Jennifer
New member
- Joined:
- Jun 5, 2010
- Posts:
- 53
- Liked Posts:
- 42
I've read most of the Cutler posts and have heard some of what ESPN radio is saying and find it kind of fascinating because the vast majority of those commenting couch the issue as one of "toughness."
No surprise there because the sports culture is one that if player has a pulse he should be playing; yes a touch of hyperbole.
Over the last few years I've on more than one occasion wondered if a player playing hurt is always in his team's best interest. The truth of the matter is that players sometimes play hurt solely to prove their manhood while ignoring the impact on the ability of their team to win with them playing.
It it obvious that Cutler could have played since he could both walk and throw the ball. And he might have been tough enough to have done so. But with his injury would his playing have increased the Bears chances of winning or lessened them?
No surprise there because the sports culture is one that if player has a pulse he should be playing; yes a touch of hyperbole.
Over the last few years I've on more than one occasion wondered if a player playing hurt is always in his team's best interest. The truth of the matter is that players sometimes play hurt solely to prove their manhood while ignoring the impact on the ability of their team to win with them playing.
It it obvious that Cutler could have played since he could both walk and throw the ball. And he might have been tough enough to have done so. But with his injury would his playing have increased the Bears chances of winning or lessened them?