OL Jacob Gannon has left the ISU program

[Wesley]

This may be an honest question but is it a serious one?

I don't think many rational people would be piling on Gannon if he quit during the offseason. And NO ONE would say anything about his committment if he went to the NFL last year to make millions of dollars. This issue is about the timing of his decision. Why quit one game in?

A lot of people talked about Brandon Jensen until he came back and our arms were open. If Jacob had quit in August, he would have received attention in any case. You do not quit on the Cyclones would have been the message if you could start.

 

[roundball]

Timing.

And you don't think it's at all possible that the timing of his decision may have been due to factors beyond his control? Or because of things he shouldn't be held personally responsible for?

The kid cited "burnout" as one of those factors, per a tweet from someone who supposedly asked him. Do you think a person makes a conscious decision about when they get burned out? The moment burnout hits, do you think he has the ability to say "now's not a good time, you should have shown up a few months ago"?

Give the kid the benefit of doubt, for crying out loud.

 

[snowcraig2.0]

I understand the word rational. I understand logic and emotion. I understand that it is pointless to continue to present a position to someone who wants to paint it in terms of the absolute (inaccurately, I might add). So, for those that believe roundball is representing MY arguments when he attempts to pick apart my posts, here you go.

These are MY words:
I believe that if you make a commitment, you should honor it.
If you make a promise, you should keep it.
If you start something, you should finish it.

These are descriptions the work ethic that I believe in, that I try to maintain, that I taught my children, that I want to see from people at work, in my family, in my circle of friends, from society in general. Broken promises and commitments not honored are not ways to build & maintain trust and community.

Here's the part of my words roundball keeps ignoring:

SOMETIMES YOU CAN'T.

But that doesn't mean you shouldn't try.

So, what is your point?

 

[RubyClone]

Barring some actual "personal issue". Gannon = Staiger.

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-bas...a-state-cyclones-move-lucca-staiger-departure

He showed no signs of pulling off what would ultimately be one of the most selfish moves a player on any team could make.

He quit on his teammates, on the staff and on the school Tuesday when he walked into Iowa State coach Greg McDermott's office and said he was going to play in Germany.

Andy Katz

 

[GTO]

This thread has gotten unnecessarily long, but I started it and I will finish it! No way I'm quitting on this thread.

 

[Wesley]

This cannot help the locker room. Maybe we will find out who the leaders are on this team.

 

[IAStubborn]

I'm not sure you understand what "rational" means. It's not the same thing as good, or moral, or right. It means that decisions and actions are guided by reason, facts, and logic...not emotion or value judgments. I don't want to live in a world where everyone exclusively behaves rationally and entirely without emotion, but you simply can't state that "if you start something, finish it" is rational. If it were, it would read more like "finish something if it's worthwhile to do so".

As far as how it's worked out for me? I've quit things both when I should and shouldn't have, and stuck with things under the same circumstances. Some decisions were emotional reactions, and some were made rationally. Some turned out to be good moves, others mistakes. Overall, rationality has served me far better than the alternative...and even when I've turned out to be wrong, I'm infinitely more content with decisions I make that are based on clear, logical thinking rather than doggedly adhering to some belief that quitting is inherently wrong. If that's "part of the problem" to you, so be it.

The problem is is you include value judgements as not rational, and do not value in your judgement the value people place on loyalty. You would be right if we operated each independently in a vacuum. We do not. The value others have of us does matter, and this young man will pay a price (how much is debatable and circumstantial) for this decision because at least some people will view it negatively. Whether that negative out ways the positive is what he should have considered. I don't know the answer to that as I don't know the circumstances.

 

[Doctor]

This cannot help the locker room. Maybe we will find out who the leaders are on this team.

I hope it wasn't Gannon.

 

[Dandy]

Bubbles' analysis:

 

[Bret44]

This thread has gotten unnecessarily long, but I started it and I will finish it! No way I'm quitting on this thread.

Ok, throw me some likes along the way if you want too!

 

[Bret44]

Bubbles' analysis:

This is what this situation needs:

 

[GTO]

I think the issue with the whole argument is that both Roundball and ImJustKCCLone are looking at each other's points of views as absolutes. ImJustKCCLone has clearly stated her statement is not an absolute, but it is an admirable quality for people to follow through in their commitments (unless there are extenuating circumstances). Roundball's post reads as if finishing what you start is NEVER rational, but I'm assuming he means ALWAYS sticking to finishing what you start is irrational (I hope that is what he means, otherwise I'm in the same boat as ImJustKCCLone). They might be saying the same thing in different ways, but are now stuck in the semantics of the arguments... This might drag on a bit more...

 

[IAStubborn]

Okay let's just stop with the Fizer, Tinsley and White comparisons right now. Completely different. Gannon isn't leaving early to go play professionally for millions of dollars.

Or mid season

 

[Dandy]

This is what this situation needs:

Most fans as they left Jack Trice on Saturday:

 

[ImJustKCClone]

GTO: CF isn't letting me quote you....but nope. I'm done. You summed it up nicely.

(btw: just use KC if you want...it will save you some typing!)

 

[IAStubborn]

So you agree that there are exceptions to your edicts, which again makes me ask why you even mention them? Why spend so much time discussing the standard of conduct you hold for others when:

A) it probably doesn't have any bearing here (the kid was ON the team for four years, so it can hardly be claimed that he didn't try)

B) you have absolutely no idea why he left the team

Why go to such lengths to outline your personal rules regarding quitting when you don't have the slightest bit of information to know whether they apply to Gannon? Do you just like watching yourself type? (with almost 5,800 posts in just 14 months, I may have answered my own question)

Because the world isn't black and white? You are the one making a mountain over a simple statement. If you believe that we shouldn't have principles or values because they are not absolute you have:
A) an over simplified view of the world or
B) are an engineer

Just kidding engineers

 

[CycloneErik]

Because the world isn't black and white? You are the one making a mountain over a simple statement. If you believe that we shouldn't have principles or values because they are not absolute you have:
A) an over simplified view of the world or
B) are an engineer

Just kidding engineers

Is there a difference between A and B?

 

[roundball]

The problem is is you include value judgements as not rational, and do not value in your judgement the value people place on loyalty. You would be right if we operated each independently in a vacuum. We do not. The value others have of us does matter, and this young man will pay a price (how much is debatable and circumstantial) for this decision because at least some people will view it negatively. Whether that negative out ways the positive is what he should have considered. I don't know the answer to that as I don't know the circumstances.

I'm not saying that at all. A person deciding to not to quit who considers how their decision will influence others' perception of them is not the same thing as deciding not to quit because "mama taught me to finish what I start". The former uses reason, and the latter is just adhering to dogma.

 

[tippyclone]

In other news.I saw Biff Hammer taking inventory at the Grimes Wal Mart this morning. ..True story

 

[roundball]

I think the issue with the whole argument is that both Roundball and ImJustKCCLone are looking at each other's points of views as absolutes. ImJustKCCLone has clearly stated her statement is not an absolute, but it is an admirable quality for people to follow through in their commitments (unless there are extenuating circumstances). Roundball's post reads as if finishing what you start is NEVER rational, but I'm assuming he means ALWAYS sticking to finishing what you start is irrational (I hope that is what he means, otherwise I'm in the same boat as ImJustKCCLone). They might be saying the same thing in different ways, but are now stuck in the semantics of the arguments... This might drag on a bit more...

Yes, this is what I'm saying.