Jay Cutler's Injury Reveals More About Critics Than Cutler's Toughness

Last night's NFC Championship game between Chicago and Green Bay was a fascinating encounter for all of the right reasons. The real stories today should be both that the Packers are deservedly in the Super Bowl with one of the best QB's in the league at their helm (again), and also that young Caleb Hanie almost achieved a comeback of epic proportions. Of course, neither is the top story on twitter, or ESPN, or NFL Network, because a group of current and ex-players have used Jay Cutler's exit from the game in the third quarter as a stick to beat him with. Never mind that he was pulled from the game by Doctors, never mind that Centre Olin Kreutz vividly recounted Cutler's knee shaking in the huddle after a hit, and his 'amazement' that the Quarterback returned after half time. Never mind that he was diagnosed with a torn MCL this morning Never mind all of that, because nobody likes Jay Cutler, so he's fair game.

"All I'm saying is that he can finish the game on a hurt knee ... I played the whole season on one ..."

Maurice Jones-Drew

"Cmon cutler u have to come back," Cardinals safety Kerry Rhodes wrote on Twitter. "This is the NFC championship if u didn't know!"

Kerry Rhodes

“As a guy how had 20 knee surgeries you’d have to drag me out on a stretcher to Leave a championship game!”

Mark Schlereth

“Im telling u in the playoffs u must drag me off the field. All the medicine in pro lockerooms this dude comes out! I apologize bear fans! . . . Folks i never question a players injury but i do question a players heart."

Deion Sanders

If Jay Cutler's leg injury ends his career, will Deion Sanders apologise for his comments? Seems unlikely. At what point these players achieved their medical qualifications is unclear, though it is understood that Sanders was on hand to examine Cutler's knee up close and personal from the NFL Network Studios. Unfortunately for the usually likeable Jones-Drew, he has thrown himself under a bus big time. If I was a harsh man, I'd ask how on earth he knows what it's like to play in an AFC Championship game?

BUT I'M NOT!

In all seriousness, the outpouring of scorn on Cutler before all the facts were known exposed the distaste for Cutler in the media on a grand scale. Does he warrant it? Perhaps. He doesn't seem to want any of the bonhomie and banter with members of the media that many players enjoy. He's not easy to talk to, he doesn't respond well at press conferences, and his body language is always that of a man content to wallow in his own world regardless of the game situation. Yeah, he warrants the criticism for all of those things.

But toughness? Nah. I'm not buying it. Cutler has shown in his career so far - often to his detriment - that he is a stubborn, cavalier type of QB, much like Brett Favre - indeed comparisons are often made between the two - so the idea of him actively seeking to stay on the sideline at a critical point of the season... has anyone even remotely applied any form of logic to this? Why would Cutler pass up a relatively short field, like the one that faced replacement Todd Collins? Why on earth, given everything Cutler has faced this year in terms of punishment and hits, would he choose that particular moment to quit on his team-mates? None of it makes sense.

No, what makes sense is that hypocrites like Deion Sanders, Michael Irvin and Maurice Jones-Drew, all of whom have missed plenty of games through injury in the past, decided that the widely hated Cutler was an easy target. It exposes the unsettling undercurrent of deceit that Sanders peddles, as he stubbornly refused to back down on NFLN last night in the face of reports that in fact it was the doctors that pulled Cutler. Instead, Prime muddled through a well rehearsed "perception vs reality" piece that in fact told us absolutely nothing. The perception amongst idiots was that Cutler quit on the Bears. The reality was that he didn't. That's all there is to it, but somehow Deion Sanders refuses to accept that he got it completely wrong.

The argument that players have played through X Y and Z doesn't hold water. Philip Rivers was poor in the AFC Championship 3 years ago playing with a torn ACL. Coach Norv Turner gave him a choice, but crucially advised Rivers not to play, citing the team's ability to return to the playoffs in the future. What people forget is that Rivers playing on, or Cutler playing on, may not actually be what is best for the team in the short or long term. If Cutler couldn't plant his foot, then he was useless to his team and was frankly more of a liability than anything. What would the Bears gain from further risking his knee in return for an ineffective at best performance? As far as the long term consequences, Carson Palmer has been awful since his knee injury in 2006, while Tom Brady took almost a full 12 months to recover from a torn ACL in the first game of 2008. If Cutler needed 12 months to rehab his injury, that puts him out for a whole season. While it's a worst case scenario, the fact is that coaches and doctors have to be aware of the repercussions that come with an injury to a franchise QB.

I have a friend who called Cutler a coward last night. He doesn't know Cutler, he just watched the same thing that we all watched. he didn't know the situation, yet he made a judgement. That's life, unfortunately, but hopefully if there is any positive lesson from this, it's that some of those people who love the sound of their own voice on TV and on Twitter, will wait for the facts to emerge before making assumptions about another player's injury.

Like a lot of people, I'm now actively awaiting the response to the next injury suffered by any of those so quick to judge Cutler last night. I'll leave the last word, though, to a surprising voice of reason in the whole sorry affair:

Turned on Espn and reading the tweets current/former players have sent out based on Cutlers injury.what if he's really hurt bad :( I'm sad

Chad Ochocinco on Twitter

Revis, Jets agree contract

According to multiple sources, Darrelle Revis has ended his holdout from the New york Jets, pouring a small but effective bucket of cold water on speculation that he would hold out the entire season.

No terms of the deal are available as yet, but Revis was thought to be looking for a deal to eclipse Nnamdi Asomugha's $45m 3 year deal, which he signed in 2009. Expect to see Revis nudging the $16m mark, but there's every possibility that Revis won't get what he was asking for, as despite every insistence otherwise, he is generally not seen as the type of character who would put money ahead of both his team and his legacy.

With the new season less than a week away, it's no surprise that both sides have found a way to get a deal done - the question is just how long will it take Revis to get back in the saddle?

5 NFL analysts who should be benched immediately.

I just finished reading the worst article on the NFL I have ever read. If you wish to experience castration in mental form, please read Mike Florio's Sporting News article "5 quarterbacks who should be benched". Really the article headline on Profootballtalk had 'now' at the end, but in the interest of pedantry, let's forget that...

Why has this got me so riled? Because it sums up the vapid, vacant, 'if-I-say-something-shocking-enough-people-will-give-me-money' atmosphere that surrounds the world of the NFL. The problem, of course, is that in a competitive environment dominated by alpha-males, a guy who makes reasoned points without shouting can simply be ignored by his colleagues, which in turn gives the impression that his personality may not fit in the vat of testosterone that is an NFL related broadcast.

Without further ado, here's the five worst analysts in the NFL today, starting with the man who 'inspired' this article:


Mike Florio (Profootballtak.com, Sportingnews.com, NBC Sports)

It's hard to write a critique of a man who is quite self-aware in many respects, but Florio is so persistently inane that it's about time somebody offered him a dose of reality.

I actually like this guy. he has a sense of humour, he offers a legal interpretation every now and then, and in total fairness, he has built his website from the ground up based almost entirely on his work. Who doesn't have time for a guy who has lived the dream that us armchair analysts could one day be taken seriously and referenced on respectable websites?

Unfortunately, Florio's ego has become a bit of a problem.

I don't know where to begin with the article above regarding quarterbacks being benched. There is so much wrong with the tone, the content, and the way it has been marketed ('LOOK HOW SHOCKING MY STATEMENT IS!!!') that we could spend all day on this crap. instead, let's focus on Florio's credentials as far as personnel decisions:









Oh. He doesn't have any. The problem with Florio is that he's believed his own hype to the point where he wants to be taken seriously without putting hard work in. You think you can evaluate a QB based on half a mini-camp in some cases? The guy literally suggests that Jimmy Clausen should replace Matt Moore and then backs it up with the baffling reasoning that 'Fox has to prove that Clausen is the long-term answer to save his own job'. What? But what if Moore is better? We don't actually know do we?

Fox doesn't need to be tied to Clausen as long as he's winning, which he has a better chance of doing with a guy who has actually won in the NFL previously, than with an untried rookie - no matter how talented. I struggle to comprehend the mindset behind this kind of writing, because it hasn't been thought through in even the most basic form. How can he be taken seriously writing something like (and this is a direct quote) 'if the Broncos thought enough of Tebow to trade back into Round 1 to draft him, they simply should get him on the field.'

Yes, that's the expert there, churning out rubbish that would embarrass a drunken barfly at 1am, shouting and drooling into some guy's ear about how his team should have gone after McNabb, regardless of how he may fit into the offence. Oh wait, he actually did do that about Arizona! Incredible.

A quick glance at the sportingnews.com site shows another of Florio's articles '10 possible landing spots for T.O.' Just the ten teams Mike? JUST A THIRD OF THE FUCKING LEAGUE? Wow, well that doesn't seem like you've just picked the ten worst teams and then thrown him in there regardless of their situation! This is another of Florio's tricks. He will try to throw in as many possibilities as he can so that when eventually T.O. signs, he can claim that he was right. This happens in other articles too, using the old 'here's my prediction in great detail, but I'll qualify that by putting the complete opposite as a possible outcome at the end of the article' trick.

Great work Mike.

Florio should be culled immediately. He has no basis to make these sweeping judgements, and he's become slightly confused, it would seem, about his role. Why do people visit FLorio's 'rumour mill'? Could it be for rumours? I think it could! Unfortunately, as traffic has boomed and NBC has pumped money into the rumour-mill, Mike has changed the tone of the site dramatically. The high volume of posts has been replaced with a group of staff writers who seemingly just keep the place ticking over until Florio churns out his 5 posts a day that are essentially all opinion. The ratio of rumour:opinion has changed to about 1:5, indicating Florio's belief that people were visiting his site because of him, rather than because of the content.

Here's the deal Mike: They weren't, and they aren't.

Nobody has any respect for your opinion on actual football matters. You have time and again exposed the fact that you don't actually watch that much football, so why bother embarrassing yourself by commenting on personnel, tactics, and in general anything to do with on-field issues. To be successful as a 'personality', you need to accept that you are nothing more than a mouthpiece for the rumours. Your 'league sources' are a handy asset, but your outlandish 'take' on their whisperings is often cringeworthy.

So stick to the rumours Mike, it's what you're good at.

Warren Sapp (NFL Network)

Ah the 'QB KILLA' himself. Warren Sapp. A beast of a man, one of the most dominant interior linemen to ever play the game. One of the worst analysts to ever grace our screens.

Sapp's unique selling point seems to be his ability to... er... shout in a funny manner? He just shouts. That's it. What is most frustrating about this is that we saw during his playing career that Sapp had a personality that should have transferred to the small-screen quite well. Instead, he's an overbearing loudmouth who's jokes seem contrived and unfunny.

Even when discussing D-line, the position he played, Sapp offers little. He rarely gives us the kind of perspective that say, Rod Woodson can. Woodson is able to say a lot without talking very much, and often gives you the insight into what a DB may be thinking given a certain situation. Sapp is the opposite, falling back on cliches and bonhomie in an effort to disguise the fact that he is unable to articulate why he was any good at football in the first place.

Warren Sapp has a small body of work compared to some of the names on this list, but he has not done anything to suggest he belongs as a long-term fixture on our screens. Oh, one last thing - GOOD ANSWER! (at this point Warren claps his hands until Rich Eisen somehow cringes his way into ending the segment)

Gene Wojciechowski (ESPN)

Woj (I'm just calling him Woj. You understand, I'm sure) shouldn't really be on this list. I'm not being gracious here, the idiot shouldn't have been allowed the soapbox to invade our sport with his trite and incredibly sycophantic lunacy.

Whoever employed Woj as senior national sports columnist should have done so on the proviso that he never again post his anus-suckling 'columns' whenever he realises that an issue is big enough for him to comment on. Here's a great story that Gene wrote recently:

Clausen's fall linked to Big Ben fallout Gene Wojciechowski, ESPN.com

The fallout from Ben Roethlisberger's troubles had a big impact on Casey Clausen in the draft, Gene Wojciechowski writes.

April 23, 2010

Of course, having read the first name on this list of morons, you will be aware that the QB in question is named Jimmy. I feel like I've insulted you by pointing that out, but hey, that's the kind of respect I have for you. A fully blown idiot like Woj just plain old forgets what the hell he was talking about half way through the initial sentence of a story.

The biggest issue our friend Woj confronted, was that of Brett Favre. When Favre flip-flopped on his decision to retire - quite unfairly in most sane people's eyes - Woj backed him to the hilt. He wrote damning character assassinations on Green Bay Packers GM Ted Thompson, based on nothing more than... well... um... the fact that Gene loved Brett Favre.

You see, Gene REALLY loves Brett Favre, I mean REALLY. When he was traded to the Jets, Woj lambasted Thompson for trading away their best QB. Was that true? Maybe, but Aaron Rodgers turned out pretty good huh? Well surely Gene could accept that Rodgers' statistically better season in '08 was at least some vindication of the move right? Wrong! Gene says that the Packers may still have been better with Favre.

The point is, he may be right, but it's the manner in which he blindly defends Favre and his melodramatic ways, the way he castigates a young player like Rodgers purely because he has the nerve to have earned the faith of his team, and the way he saunters into the NFL world to defend people on things he knows nothing about. Woj was wrong about Rodgers because Thompson kept his job, the Packers made the playoffs, and they now have a solid basis for the next 5 years at least. Even the Vikings don't know where they stand with Favre now, even if he did lead them to the NFC title game. Would the Packers change their decision knowing what they do now? I doubt it.

Woj has a long list of players in various sports that he has authored books on, co-written with, and generally cupped the balls of, over the last decade or so. Unfortunately, everything he writes is tainted by the knowledge that he would defend his favourites with such desperate lines as "Even if you can't stand the idea of another Favre unretirement, you have to admire him for working his way around a system usually stacked in favor of the teams, not the players. "

Yeah, great work Gene. Shame you weren't so idealistic when you were calling for a 25yr old Aaron Rodgers to lose his job (and many millions of incentive dollars) back in 2008 huh?

Next.

Mel Kiper Jr. (ESPN)

Unlucky Mel, not even an NFL analyst if we're going to get pedantic, yet still worthy of inclusion on a list like this due to his sheer volume of on-the-record mistakes.

Mel is a bit of a popular target for people looking to make a trendy statement about how little the talking heads know about the draft. You will often hear people talking about him, rattling off his mistakes and laughing at his ridiculous haircut (Peter King, consider yourself lucky that you are quite good at your job) and general demeanour. These are all worthy things, and these people should be congratulated wholeheartedly. Perhaps buy them a beer!

That's it. I suggest you buy people who slag off Mel Kiper jr a beer. What? You want more? For fu...

Ok so first of all Mel has a difficult job. You ever tried doing a mock draft? Guaranteed 99% of mock drafts will be wrong by pick 7, the rest will be done by pick 10. The problem is, Mel and his fellow draft gurus build up players to believe in their own hype, in the media's evaluation of them, when in reality, NFL teams are looking for very different things from a player to what these so called 'experts' are looking for.

This may mean nothing to us as fans, but what about the players? Imagine a guy like Kiper talks you up to be a second round pick, like Central Michigan's Dan LeFevour. What do you do on day one of the draft? The crushing disappointment of being taken in the sixth round must really be quite painful. The same can be said for Andre Woodson, the Kentucky prospect who was tabbed as a first rounder by Kiper, only to slide all the way to the sixth. Woodson is now out of the league, playing in the UFL.

Is that fair on a kid? Most people will argue that they should know from their experiences with teams whether they're likely to get drafted, but that is rubbish. They are guys of 21, 22. They will watch a guy like Kiper and take his word as gospel. Unfortunately, for many of them, the riches they were promised never materialise. But why is this?

Part of Kiper's problem is that he is evaluating the college game and then has absolutely no ability to transfer what he sees into an accurate assessment of the player in the NFL. This is because the guy doesn't have the same passion for the pro game, seemingly. If that truly is the case, then why bother doing a mock? Why bother ranking the players in terms of the NFL? Surely the answer for Mel is to rank players based purely on their college play and leave the question of where they fit into the NFL ranks for those who know what they're looking for in a kid?

Sadly, this doesn't give Kiper his three days of airtime in Spring, where he gets to rattle off just how much he knows about a kid from Bowling Green. He needs to make predictions, because predictions are what idiots feed on. If he stuck to what he saw, people might actually realise that someone like Mike Mayock watches enough NFL and film of prospects to be a far more legitimate 'draft guru' than Mel.

Oh, and those predictions? What about claiming that the 2001 New England Patriots would finish 0-16? The bumbling Pats, of course, would vindicate this assessment by winning just one of the super bowls they played in during the season.

I'll tell you the rest at Mike Williams' hall of fame ceremony

Deion Sanders (NFL Network)

Oh god. I didn't want to do this, I really didn't.

Let's just be clear: If you don't like watching Deion most of the time, you must be nuts. The guy has more charisma in a single pubic hair than most of us can imagine having in a lifetime. He brings insight into the game as far as the position he played and the aspects of fame that he has experienced first-hand. With on-air chemistry like he has with Steve Marriuci and Rich Eisen, the guy should be a wet dream of an analyst.

But he isn't. Sanders has become almost unbearable on his NFL Gameday and NFL Total Access appearances throughout the season.

Deion's heart is in the right place. I do not for a second think he is a bad person - quite the opposite actually - and I certainly don't think he is a bad analyst. His problem is that he considers himself to be a mentor to dozens of players in the NFL, many of whom will at some point go through disputes with management and/or the league at some point. I don't have a problem with Deion defending a player, or even shouting 'PAYDAMAN!' when a guy deserves a new contract like Cleveland WR Josh Cribbs last season.

What I do have a problem with is not knowing exactly who's success Deion has a vested interest in. Sanders is in a privileged position, able to influence viewers and the media with his engaging personality on a TV show that is watched by a lot of NFL fans either on TV or as part of NFL.com's web videos.

When Deion was forced to expose the relationships he has with a large group of (un-named) NFL players as a result of the investigation into Oklahoma State WR Dez Bryant last year, it revealed the massive conflict of interest that Sanders has in the pro game. His meddling in Bryant's college career cost Bryant a year of football - probably his most crucial year - and potentially millions of dollars. It's hard to imagine that Deion won't attempt to make this up to young Dez by talking up his performances on NFL Gameday isn't it?

Bryant is just the beginning. Almost nothing that Deion Sanders says can be taken as 'analysis', he is simply trying to protect his select group of friends and adopted sons. The examples are literally too numerous to mention, but we all know by now Deion's signature line: 'PAYDAMAN!'. He is almost constantly looking to gain more money for a group of guys that he has personal links to. Is that fair?

His constant abuse of his privileges has sullied his reputation, and it is gutting as a fan of both Deion and the NFL to say this, but Prime Time is over. Sooner or later something will happen that pushes this issue beyond having a nice friendly chat with Mooch on NFL Network about it, as he did after the Bryant scandal, and having a formal, serious discussion with Roger Goodell about his huge conflict of interest in how the NFL is presented to the public.

McNabb trade a big gamble for Reid and Heckert

There is a consensus building that the Philadelphia Eagles will trade Donovan McNabb in the next few weeks, before turning their franchise over to Kevin Kolb. Is this the right decision?

First of all, I am a big fan of McNabb. Two years ago this same situation would have resulted in fans clamouring for him to get out of town, because he has never quite convinced Eagles fans that he is the guy that will bring them a championship. In the last couple of years, however, he has responded well to the indignity of being benched midway through a game and played better football as a result.

On the other hand, the clock is very much ticking, and McNabb is no longer in his prime. Even with quarterbacks playing longer than ever, McNabb can't be guaranteed to play longer than two more years. Now consider that Kevin Kolb has shown flashes in relief and in pre-season that he is ready to replace McNabb, and you have an interesting quandary for Eagles GM Tom Heckert and coach Andy Reid. Should they trade McNabb now and cash in while they still can? Or would they be better off holding on to McNabb and giving him one or two last shots to win the team a Super Bowl?

The first question is whether the team believs in Kolb to maintain a level of respectability next season. The Eagles fanbase is notorious for it's impatience, so if Kolb starts very slowly there could be an issue. Not only that, but it could be exaggerated further if McNabb is playing well for a new team. Imagine how silly Heckert and Reid are going to look if McNabb takes a perennially losing franchise like Buffalo or Oakland, and turns them into playoff contenders? Maybe it's a long shot, but it's not out of the question. If it happens, they will both be out of jobs.

McNabb's trade value is certainly not as strong as first thought. Part of this is due to the public's lack of awareness about draft pick value in the modern era. The time was that a starting QB was a no-brainer to command a first round pick. Hell, Rick Mirer went for two a first rounder and was then traded within a year. It was just an accepted risk in the nineties. The market has changed in the last ten years, especially as the financial climate has left more teams questioning the value they receive from top picks.

All of a sudden you have players valued at a second rounder who are brought in to start and be the 'franchise' QB, such as McNabb, Matt Cassell in KC, and Matt Schaub in Houston. Where does this leave a player with questionable impact such as Michael Vick? Interesting thought. The general consensus amongst fans is that McNabb and Kolb are worth first rounders, whilst Vick is worth a second. The reality is that few teams will pay a first for a guy who could be done in a year (McNabb), or who hasn't proven himself (Kolb).

The Eagles figure to trade McNabb and extend Kolb in the same way that Green Bay turned Brett Favre loose in favour of Aaron Rodgers two years ago. There has to be a degree of faith in the front office assessment of Kolb for this to work. The reason it worked for the Packers was that they committed to Rodgers, but they also knew that they wouldn't necessarily need to extend him in his first year of starting. Unfortunately, the Eagles have a limited time frame to deal with Kolb's contract. This could lead to decisions being rushed and mistakes being made.

If it was me? I'd probably trade McNabb too, regardless of the trade return. It's the option that makes most sense if you believe in Kevin Kolb as a starter, because after this year he is sure to walk after another year spent on the bench. Where does that leave Philadelphia? Arguably in a bigger mess and tied to McNabb in the twilight of his career. In fact, if they don't trade McNabb, they will be spending their own high draft picks on a QB next year.

Denver could be in the QB market

Reports today suggest that the Denver Broncos have contacted the Philadelphia Eagles about a trade for Donovan Mcnabb. What does this mean for Kyle Orton and the Broncos?

If the rumours are true, firstly it should be noted that the Bills and Browns are also in the mix, as they are the other teams mentioned. This means that there's no guarantee by any means that either the Eagles would trade him only to the Broncos, or that McNabb would agree with Denver over Buffalo or Cleveland. However, one thing it does show is that the Broncos themselevs are not sold on Kyle Orton for next season.

Orton is a restricted free agent who the Broncos would likely be happy to keep him around at the right price. One option that will not be available for the Broncos is to place the lowest tender on Orton (around $1.01m) , for which they would have received a 4th round pick as compensation if he signed for another team. That would be relatively likely considering Orton's demonstration at the beginning of last season and in his initial stint in Chicago that he can win games in the NFL. Unfortunately, although Orton's basic salary was only scheduled to be $620,000 in 2009, he met playing time and performance incentives which mean he will likely have to be given a higher tender to meet the rule that stipulates a player in RFA must be offered a tender of 110% of his last year's salary.

A more realistic option is the higher tender of $1.54m which would net the Broncos a 2nd round pick in compensation. There is no telling what the market would be if that was the case, primarily because although he would be a good short term option for the price, the uncertainty over the potential work stoppage in 2011 may make teams wary of offering a player a long term deal in an unstable market. Remember that for Orton to move, he has to either believe that he will start in his new city, or have the long term security of a new deal. If one of the two is not in place, he could choose to hang around in Denver, even if they have moved for another QB, as he will be eligible for unrestricted free agency - and a much bigger payday - in 2011.

Some Broncos fans were sold on Orton as a franchise QB after the team's strong start this year, but the crushing disappointment of missing the playoffs after such promise has clearly left questions amongst those who are actually making the decisions. Coach Josh McDaniels attempted to swing a deal for Matt Cassel before he joined Kansas City, and he has already traded away Jay Cutler - who arguably has a great deal more talent than Orton ever will. None of this shows mych willingness on the part of the team to lock Orton up long term, and realistically that could well be the pivotal point. Orton has played almost his whole 5 year career on a tiny wage compared to what he could realitsically expect from a multi-year deal, so I would expect that even if the prospects of starting are not greatly enhanced, the increased security would be attractive for him.

One thing we can now do is chalk Denver up on the list of teams that would be interested in adding a QB at some point this offseason. I mentioned a few weeks ago that I had a list of 17 teams that would be interested in potentially be in the market for either a starter or a backup via free agency or the draft. Some are obvious (Oakland, St Louis) whilst others are dependent on a current member of the roster retiring (New Orleans, Minnesota).

There are other combinations of circumstance that could lead teams to look for a new signal caller this year, but at the very least it looks like Denver are looking for an upgrade.

Snowstorm during Super Bowl week hits New York

I've long campaigned that playing the Super Bowl only in domed or warm weather climates detracts from the character of the greatest show on earth.

Think of some of the more iconic moments in the NFL over the years, and some of the greatest images come from games where the elements have come into play. From the great Bears-Packers rivalry that regularly features games below freezing, the AFC championship game between Indianapolis and New England in 2003 in the snow, and the now infamous 'tuck rule' game between the Patriots and Oakland in 2002. Hey, even Santa getting pelted with snowballs in Philadelphia - it was all part of the game, and when you watch a retrospective on any of these moments, the weather simply adds to the memories.

The NFL insists that to host a superbowl, the city must have an average temperature of 50 degrees or more - or else be played in a dome. Whilst I don't have a problem with common sense being applied, it seems a shame that so many stadiums are automatically disqualified from selection on the grounds of their location. Ok, so playing in Lambeau or Soldier Field may be a stretch in February. We all know that secretly even the Packers and Bears players would rather be in a warmer climate, but it annoys me that other cities with more moderate weather are also excluded from the list.

The most obvious example would be Kansas City, who were forced to withdraw their bid to host the Super Bowl in 2015 because Arrowhead does not have a roof, and Jackson County narrowly denied the Chiefs funding to build one in time. The temperature in Missouri at this time of year is not particularly helpful to the cause, but should that prohibit a team from hosting the game? In my view, no.

New York (or New Jersey if we are going to be pedantic) is the next city to try it's luck at a Superbowl, with the new Giants/Jets stadium widely expected to bid for the big game in 2014 or 2015. There has been a massive investment in new stadia in the league in recent years, and the idea of Jerry Jones showcasing his new stadium in Dallas whilst the home of the Giants and Jets goes without is not something that sits well with those who have funded the plan.

Unfortunately, with no roof in place, the stadium faces an uphill struggle to convince the league that it is capable of hosting a superbowl with no disruption from inclement weather in the area. The problem is not just on the field, but the logistical issues that could arise in the event of a freak snowstorm on the east coast.

One such as hit yesterday, and is expected to hit New York today?

The timing could not be worse, coming as it does at the crucial point where the majority of fans will be arriving in the host city for the weekend. Of course, in my view, some snow should not detract from the bid, but an epic storm of this scale cannot help but place another element of doubt in the owners' minds that their biggest showcase event could become a farce - or even worse, be postponed - if New York hosts the game. Even the smallest amount of chance will likely count heavily against northern stadiums, so unfortunately, I don't envisage any situation where the league allows a cold weather city to host the game outdoors in the near future.

Not unless there's an awful lot of money changing hands somewhere...

Bush faces the career crossroads on Sunday

Super Bowl XLIV on Sunday will be the biggest sporting event in New Orleans history, but for one player, it will also define his career path, and possibly his legacy in the city.

The Saints have a decision to make at some point this offseason. Do they pay Reggie Bush, their number two overall pick in 2006 a whopping $8m salary next season, do they ask him to rework his contract, or do they cash in and trade him to a willing suitor in his former college coach, Pete Carroll? The good news for the Saints is that the decision rests more in what Bush does on Sunday than on his previous body of work.

Make no mistake about it, if Reggie Bush contributes in a meaningful way this Sunday, he will be back in the bayou next year. The Saints are a franchise rooted very much at the centre of their community, and it is difficult to see them parting ways with Bush if he is seen as a hero by the fans. If the Saints win, the party will last a long time, but when it is over, those tough business decisions may seem a little easier with the uncapped year ahead and fans idolising a player who helped bring the biggest prize of all to New Orleans.

Of course, in such a situation, the Saints would inevitably attempt to restructure the rookie contract Bush signed, but the big problem may be that Bush would hold all of the leverage, and by playing chicken with the team, he would win that battle.

If, on the other hand, Bush is anonymous in a Saints loss, or even has a bad game and the team wins, the boot is well and truly on the other foot. Is he a bust? Not quite. he's unconventional for his position and draft slot, but he has contributed in his own fashion over the last few years. There's no doubt that he shows flashes of brilliance and changes games occasionally with a burst of speed, but until the divisional playoffs, Bush had shown little sign of being able to run between the tackles or carry much of a load from the backfield.

The truth is he just doesn't fit the mould, and rather like Josh Cribbs, that makes his contribution very difficult to evaluate. Fans may love Cribbs as a return man, but he wants to be paid as a wide receiver. Similarly, Bush is great catching swing passes and screens out of the backfield, or running back punts, but he was drafted as a running back second overall. You don't pay that type of player $8m unless he is guaranteed to contribute in more conventional terms over the course of your season. The harsh reality of business in the NFL is that you can get paid better as an average player who contributes no big plays but plays a traditional role in an offence, than a dynamic player who's value varies from team to team.

The general consensus is that at some point Carroll will look to upgrade the running back position in Seattle, and that New Orleans may be his first port of call if he believes he can swing a trade for the guy he coached at USC. If not Carroll though, who will take Bush? There will be suitors, but how many of them will pay him the $8m? That is why Sunday matters so much. It will either strengthen or weaken the market that he will use as leverage this season. Play well, and Bush can stay in New Orleans and bask in the adulation for a few more years on money that the fans will be happy to see him take. Play badly and he could be looking at a trade to whoever is desperate enough to risk big money on a player who has shown he can't carry the load. Those teams don't tend to be among the perennial contenders...

Reggie Bush enters the biggest game of his career on Sunday - in every sense.