USA Today's Chris Chase: Post-game interviews worthless

Talk about ..........

 

What are you so butthurt about?

 

I mentioned this on the playoff thread, but Tony Gonzalez's TV postgame interview after the Falcons beat Seattle was very candid and enlightening, I thought.

Problem is, very few of those TV postgame interviews are either.

 

Worthless questions are the start to many worthless interviews.

 

good non-answer, ya witard

 

Chris Chase is one of the most ostracized bloggers Yahoo has. People cannot stand him, and I'm in that camp. The guy cannot write worth a lick.

 

Postgame interviews are worthless when you hover behind the crowd with a recorder running to grab quotes like, "We just didn't have it all today," and, "They wanted it more," and, "We're going to review the film this week and correct mistakes," or, "I really tip my hat to those guys out there," etc.

The environment is what you make of it. If you ask questions leading to 110% responses, then that's what you get. If you're upset because the star isn't available to answer questions about what went on out there in the locker room, then you're doing the job wrong. Best quotes I've ever received came from backups, angry linemen, and the veteran forwards averaging 12 minutes a night.

 

It's up to the NFL to deal with Belichick. He should be hit with a fine that's more than some slap on the wrist. He's able to be paid the way he is because of the league's unholy alliance with the networks. That means doing whatever was agreed to whether you like it or not and, unfortunately for Mr. Bill, that means insipid interviews.
If he chooses to conduct himself like Popovich with Sager on the NBA telecasts, then that's his prerogative.
Speaking of shameless whoring, you know you're in the "as long as the check clears era" when you've got to say something will be coming up on the Yipee Ki-Yay postgame report or whatever it was. And, shouldn't it be Yippee Ki-Yay MF postgame report?

 

I came to be fascinated by the unanimous, visceral hatred the guy inspired. He was almost always insipid, but never offensive that I can recall. Ergo, given that meaningless writing runs amok on the internet, why was it so intolerable when perpetrated by this one hack?

Somehow, he managed to truly, uniquely inflame a group that generally just hates everyone in similar fashion (internet, and especially Y!, commenters). And I guess I never got why a guy writing entirely off stuff he saw on TV, read in news releases, or saw in wire photos was so infuriating, when there's about one million Americans doing the same thing on the internet every day (you know, like internet commenters).

 

I don't understand it either, but folks absolutely hate the guy. I guess it's because he writes for Yahoo, which promotes his stories on the front page quite a bit. Why people still click on them is beyond me.

 

The post-game interviews are part of the process. Learn how to ask a question and you might get a strong answer.

Tangentially, the most worthless thing in sports the last, what, 5 years, is the ESPN in-game interviews with hoops coaches between the 1st and 2nd quarters, or before the 4th quarter. Only once, and this was recently, has one of those interviews produced *any*thing, when Popovich did his "Happy!??!" thing with Aldredge:

"We're in the middle of a contest -- nobody's happy."

Exactly. What do we expect to glean from these "interviews"? It's awful television. Even worse it's filtering down to college. Last night the woman interviewed Calipari during a timeout in the Alabama game. He said squat. The Alabama coach said less than that. More than anything, these coaches don't want to be interviewed mid-game.

The 4th-inning chats with managers are a little more tolerable, but barely.

 

All Gregg Popovich sideline interviews are worthwhile. But that was the best.