Like many others who watched the Bears fall to the Packers on Sunday, we at Sports Intelligence Analysts observed Bears quarterback Jay Cutler’s behavior and body language on the sidelines with great interest. Unlike many fans and some players, however, we did not leap to the conclusion that what we observed indicated that he was dogging it and actually could have or should have still been in the game.
The reason we didn’t jump to conclusions about Cutler is very simple. Anyone who watched Cutler on the sidelines can only guess at the specific cause of the behaviors he exhibited. Yes, we can say Cutler appeared dejected, uncommunicative, and no longer had his head in the game. However, in order to make an accurate assessment of what such behaviors really mean, we need one additional critical piece of information: What’s the specific cause of those behaviors? Was Cutler’s dejection a reflection of his disappointment because of his poor performance? Was it because of his tremendous disappointment that his injury precluded him from going back into the game? Was it a reflection of the pain he was in and worry about how serious the injury might be?
In order to most accurately assess human behavior, one must identify the stimulus or cause of the behavior, and then evaluate the response. In Cutler’s case, the information about the stimulus that was missing had to do with just how serious the injury was. Without that information, one can only guess at what Cutler’s behavior really meant.
While the U.S. Constitution affords us all the right to free speech and to voice our opinions, to do so recklessly, relying mainly on our bias and grandiose need to get our names in the media yet again (think Maurice Jones-Drew and Philip Rivers) is incredibly unfair. Whether Cutler has the “heart” to be a successful NFL quarterback is a fair question. But to base the answer on behavior we don’t know the cause of is unreliable and, depending on one’s motive, perhaps even shameful.
No comments:
Post a Comment