Jon would have done much better than Robb

[Minsc]

EXACTLY....An arrogant person would not do that. An arrogant person would have told Sam to piss off, and continued to act poorly. An arrogant person would not have listened, and he/she would have performed his duties poorly. Attempting to desert isn't a sign of arrogance he wanted to help his family. That makes him human, not arrogant.

No it just means that Jon isn't a complete idiot, in how an arrogant person will easily accept a position that is higher then his previous goal. Attempting to desert is performing your duties poorly, honestly besides luckily being there (along with having Ghost) during the Wright attack Jon never performs all that spectacular.

The alliance with the Tullys was of great value in many ways . . . but Cat made a lot more than one bad decision. Some of the Stark problems you can blame on Ned, some of them you can blame on Sansa, but when it comes to blame Cat has to get the lion's share.

Hardly, Ned and Robb both make much worse mistakes then her.

[Greymoon]

^

What's all this about "arrogance". Jon at the beginning of his journey was, but he changed a lot since then....and I honestly think Robb was pretty arrogant as well; and probably more arrogant than Jon -- that at least should be a shortcoming they both shared; they grew up together after all; but Jon's circumstances were a little more humbling imo than Robb's. I find Robb's friendship with Theon to be quite telling in that regard... we should not forget that most of what we know and see of Robb is through Catelyn's eyes.

Their circumstances are pretty much not comparable. Jon eventually made friends with Tyrion; with Grenn and Pyp, and Edd....(+ Satin) all lower born than him; he saw worth in Sam too; he got along with wildlings... I don't think Robb could have done any of that -- Remember Ser Waymar Royce? I think Robb would have had the same self-sufficient attitude for a while longer at the wall...Just saying... their stories are too different, and each boy was the best suited for whatever GRRM had in mind for them. Robb for the tragic hero dead before his time; and Jon for...whatever GRRM has in mind for him. ;)

As to martial prowess, Robb had a personal guard made up of 30 northern warriors. He had his own plot armor in a way -- the Karstark brothers; Alys's betrothed; the SmallJon; Dacey Mormont -- all of them died for him. Without Daryn Hornwood, Eddard and Torrhen Karstark; I'm pretty sure the Kingslayer would have done Robb in right quick.... he also had plenty of councilors; his mum; uncle Brynden; and other northern lords at his disposal.

Jon did too have "councilors" though; Jeor and co. appear more like fatherly figures; (once Jon is LC; he has Maester Aemon and Sam -- that's about it) and he did too show his ability to lead when he held the wall -- a task thrust upon him without any warning. He gave Stannis good council as well...

In any case; on this, I think they were both matched; both were sons of "the Ned" if you will.... though they are different too, in that Jon is a better sword ;) (and Robb the better lance)

Before Winterfell was lost; Jon could not have lead the North; unless he proved himself to be an exceptional commander. Had he been given the chance, he'd have made mistakes as well, though they'd have looked different imo. He would not have married a Jeyne; not even bedded such a meek girl....But beyond that it's difficult to say.

For the record, while Jon might not have fared better than Robb as KitN; I don't think Robb would have fared any better at the wall; and especially not with the wildlings. Jon shows a lot of adaptability; he often gets thrown out of the loop; does often need someone to point things out -- but his mind is never closed to new ideas and he's not stupid either -- rather observant. He listen; and learns; and that is a positive trait, very useful for a leader.... he does have his moments where things just fly over his head...I'm pretty sure that happens to everyone though; even to Robb.

The biggest difference between Robb and Jon was imo in the manner of their upbringing, their status: that determines their outlook, role and the way they are perceived. Robb seems an "All or nothing" sort of guy, who will not compromise; has a very naive view of right/wrong. He tries to maintain honor and virtue.... Jon seems more willing to compromise; more willing to bend the rules -- he's never been measured with the same expectations, his very birth has him branded as dishonorable -- at first he hates it; but slowly, he comes to see that brand as useful and adopts a more pragmatic approach...

[JonisHenryTudor]

No it just means that Jon isn't a complete idiot, in how an arrogant person will easily accept a position that is higher then his previous goal. Attempting to desert is performing your duties poorly, honestly besides luckily being there (along with having Ghost) during the Wright attack Jon never performs all that spectacular.

Hardly, Ned and Robb both make much worse mistakes then her.

His family was involved, most of us would do the same. Also, that might be a sign of neglecting the NW, but not arrogance which ultimately is my point.

The last statement, well several characters have been "lucky" but that is life whether fictional or not. Having said that, this is Jon's first encounter with an otherworldly being. Let's say this. A robber breaks into your home with a baseball bat. You would react the best you could to protect your family. Same scenario. A zombie breaks into your house with magical powers, what are you going to do? In the moment of confusion you probably won't exactly perform like the flawless Aragorn.

Even then, "poor" performance has nothing to do with arrogance. I disagree about the idiot comment. Jon expected to be a ranger, and then was told that he was a steward. That is absolutely frustrating for anyone to have your dreams dashed. No a single person would react well to that, because of frustration, not arrogance. An arrogant person would write the entire situation off, pout, quit, etc but never change his/her attitude. This is precisely what Janos Slynt encapsulates. Jon reacted, and that is not arrogance. After he reacted and Sam calmed him down, he decided Sam was right. Again that is not evidence of arrogance, but someone who desperately wanted to prove himself and has his hopes frustrated. He reacted quickly....

Having said I shall point to something LF said:

"Starks quick to react, slow of mind"

[David Selig]

This doesn't sound like a very good arguement. Invoking meta textual elements to make Jon look worse

And are you insinuating the Tullys were a positive influence on the Starks? That is laughable

Of course the Tully were a positive influence. Cat was smarter and more practical than Ned. Cat was Robb's best political adviser, the Blackfish his best military adviser. The Tully were the Starks main allies in the war.

Jon looks bad because he behaves like a doofus often but gets away with it. Like his desertion in AGOT. A mindbogglingly stupid act. But his magical wolf saved him from the consequences of it.

[PirateVergo]

I fail to understand how we can compare Bowen Marsh stabbing Jon because he is a fool who doesn't understand anything with Robb Stark getting betrayed because of the terrible decisions he made.

Robb had everything from the start, he was the son of Ned Stark that's why he did great, all he did was winning battles thanks to his competent bannermen.

Robb is a great military commander but a terrible leader.

Also according to Aemon Jon's burden is crueler than the Egg who was a king, so yea Jon was already in a more difficult position from the start.

Robb was gifted,

Robb gifted? Uh no.

[TheKingoftheSevenKingdoms]

Dude, Jon is my favourite character, but shut the fuck up man. Robb did the best he could on what he had. It's not his fault he was born a Tully. He was meant to be a King in the north, not like an uncharismatic and dry Jon Snow

You are also assuming Jon would do all this in his normal state. If Jon is trueborn, his personality may be a lot different. The northerners would never follow a bastard as commander, even if he is ned stark's son

[PirateVergo]

n. Robb did the best he could on what he had

Marrying Jeyne, killing Rickard Karstark, not telling what he planned to do to Edmure and then blaming him.

Robb was a great military commander and that's it, he was by no mean a great leader whereas Jon is the opposite, Mormont wanted to make him his successor for a reason.

n. Robb did the best he could on what he had

Well if Jon can get the respect and the trust of Stannis I don't see why he couldn't do the same thing with the Stark's bannermen.

[Minsc]

I fail to understand how we can compare Bowen Marsh stabbing Jon because he is a fool who doesn't understand anything with Robb Stark getting betrayed because of the terrible decisions he made.

Bowan didn't stab Jon because he didn't get anything, instead he stabbed Jon because Jon brilliantly decided to inform the entire NW that he is breaking his vows and forcing the Watch into a conflict with a superior force.

he was by no mean a great leader whereas Jon is the opposite, Mormont wanted to make him his successor for a reason.

Jon is hardly a great leader, and the fact Jorah Mormont, the man that makes Mace Tyrell look like Baelor Breakspear, wanted him as his successor proves nothing.

[Boarsbane]

Mormont wanted to make him his successor for a reason.

Yea, that reason being the plot. There were much better options available and he picks the arrogant, sulky bastard, it is contrived. There are plenty of men with more experience who could be groomed as replacements, but he picks the recruit whose only even remote signs of leadership skills is helping train other recruits how to fight, and that is only after Noye points out how huge a dick he is being.

[Alayne's Shadow.]

Have you ever been in a scenario where you were "superior" in one way or another? Meaning education, knowledge, talent, etc? People who don't have what you have, have a tendency to be incredibly jealous. On the other hand, people who have superior capabilities often disregard those underneath them. Jon was disliked by some because unlike most of the NW's he chose to go, he didn't rape, steal, etc from someone. He is a superior swordsman than most there, and as a result it bothered some. At first in frustration he reacts, but Tyrion gives him a piece of advice and he takes it thus aiding those around him.

In addition, I think you have to consider Jon's life. Yes he was allowed to live in a noble household, but he was treated poorly by Cat and had the stigma of bastard on him as a result. He just wanted to prove himself.

If you want to see the epitome of arrogance.....see Dany....

I have been in such scenario, and I admit I have acted with arrogance, same as Jon has. I don't think there's anything wrong with that. Jon is only Human. I think that Jon grew, and to deny that is to deny Jon's ability to learn and grow, which is damaging to his characterization, which seems to be exactly what you want to protect! Jon certainly had a fair share of arrogance, and he learned around that. That's not a crime, at all.

I do consider Jon's life. His life, as bastardy haunted him and Cat avoided, was still better than 99% of most people in Westeros. Jon, however, doesn't seem to see that in ASOIAF. He's as spoiled as his brothers, the only difference being the obvious. He's not the son of Catelyn Stark. But he's certainly groomed as Robb was. I don't see his superiority to the young wolf, still. I like Jon, and It's because I like him, that I understand that his development.

Yea, that reason being the plot. There were much better options available and he picks the arrogant, sulky bastard, it is contrived. There are plenty of men with more experience who could be groomed as replacements, but he picks the recruit whose only even remote signs of leadership skills is helping train other recruits how to fight, and that is only after Noye points out how huge a dick he is being.

Exactly. Jon was chosen because plot demanded it. I've always thought that part of the storyline seemed too contrived. Like Jeor deciding to give away the sword that has been in his family for centuries to some boy that saved his life. Wasn't Jon's duty to save the Lord Commander's life? Why is he getting free gifts for doing his task?

[The Bedding]

5)yeah because Jon never breaks his vow for sex.....

There was a cancel out of vows. Jon was honoring his vow to Quorin Halfhand, and thus effectively the NW, when he bedded Ygritte. It was his duty to please that booty.

[The Bedding]

not telling what he planned to do to Edmure and then blaming him.

Thisssss! I'm a Robb fan, but this one really weighs on my mind. As I read, I couldn't fault Edmure for what he did. It was an ok gamble to keep Edmure in the dark for more secrecy but it failed. It was Robb's gamble and he should have accepted the blame.

[PirateVergo]

Bowan didn't stab Jon because he didn't get anything, instead he stabbed Jon because Jon brilliantly decided to inform the entire NW that he is breaking his vows and forcing the Watch into a conflict with a superior force.

Yea that was stupid Jon did a big mistake right there, he is farm from being a perfect leader, but how is this decision as bad as Robb basically saying "fuck off" to the Frey?

Jon is the only one at the wall who really try to fight against the others.

Jon made a mistake but unlike Robb there is something behind it.

Jon is hardly a great leader,

Jon is consistently dealing with people more important than him (Mormont,Mance,Stannis) and still he managed to get respect and trust from them.

This is charisma, Jon being a great leader is what make him a competent character, because even if he's decent with a sword he's still far from being Loras Tyrell.

Not to mention that Jon's burden is crueler than the Egg's according to Aemon, it's easy to be a king when you have men to follow you whatever you does.

Yea, that reason being the plot. There were much better options available and he picks the arrogant, sulky bastard, it is contrived. There are plenty of men with more experience who could be groomed as replacements, but he picks the recruit whose only even remote signs of leadership skills is helping train other recruits how to fight, and that is only after Noye points out how huge a dick he is being.

Exactly. Jon was chosen because plot demanded it.

Is this a troll or you guys are actually serious?

Mormont wanted Jon as his successor because he saw much promise in him, what's the problem with that?

There is no thing such as plot in the story, GRRM obviously wanted to make Jon his successor but you can't say Mormont's decision is wrong because of that.

[Boarsbane]

Is this a troll or you guys are actually serious?

Mormont wanted Jon as his successor because he saw much promise in him, what's the problem with that?

What promise? He had to be nudged into actually realizing that him being so superior to the other recruits in arms is because he has been training most his life and they have never held a sword. This so called "promise" should mean nothing compared to the years of experience other members have, but Jon is special. He is a recruit for godsake, how is it even possible for him to show enough promise to be considered for LC before he has even passed basic training?

[King Crow]

What promise? He had to be nudged into actually realizing that him being so superior to the other recruits in arms is because he has been training most his life and they have never held a sword. This so called "promise" should mean nothing compared to the years of experience other members have, but Jon is special. He is a recruit for godsake, how is it even possible for him to show enough promise to be considered for LC before he has even passed basic training?

I always assumed that Jon was being groomed to be a future lord commander, not particularly Mormont's replacement. I believe the more able candidates like Qhorin and Benjen didn't need any grooming from Mormont, so he choose someone young who showed promise. I think where Jon showed promise was both his talk to Maester Aemon about Sam, and how after receiving advice from Donal he actually improved his behavior. When Waymar receives advice he completely disregards it,

[Minsc]

Yea that was stupid Jon did a big mistake right there, he is farm from being a perfect leader, but how is this decision as bad as Robb basically saying "fuck off" to the Frey?

Jon is the only one at the wall who really try to fight against the others.

Jon made a mistake but unlike Robb there is something behind it.

Jon didn't get stabbed because he was attempting to fight the Others, instead because he successfully alienate his lieutenants.

Jon is consistently dealing with people more important than him (Mormont,Mance,Stannis) and still he managed to get respect and trust from them.

This is charisma, Jon being a great leader is what make him a competent character, because even if he's decent with a sword he's still far from being Loras Tyrell.

Dealing with various important people doesn't make one a great leader, especially seeing how Jon isn't one. Also someone with charisma wouldn't alienate his followers enough that they attempt to kill him.

[PirateVergo]

Jon didn't get stabbed because he was attempting to fight the Others, instead because he successfully alienate his lieutenants.

He got stabbed for many reasons, he allowed the wildlings to stay at the wall, Jon did a mistake, but there is no character who's trying as hard as him to stop the WW.

So yea his intentions were obviously for the sake of NW.

In comparison Robb had to marry Jeyne to save her honor but that's because he did the mistake of sleeping with her at the start.

You cannot compare these 2 situations, as I said Jon is in a more difficult position, his men aren't some lords who bend the knee easily, he is their lord commander, but it's not a safe position and Mormont's death is a perfect example of how dangerous it is.

Dealing with various important people doesn't make one a great leader, especially seeing how Jon isn't one. Also someone with charisma wouldn't alienate his followers enough that they attempt to kill him.

That does make him a great leader, if you can win the respect and the trust of people like Stannis and Mance and even make them listen to your advice then you definitely have qualities as a leader,

Jon's charisma has absolutely nothing to do with what happened,he did a mistake and lost the trust of his men.

[Minsc]

He got stabbed for many reasons, he allowed the wildlings to stay at the wall, Jon did a mistake, but there is no character who's trying as hard as him to stop the WW.

So yea his intentions were obviously for the sake of NW.

In comparison Robb had to marry Jeyne to save her honor but that's because he did the mistake of sleeping with her at the start.

You cannot compare these 2 situations, as I said Jon is in a more difficult position, his men aren't some lords who bend the knee easily, he is their lord commander, but it's not a safe position and Mormont's death is a perfect example of how dangerous it is.

The reason that he was stabbed wasn't because of his actions for the sake of NW, instead it was because he got too emotionally invested in protecting his family.

I disagree that Jon was in a more difficult position, seeing how Robb was having to fight against highly experienced lords in a war against all odds.

Mormont died because he was an idiot.

That does make him a great leader, if you can win the respect and the trust of people like Stannis and Mance and even make them listen to your advice then you definitely have qualities as a leader,

Jon's charisma has absolutely nothing to do with what happened,he did a mistake and lost the trust of his men.

No it doesn't, a great leader doesn't get killed by his own men within a month of his leadership (Moreover, Robb equally had very experienced lords follow him). It shows that he doesn't have a great deal of charisma.

[PirateVergo]

The reason that he was stabbed wasn't because of his actions for the sake of NW, instead it was because he got too emotionally invested in protecting his family.

Bowen Marsh was already showing his discontent with Jon's actions way before the pink letter.

I disagree that Jon was in a more difficult position, seeing how Robb was having to fight against highly experienced lords in a war against all odds.

He was in a way more difficult position, Jon is at the wall, with a king who ask things he can't give him, he need to deal with the wildlings, the queen's men and his own brothers, he does not have any authority over half of the people at the wall and still he's supposed to hold this place against the White Walkers.

Robb had bannermen and highly experienced lords on his side, Jon has nothing but rapist and thief.

It's not even close, Robb's war was far from unwinnable.

No it doesn't, a great leader doesn't get killed by his own men

Julius Caesar is one of the the greatest leader who ever lived, he was murdered by his "men", the same thing happened to many other great leaders of our history.

And how long it takes is irrelevant to the discussion, in the end both Robb and Jon were betrayed by their men because they made mistakes.

Moreover, Robb equally had very experienced lords follow him)

He is Ned's son and the heir of Winterfell, take his title away he's nothing put him in Jon's shoes he would have died beyond the wall.

[LordStoneheart]

Robb would have failed long before if wasn't for his mother, Brynden, and many others Riverlords, and yes, including the Freys. They were a help until Robb broke his vow.

"Poisonous Tully influence?" How about "Poisonous Northern Influence?" Roose Bolton, Rickard Karstark, his own honor that made him marry Jeyne.