday column:

https://napavalleyregister.com/lifestyles/real-napa/columnists/kevin-courtney/
napa-journal-my-brush-with-job-death/article_7018fc0d-6683-586f-9fd3-
e5fafd5a5a74.html

There’s a few things that I unpack from this chain of events. For openers,
though writing is no longer my career, I have found a way to stay involved
on two fronts: a) As a freelance reporter covering Friday night high school
football for the Register and b) Updating this blog a couple times per week.
While I have no regrets changing careers because it was best for both my
family and me, I would feel like part of my identity was lost if I gave up
writing.

Though I understand the newspaper industry’s reason behind cutting costs,
including but not limited to the online and social media reading to loss of
advertising dollars, it’s sad to see those who have put in multiple decades
in the industry see their fate decided by other factors. It’s easy to blame the
corporate powers that be, and though I’m not absolving them, culture change
is also part of the decline of the newspaper industry.

The only ones that are still loyal to reading newspapers are your 80 and
older crowd. The Baby Boomers and Generation Xers, of which I fall into
the latter, grew up reading newspapers but we’ve moved on from that way
of getting our news. The millenial and younger crowd, however, wouldn’t
get caught dead reading a newspaper.

Perhaps my biggest takeaway from this chain of events is that if I did not
make my move, I would have been a buyout candidate within the next
eight years if not sooner. After all, at the time I left the industry, I had 18
years of experience and I will be 47 in August.

While I realize that we do not always get to decide our professional fate,
I am exceedingly blessed that I walked away from an industry that sends
a lot of people packing. There were certain things that compelled me to
leave the industry but I am blessed beyond belief that I did such on my
own accord.