Jim Harbaugh Is Not A Food Critic Comment Count

Ace



[Eric Upchurch/MGoBlog]

Jim Harbaugh is the first person to admit he's obsessed with football. Everything else is secondary. This is a man who traveled to Paris with his wife, went to a Mexican restaurant that appears to be decent but by no means world-renowned, and declared it the best restaurant while also boiling down his personality into a damn near perfect tweet.

Harbaugh is a blunt instrument. He doesn't get sick. He doesn't take holidays. He's a jackhammer. We know this.

Harbaugh also has strong ties to the military. One of his oldest, closest friends is retired Marine colonel Jim Minick, who now serves at Michigan's director of football operations. He has a well-documented history of bringing in military officers to speak to his teams. He stops by Omaha Beach while on vacation. He welcomes servicemen into his office and genuinely looks more excited to take a photo with them than vice versa.

Which brings us to yesterday. Harbaugh emerged from the fall camp submarine—his term; he's also referred to it as a "bunker"—to address the media for the first game-week press conference of the season. Harbaugh is well-known for his unpredictable, off-the-cuff answers in pressers (not to mention on Twitter). We have a "jim harbaugh says things he probably shouldn't" tag, and the proprietor of this site has described him as "being himself at maximum volume at all times" on multiple occasions.

The odds that Harbaugh had the time or inclination to seriously ponder Colin Kaepernick's protest of the national anthem before the press conference are exceedingly low. This is a football coach known for being way more football-obsessed than even the average football-obsessed football coach. He's briefly emerging from three weeks of fall camp and its four-hour practices and endless film study to talk about the Hawaii game. He's probably aware of the basic details of Kaepernick's protest, but that's not anywhere close to his primary focus. He's thinking about his team, preparing for Hawaii, and not letting on anything about the ongoing quarterback competition.

[Hit THE JUMP.]

Fifteen minutes into a twenty-minute presser, Harbaugh is asked about Kaepernick. This is how our press conference correspondent, Adam Schnepp, transcribed the exchange:

As someone who knows Colin Kaepernick, what do you think about his stance to sit during the Anthem, and do you think it will cost him his job with the 49ers?

“I acknowledge his right to do that, but…I don’t respect the…the motivation or the…or the action.”

He pauses three times in that one sentence, which stands in stark contrast to the rest of the presser. The video shows a man who is searching for the right words and isn't quite sure he found them:

Harbaugh went off-the-cuff, which is his nature. He didn't choose his words carefully.

Colin Kaepernick, on the other hand, has spent a great deal of time thinking about his motivation and his action. After the media picked up on his protest, he spent 18 minutes discussing in detail why he won't stand for the national anthem. Before that, he addressed the 49ers in a players-only meeting, one that teammates described as both "productive and informative." At least one player whose initial reaction mirrored Harbaugh's emerged from the meeting with a different mindset:

“To be honest with you, I took offense to it,” 49ers center Daniel Kilgore said upon learning Kaepernick opted not to stand for the Star-Spangled Banner out of protest for what he sees as injustice for minorities in the United States.

“But after Kap stating his case today, and seeing where he was coming from, I do stand with Kap when he says, ‘Enough is enough against crime and the violence, discrimination and racism.’

“I believe enough is enough. I can see where people would think it’s bad with the national anthem and the military. For me, I’m going to stand there every time. I’m going to think about and honor those who are fighting and those who have fought, my family members, my friends. If Kap decides not to, that’s his decision.”

While Kilgore may not be joining Kaepernick in protest, he acknowledges and understands the impetus behind it, and that is a critical distinction.

Harbaugh, unlike Kilgore, didn't talk to Kaepernick this week. My assumption, based on Harbaugh's reaction and that of many others, as well as his background, is that he viewed Kaepernick's protest as a disrespectful act to the military, to which the flag and the anthem are inextricably linked; just look at Michigan's upcoming military appreciation festivities for the UCF game, which will feature "two large American field flags [that] will be held by over 150 veterans and service members" during the anthem among several other military tributes. I doubt he'd considered Kaepernick's pointed views on police violence, not to mention his direct experience with it:

-Q: Have you ever been pulled over unjustly or had a bad experience in that regard?

-KAEPERNICK: Yes. Multiple times.

I mean, I’ve had times where one of my roommates was moving out of a house in college and because we were the only black people in that neighborhood, the cops got called and all of us had guns drawn on us. I mean, came in the house without knocking, guns drawn, on one of my teammates and roommates.

So I have experienced this. People close to me have experienced this. This isn’t something that’s a one-off case here, a one-off case there.

When Harbaugh initially said he didn't respect Kaepernick's "motivation," he unwittingly invalidated the very real issues that Kaepernick is addressing with his act of protest. It was one of the worst possible word choices.  Immediately after the press conference ended, he corrected that error:

If Harbaugh had said that initially, he wouldn't be in the midst of a media firestorm, or at least not one that's nearly this heated. While he still takes exception to Kaepernick's action, that's a position that doesn't invalidate years, decades, centuries of America's history, as well as the present state of relations between police and minorities in many parts of this country.

You may still disagree with Harbaugh. Kaepernick's protest is nonviolent, even nonintrusive—he sat for the anthem in the first preseason game, too, and nobody noticed—and when the media picked up on it, it sparked a nation-wide conversation that's led to some remarkable revelations. I majored in history; without Kaepernick's protest, I wouldn't be aware of the third verse of the Star Spangled Banner. That appears to be the case with one of Harbaugh's star players, Jourdan Lewis, as well. If the goal of protest—a deeply American act dating back to the very genesis of this country—is to raise awareness of issues and drive change, Kaepernick hit the mark; again, look at the reaction from his teammates after the players-only meeting.

You may still disagree with Kaepernick, too. The national anthem and the flag are symbols that, for many of us, stand for freedom, equality, and the sacrifices so many have made to uphold those values. Kaepernick's freedom of expression extends to his critics, and they have a valid point, too: many, many people have died fighting for the country and values that flag symbolizes, and Kaepernick's actions can be interpreted as disrespect of that country and those values in that context. I can't know for sure, but it's quite possible Harbaugh feels that way.

This is all well and good as long as there's an acknowledgment that this discussion has valid opinions on both sides. Harbaugh's initial statement didn't leave room for that. His clarification did.

In an ideal world, Harbaugh would've been prepared to address the issue—the question wasn't hard to see coming—and better express his true feelings on the matter, or acknowledge that he wasn't ready to address it and put forth a no comment. His brother, Baltimore Ravens coach John Harbaugh, had thought through his answer enough to quote Voltaire when asked about Kaepernick:

"Voltaire so eloquently stated, 'I may not agree with what you say, but I'll defend it until death your right to say it,'" John Harbaugh said. "That's a principle that our country is founded on. I don't think you cannot deny someone the right to speak out or mock or make fun or belittle anybody else's opinion."

Jim Harbaugh, however, is a blunt instrument. He answered the question. By his own admission, he missed the mark.

I hate when people tell sports figures to stick to sports. These are people with experiences and opinions that are often quite valuable, and they have a larger platform than most. Context matters, though. Jim Harbaugh is not a food critic. He is not a politician. He is not a social commentator. He is a football coach. We shouldn't be surprised that he sounded like one when asked to address a complicated, nuanced, and controversial social issue in between questions about the depth chart and this season's schedule.

Comments

Bando Calrissian

August 30th, 2016 at 3:58 PM ^

Why wouldn't a reporter ask that question? Kaepernick's former coach, in a moment when he's front-page news... It's a reporter doing their job.

It's amazing to me people still struggle with the fact that press conferences are nothing more than reporters asking specific questions for specific stories. 

quigley.blue

August 30th, 2016 at 3:52 PM ^

Focusing on Harbaugh (or Brees, or anyone else for that matter) completely ignores the point that Kaepernick was trying to make.  Which is probably ultimately what (white) people want.  Talking about Harbaugh instead of racism is burying your head in the sand, and those of us in comfy status-quo worlds have been doing that for decades (millenia).  That's my 0.02.

Wolverine Devotee

August 30th, 2016 at 5:33 PM ^

I can see both points of view. No point of discussing it further.

Personally I identify with faith over country. I stand when the gospel is being read, which is what calls for it.

Standing for national anthem is something I don't completely understand. Hats off yes.




Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

maceo_blastin'

August 30th, 2016 at 3:54 PM ^

Knowing he'd be asked this question, I was hoping he'd be able to say he talked to Kaepernick about it. Guys like Calipari make a point to stay connected w/ their former players. And I think it helps their profile in the eyes of recruits. Then again, dude's probably busy. 

Blue in PA

August 30th, 2016 at 3:55 PM ^

Having the right to do something doesn't make it the right thing to do.  

The millions of Americans who are pissed and lashing out at CK are exercising their rights as well.  Because we live in the USA we have the right to make poor decisions, that right doesn't give us immunity from responsibility for poor decisions.  This punk was fined by the NFL for dropping the N-bomb, now he's a race warrior?   Got it.

Disrespecting the country, the flag, the National Anthem and every veteran who's ever been in harms way defending her..... there's no excuse.  I agree with something Rex Ryan said, that could be a first.  As for CK, maybe the CFL will take him, I'd be happy to never see him take a snap again.

 

beardog07

August 30th, 2016 at 4:10 PM ^

No one is criticising their right to criticize Kaepernick.  They're criticizing their view that any form of protest that doesn't involve 100% obediance to American symbols and rituals is "petulant", "misguided", "selfish", and/or "disgraces the military."

MileHighWolverine

August 30th, 2016 at 4:24 PM ^

Your comment seems too rigid to be real. Are you being sarcastic here or do you not respect someone standing up for something they believe in even if it comes at great personal cost? 

What were your thoughts on the protests in the 60's and more specifically, Ali's protesting his constription in the army?

Also, it would be nice if people remembered this country, that everyone loves so much, was founded by protesters in the first place. 

grumbler

August 30th, 2016 at 4:38 PM ^

As a veteran, I veto your claim to speak about what disrespects me.  I don't find Kapernick's actions disrespect me at all; what disrespects me is punks like you trying to tell everyone how I feel about some given person's actions.

Maybe millions of Americans are being stupid enough to get pissed at Kapernick rather than getting pissed off at racism, but they have the right to be morons.  Doesn't mean we have to pay any attention to them, though.

WindyCityBlue

August 30th, 2016 at 6:31 PM ^

...at least not explicilty so.  More so, I thinks he saying that CK was acting disrespectful, which is distinct from saying that you should feel disrepected. 

Besides, my father and former roommate (both military) think it was disrespectful to those who served.  Can they veto your thoughts?  No. 

Overall, I think you are being a little too harsh on the guy.

gbdub

August 30th, 2016 at 4:04 PM ^

And let's not pretend that Kap himself is immune from foot-in-mouth. This is a guy that posted a picture of the US flag and the confederate battle flag side by side and asserted there was no difference between them, and just the other day had an Instagram photo of the Houston floods (that killed people) captioned "Told you #7torms are coming!"

Maybe we ought to give the benefit of the doubt rather than jump on every off the cuff remark that can be twisted into evidence of nasty motivation.

Honestly my only issue with the whole situation is that Dallas players were apparently not allowed to have stickers supporting the cops who died there.

Personally, my take would be "America certainly has its problems, but none of them will be solved by being divisive. Standing for the anthem is a powerful symbol of unity, a symbolic act of setting aside our differences for a moment and celebrating the ideals of America that we all continue to strive for even though we've yet to fully achieve them".




Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

TheBorg

August 30th, 2016 at 4:52 PM ^

but your "my take..." is outstanding, as a succinct and on-the-mark observation of why CK was wrong to stay seated during the NA. His rationale, while in some instances valid, pale when compared to the disunity created by such a divisive act. There are appropriate venues to voice discontent and his refusing to stand for the National Anthem - an all it represents -  was not the appropriate forum. 

blue in dc

August 30th, 2016 at 6:07 PM ^

CK is one man. One man who did no more than sit during the national anthem. While he may be responsible for bringing the disunity to the surface this particular week, I'm pretty sure he did not create it. Further, if it was such a divisive act, why didn"t anyone notice it the first time he did it?

The only thing that has given the act any power is the number of people who have spent so much effort critisizing it. If they would ignore it, it would go away and be powerless.

Further, acknowledging that his points are in fact valid in some instances - which I think means that you are agreeing that there are in fact still people hurt by racism amd them suggesting that this injutice ,in fact pales in comparison to the horrors caused by CK sitting in his chair subscribes an awful lot of power to CK's butt.

gbdub

August 30th, 2016 at 6:26 PM ^

I quoted no one but myself. To be honest I think you're taking it a bit farther than I meant - I don't think Kap's actions are "such a divisive act" that anything could "pale in comparison to".

Just that we've decided to create a symbolic observance, and I'd prefer to focus on the positive potential of that symbol as a unifying thing rather than an opportunity to air grievances.

At the same time, blue in dc, I think it's wrong to expect everyone to dismiss Kap's actions as "no big deal" when Kap clearly intended it to be one. He didn't just absentmindedly sit down, or even privately sit and say "I have my reasons". This was clearly something he thought about and intended as a significant public protest. Kap can't have his cake and eat it too, dismissing the critics as making a big deal of nothing while accepting the praise for his "brave stand to raise awareness" (I don't think Kap actually is doing this, but you seem to be trying to make that argument for him).




Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

blue in dc

August 30th, 2016 at 7:19 PM ^

I get that Kap intended it to be a big deal, that doesn"t mean everyone else has too. I for instance (and I don"t think I am alone) would have responded to any posts on this topic if not for other posts incensed by what he did.

Thank you for taking the time to respond and I apologize for reading to much into your post.

His Dudeness

August 30th, 2016 at 4:05 PM ^

If you don't watch ESPN and don't have a Twitter/Facebook account then this was never even a story.

No need for this to be a front page post. If it were a post on the MGoBoard it would have been nuked.

In the conversation for worst front page post of all time.

Bravo.

bigmc6000

August 30th, 2016 at 4:26 PM ^

I wish there was something more than "totally agree" to say here but there really isn't. I mean, I think Rich Rods tenure here was more successful than this "front page" material.

I do wonder why the "no politics" rule got thrown to the wayside for a tl;dr post that was nothing but political silliness.




Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

stephenrjking

August 30th, 2016 at 4:07 PM ^

I would raise this issue categorically, but I will supply things this way instead: there has been persuasive, factually and contextually based pushback against the idea being floated in a number of circles that the third stanza of the anthem refers to African slavery, as opposed to the real and common issues of the time regarding mercenaries fighting for the British and impressment.

YMMV. But it's not nearly as clearcut as some are discussing. Most of the links I have discussing this would be considered political, and I don't want to get into that here, but I would encourage people to look past the worst possible interpretating of everything to research for themselves.

I disagree with Kaepernick, but I think this is getting blown way out of proportion. I do find that there is some double standard regarding the way some parties are defending him as opposed to how they would treat someone like Tim Tebow speaking out on issues he cares about, but whatever. There's a double standard on the other side of those two, as well. This, honestly, shouldn't be a big deal.

This can be a trap for Harbaugh, though. He has to be a leader of men, and he has to recruit them and hold their trust; how he says things matter. Fair or not, it matters. In my occupation, the things I say can matter. If I insult someone, they're not inclined to seek my counsel in parenting; if people in my city know me as a political commentator, they may have trouble seeing what is supposed to be my core role and message.

Is it fair? It doesn't really matter. It's real.

stephenrjking

August 30th, 2016 at 4:26 PM ^

Yeah, using the term "YMMV" means asserting that my arguments are clearly correct.

But since you asked:

 

Here's a link to the page quoted. (I looked it up since it came across the bow). Note that the issue of impressment is something well recognized in any discussion of the issues that prompted the war.

 

Jon06

August 30th, 2016 at 5:21 PM ^

I confess I didn't make it to the YMMV of your second paragraph because I was so pissed off by your question-begging use of "persuasive" and your contrast of "African slavery" with "real and common issues" (as if slavery weren't real!? of course you didn't mean that, but you did write something that suggests it).

But Kat McKinley's tweet* of something presenting one side of an issue is not exactly what I'd call persuasive. (For one thing, it makes the third verse absolutely terrible for a different reason: what exactly is to be celebrated in the deaths of Americans impressed against their will into service on British ships? Truly a horrible sentiment.) Here is a more balanced discussion, from a source that at least doesn't openly proclaim any political bias: http://www.snopes.com/2016/08/29/star-spangled-banner-and-slavery/.



So I think there's at least a non-crazy argument that "land of the free" in precisely the context of third verse and with a full view of the relevant facts means the land of the free as opposed to the enslaved who are, by that very phrase, being denied any right to the country they inhabit.



*I initially mistakenly said her tweet was unsourced. Now I see the url in her image. Still underwhelmed for the reasons given.

stephenrjking

August 30th, 2016 at 6:06 PM ^

Ah, so now it turns out you didn't read everything I wrote.

Yeah, I re-read that section you referenced and saw how it could be taken wrong before you mentioned it, but editing was out the window with your response. I actually wrote half a paragraph discussing slavery as the "original moral sin of the country" while also emphasizing that the impressment issues aren't just something invented by Francis Scott Key apologists in the 21st century, but in an attempt to recognize that there may be different interpretations (which is all that the snopes article establishes) I rewrote it and left the portion out. Perhaps I should have been more conscious of what morals I should signal here. 

But you got so upset at the word "persuasive" and the fact that someone would agree with you that you didn't bother to actually read everthing that I wrote. Persuasive doesn't mean that you have to be persuaded by it, just that some of the arguments (that tweet was concise, I have seen dozens of other discussions and quotations to that end that would be silly to spam this board with) are well-reasoned rather than (as some people seem to think) the mindless patriotic rantings of the enraged. 

Which brings me to a point: A lot of people sympathetic to Kaepernick are upset that people who oppose his choice are ignoring his actual reasoning in favor of partisan rage.

But there's plenty of that going around on both sides. Many that agree or sympathize with him refuse to extend the same courtesy they demand on his behalf to those they disagree with. You engaged in some of that same behavior when you thumped out your initial response to me; your second post, while still hostile, is a marked improvement in its effort to understand my reasoning and address it.

Too many never bother to slow down. It's all rage and insult and "You're bad, I'm good" and "No one could possibly disagree with me without malicious motives." And many people do this while professing to be open-minded. 

It is, honestly, the greatest disappointment I have with my home town. 

I don't agree with your follow-up, but I find it a much better response. 

Jon06

August 30th, 2016 at 10:45 PM ^

Instead of going meta, can you actually respond to my points? In particular,

1. On your interpretation, the verse is still awful, because on your interpretation Key is celebrating the deaths of American prisoners. Shouldn't we dislike the song for that reason, assuming your differently bloodthirsty interpretation is correct?

2.

"land of the free" in precisely the context of third verse and with a full view of the relevant facts means the land of the free as opposed to the enslaved who are, by that very phrase, being denied any right to the country they inhabit.

So shouldn't we think "land of the free" is in fact intended to denigrate and erase non-free people (like African slaves, in addition to American prisoners who, according to you, Key is calling slaves)? If not, why not? What about the context or which fact or facts gets you out of that reading?

 

FreddieMercuryHayes

August 30th, 2016 at 4:07 PM ^

I will say this in this whole debate: the only thing that really bothers me is how people think they own what the national anthem and flag stand for.  They stand for America.  They stand for everyone in America.  They stand for the good, the bad and they ugly.  They don't stand for just the wrongs and ills of society.  They don't stand for the idealistic picture of what America is or can be.  They don't stand just for the military and those who serve.  They stand for everyone and everything.  Saying Kap disrespected one great part of America because he didn't stand and then ignoring that he then also disrespected a bad part of America is an illogical sentiment to me.

M-Dog

August 30th, 2016 at 4:36 PM ^

He is free to do what he wants.  And Harbaugh is not required to comment on it and then defend or condemn it.

He got caught by surprise by a question that should not have been asked.  He does not represent Kaepernick.

Protip:  Reporters, it is also an innapropriate question to ask him about whether he supports Clinton or Trump.  So don't try it.

 

 

jaydubya

August 30th, 2016 at 4:08 PM ^

"[M]any, many people have died fighting for the country and values that flag symbolizes, and Kaepernick's actions can be interpreted as disrespect of that country and those values in that context. I can't know for sure, but it's quite possible Harbaugh feels that way.

This is all well and good as long as there's an acknowledgment that this discussion has valid opinions on both sides. Harbaugh's initial statement didn't leave room for that. His clarification did."

This story could be pared down to the above two paragraphs.

Or less:

JH misspoke when responding to a question for which he wasn't prepared, and appropriately corrected himself shortly thereafter.  The end.