Now he is back in Massachusetts for a visit and has been touching base with one-time co-workers who did not take a similar leap -- people who stayed on while he struck out.
I gather it is all a bit odd for him, reconnecting with people who stayed put. Why didn't they strike out and begin the coaching ladder ascent? A sliver of a voice suggests that not striking out is somehow less ballsy than making the big move that is full of uncertainty.
Or anyway, that was a part of my thinking when we talked a bit about it.
But then I had to correct myself. Not making a leap of faith is every bit as ballsy as making one. It is a choice that will echoechoecho. And it made me think of the realms of "want" and "need."
Who knows what another person wants and needs? Hell, it's hard enough to sort out and balance the two within, let alone judging someone else's choices. For some, the adventure of striking out and traveling in new lands is just the ticket -- the thing that will broaden their horizons and nourish the "want" plant that craves sustenance. But for others, the "need" for stability and love and family is paramount ... the card that trumps all others. Which is which? Which holds the winning formula? Which croons more sweetly? Which is more reliable?
I "want" X
I "need" Y
Is that comparing/contrasting apples-and-oranges or apples-and-apples or oranges-and-oranges? Are they the same and different or just different or just the same...?
It would be better if I kept my thoughts to myself when gauging the courage and cowardice, energy and weakness, wisdom and ignorance of another. If I sometimes cannot figure it out for myself, where do I get off applying my judgments to others?
But that, of course, is why the internet created blogs.