ADVERTISEMENT

Hannah

Status
Not open for further replies.
I would like to watch the interviews but cannot find them anywhere so far. Anyone have links since some of you are wizards at finding things online. The BTN+ archived replay of the broadcast appears to be edited, I watched through Beau and only saw wrestling, nothing else.
 
I would like to watch the interviews but cannot find them anywhere so far. Anyone have links since some of you are wizards at finding things online. The BTN+ archived replay of the broadcast appears to be edited, I watched through Beau and only saw wrestling, nothing else.
This channel has the individual matches with interviews. Some of them also have bonus footage at the end if you need help learning English. This one is MM's but you can go to the main channel for all the rest and the Big 12 matches as well.

 
You know she covered PSU wrestling for years as a student, was friends with Nolf, Bo, etc, and is engaged to Luke Pletcher, right?

No, I don't know any of that. As a general rule, I don't pay attention to the social lives of media personalities.

So granting what you say as true, her lack of substance is even more inexcusable.
 
I'm not sure what OP and his wife were watching, but I think most here would agree that Hannah did a pretty good job. She has at least a working knowledge of the sport, and she conducted herself very professionally. OP needs to cut her some slack as she's not acting as play by play or color commentator. She was there to hold a microphone and ask guys how they felt after winning a match. She did her job.

"has at least a working knowledge of the sport"

Sorry, didn't see any evidence of that.
 
Billy
Hannah was great. I’d take her any day over Quint and Billy Baldwin. Apart from the post-match interviews, which are always going to be awkward when the wrestlers don’t answer her questions, she provided some nice insights when they pulled her in. I’d love to see her to become a staple at nationals.

Baldwin is there because he's a celebrity who wrestled in college, not my cup of tea either.
 
I spoke ill of Quint--mostly because his questions to me seem to show he doesn't know wrestling as well, and as I said, those off-the-mat interviews are mostly miss with the occasional hit.

I have no idea what OP is thinking of in regard to Hannah's lack of knowledge of the sport--she asked the same questions all the pros do in those situations. Further, I have followed her career since she was a PSU athletics intern (or whatever her role was): She's been working hard at her craft for a good while now--covering Steelers, Pirates, College Football, etc. I think she has a chance to be a big name in her craft, which is mighty impressive. And, she likes wrestling, so it's great! I'm hoping maybe ESPN will consider using her in 2 weeks, frankly. No sideline reporter is likely to rake muck or win a pulitzer, but it's definitely not an easy job, and she does it well.
 
Female interviewers AND announcers?!? Oh no! If we don't do something soon, women will even be allowed to vote and drive!

Argumentum ad hominem or just generic simping?

I know you think pulling the "sexist" card is a devastating counter-argument,
Perhaps you might consider somebody with the pseudonym "Pitchfork Rebel" really doesn't give a murine posterior about that. If I express an unpopular opinion, so be it. If I told you Howard Cosell was annoying pain the ass; what does that make me?

This is a good interview, in part conducted by old bald guy with cell phone:

Granted, Mesenbrink enjoys the process, and is an effusive personality-but notice how the interviewer asked him about how he did did certain things and then the question about trying to keep him [Hamiti] down allows Mesenbrink to say he was going for the cradle.

It was "how DID you", not how did you "feel".

 
Last edited:
So we need to diss a young woman, early in her career, on a tough assignment (after-match interviews of guys still catching breath, processing win, or plain nervous)? Or a young kid less than a year past HS prom night being asked to answer questions in front of a national audience after winning B1Gs? Or other young men waxing philosophical or religious in their replies?
To one of the greatest college lineups of all time, the wrestling gods add the most exciting wrestler in decades, but its both sides of post-match interviews by young adults that twist some shorts? Okay then.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Goathead88
Over the years we've been married, there have been a couple of times Mrs. Rebel has had a instant strong reaction to people. I've learned that in any situation involving people, I should just wait for her reaction. Any flicker of doubt that I married a human Geiger counter for human radiotoxicity were were put to bed when we watched Gamma Ray AJ's post match interview after he won the 2021 crown. I thought she was just disgusted with the puerile bragging; but man she recognized a world class [insert word here].

So all this weekend I watched the interviews and it was obvious HM knew nothing about wrestling; so she tried to psychoanalyze everything. I missed Davis' conf. champ match, so I watched it on DVR. When the post match interview came on, my wife got that look and let loose about how HM diminished a young wrestler who didn't want to play her game.

I realize it's mandatory to have women covering men's sports now; (Extra Stupid Political Network was on in the gym on Friday and the NBA game was only women); but can't they get one that takes the time to learn the rudiments of the wrestling and doesn't want to make everything about "feelings"?
Tell me you don't follow PSU sports, without telling me you don't follow PSU sports...
 
This is a good interview, in part conducted by old bald guy with cell phone:
Jim Carlson (bald guy with phone) is as smooth a pro journo as wrestling gets. I've learned a lot from listening to him ask questions this year (when I can hear his soft voice). But the "just off the mat" interview is not the same thing as this. Pyles also asked a number of questions in that interview--he's definitely improved over the years as well. I bet neither one of them would want Hannah's job though.
 
So we need to diss a young woman, early in her career, on a tough assignment (after-match interviews of guys still catching breath, processing win, or plain nervous)? Or a young kid less than a year past HS prom night being asked to answer questions in front of a national audience after winning B1Gs? Or other young men waxing philosophical or religious in their replies?
To one of the greatest college lineups of all time, the wrestling gods add the most exciting wrestler in decades, but its both sides of post-match interviews by young adults that twist some shorts? Okay then.

Would you be this reflexively protective if she was male? Is that what twists your shorts? I'm getting confused here, on one hand I'm being told she's the paragon of professionalism on the other hand, I need to make allowances for youth and inexperience.

I'm long past youth and never had to worry about athletic talent putting me in a blinding spotlight, but maybe the reason it's a tough assignment is because it's so invasive and maybe there should be more than thirty seconds between the time the ref blows the whistle and having a mic shoved in your face.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HikeNatParks
Jim Carlson (bald guy with phone) is as smooth a pro journo as wrestling gets. I've learned a lot from listening to him ask questions this year (when I can hear his soft voice). But the "just off the mat" interview is not the same thing as this. Pyles also asked a number of questions in that interview--he's definitely improved over the years as well. I bet neither one of them would want Hannah's job though.
Jim Carlson has been covering wrestling since God was a child. He's been great at this for a long time, and an unfair comparison for anyone under 30.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pitchfork Rebel
Jim Carlson (bald guy with phone) is as smooth a pro journo as wrestling gets. I've learned a lot from listening to him ask questions this year (when I can hear his soft voice). But the "just off the mat" interview is not the same thing as this. Pyles also asked a number of questions in that interview--he's definitely improved over the years as well. I bet neither one of them would want Hannah's job though.
This interview is completely different. I hear the 197 lb mat h being announced, so Mitchell has had some time to process his thoughts and what happened in the match. Way different scenario than getting a microphone shoved in your face a minute after competing.
 
Would you be this reflexively protective if she was male? Is that what twists your shorts? I'm getting confused here, on one hand I'm being told she's the paragon of professionalism on the other hand, I need to make allowances for youth and inexperience.

I'm long past youth and never had to worry about athletic talent putting me in a blinding spotlight, but maybe the reason it's a tough assignment is because it's so invasive and maybe there should be more than thirty seconds between the time the ref blows the whistle and having a mic shoved in your face.
Firstly, no need for the esoteric jargon, it's not as cute as you think it is. Second, you're just as inconsistent. Is Hannah Mears bad at her job or is job the problem?
 
Would you be this reflexively protective if she was male? Is that what twists your shorts? I'm getting confused here, on one hand I'm being told she's the paragon of professionalism on the other hand, I need to make allowances for youth and inexperience.

I'm long past youth and never had to worry about athletic talent putting me in a blinding spotlight, but maybe the reason it's a tough assignment is because it's so invasive and maybe there should be more than thirty seconds between the time the ref blows the whistle and having a mic shoved in your face.
I think I’m more “reflexively protective” (I like that) because of their age, not sex. It’s a tough, awkward gig on either side of the mic for the reason you state (so soon after such crazy physical exertion). It’s why I’ll always cut a LOT of slack to both parties involved, especially when so young.
 
Firstly, no need for the esoteric jargon, it's not as cute as you think it is. Second, you're just as inconsistent. Is Hannah Mears bad at her job or is job the problem?

1.) Other than "paragon", I didn't use any "esoteric" words and I assure you I make no attempt to be "cute", in any sense of the word. Of course using "cute" to mean what I think is the way you are using it; i.e. typically the third or fourth definition of the word -clever or cunning in a self-serving way-is esoteric. If you are expecting me to dumb down to suit you; you are mistaken.

2.) I didn't say she was "bad at her job"; I said I didn't like her interviewing style/approach; and I especially didn't like her interview with Davis.

3.) As a general rule, an individuals can lack occupational proficiency and undertake or be assigned to tasks that are difficult or infeasible; they are not mutually exclusive contingencies.

So to be clear; I do dislike the "shove" a microphone in their face right away approach. I think the athletes should be allowed to have a couple minutes of reflection-unless they are comfortable with an immediate response including having the opportunity to defer and when they are interviewed; avoid an excessive focus on "feelings" or other vapid questions. For that matter; if there was a few minutes intermission; both parties would have to time to collect their thoughts. However, when she asked Davis about how important it was to get a W for the rest of the team; I just scratched my head.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PSUbluTX
1.) Other than "paragon", I didn't use any "esoteric" words and I assure you I make no attempt to be "cute", in any sense of the word. Of course using "cute" to mean what I think is the way you are using it; i.e. typically the third or fourth definition of the word -clever or cunning in a self-serving way-is esoteric. If you are expecting me to dumb down to suit you; you are mistaken.

2.) I didn't say she was "bad at her job"; I said I didn't like her interviewing style/approach; and I especially didn't like her interview with Davis.

3.) As a general rule, an individuals can lack occupational proficiency and undertake or be assigned to tasks that are difficult or infeasible; they are not mutually exclusive contingencies.

So to be clear; I do dislike the "shove" a microphone in their face right away approach. I think the athletes should be allowed to have a couple minutes of reflection-unless they are comfortable with an immediate response including having the opportunity to defer and when they are interviewed; avoid an excessive focus on "feelings" or other vapid questions. For that matter; if there was a few minutes intermission; both parties would have to time to collect their thoughts. However, when she asked Davis about how important it was to get a W for the rest of the team; I just scratched my head.
Umm. Don't know what happened there, but I didn't type what you quoted.
 
So we need to diss a young woman, early in her career, on a tough assignment (after-match interviews of guys still catching breath, processing win, or plain nervous)? Or a young kid less than a year past HS prom night being asked to answer questions in front of a national audience after winning B1Gs? Or other young men waxing philosophical or religious in their replies?
To one of the greatest college lineups of all time, the wrestling gods add the most exciting wrestler in decades, but its both sides of post-match interviews by young adults that twist some shorts? Okay then.
I agree with the bit about giving the wrestlers a chance to catch their breath.. unless you're he hoping for a headline or something. The two Brooks interviews - right after the match he mentions being ill at Iowa but on the 2nd interview he doesn't come close to saying it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HikeNatParks
I think she did a good job overall and did fine with having to roll when Davis wasn't giving her much to work with. Davis obviously isn't used to being interviewed straight off the mat and did something that you occasionally see rookies do, which is actually consider the question literally and attempt to answer it honestly, as opposed to responding with widely accepted patter.

It's not a deposition, it's a dance, wherein both participants are typically aware
that the questions are merely being posed to elicit a genuine response (e.g., excitement, disappointment, relief) to what just happened. The athlete can take it wherever they want, and most athletes who have been there before know how to either deliver what's expected or even lead the dance (e.g., Nickal does this extremely well).

Davis clearly didn't know how to dance, and it might be helpful if someone sat down with him to impart some canned, can't-miss cliches because Davis will be in that position again before long.

Another aspect to this is that most athletes straight off the mat are often incoherent because their heads are still in the match and haven't yet made the switch to normal human. I think that was part of this. In one sense it's unfair to the athletes, but it's also just a necessary part of the sport and wrestlers need to have a gameplan for how to approach it.

But Mears did fine in a tough spot, I thought, b/c Davis kept kicking it back to her with, uh, very short answers. The obvious alternative was to cut the entire thing shorter, but that's awkward too. Davis will get better at it because he's a bright kid--his interview outside the practice room earlier in the season was a good indicator of who he is.
Bull Durham should be required watching.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Psalm 1 guy
Bull Durham should be required watching.

Anybody who has dealt with young people, especially boys know a lot of them answer in one word answers-when they don't grunt; if they are thinking something, they don't express it and one too many questions is a personal assault or "diss".

To paraphrase the East German official responding to questions raised by the stunning times, v-tapered backs and deep voices of the DDR swimmers: “we came here to swim, not to sing.”


Dirty Laundry should be required listening

(Henley, not Underwood)

 
Last edited:
Interesting take from first poster. My wife was walking through the room during earlier rounds when Hannah Mears was interviewing someone between matches. I don’t recall who. She also talked about a conversation with one of the coaches. My wife came over to listen and said she really liked her take and she seemed to be very knowledgeable. She said she’d like to see more of her commentary and said, “I might have to come watch the finals with you if she’s going to be commenting.”

My wife did come watch the finals with me. We both thought the Davis interview was humorous. I'm sure, Braeden had many other things he wanted to do, than an interview. As others have said, that seems to be more about the interviews right off the mat. Lots of athletes are not great interviews, when they are excited, tired, shocked, and inexperienced at interviews. Loved Hannah throughout the tourney, she’s great!
 
  • Like
Reactions: PSU Yinzer
Kerks interview was interesting/odd. Some brainwashed indoctrination going on there.
Why? Because he believes in God and not worldly things? That's actual Christian teaching going back 100's of years. It's actually quite normal. Maybe you just don't like religious people. If so, maybe keep your indoctrination bs off the board.
 
I thought Ms. Mears did a great job! Seemed personable, authentic, and poised. I thought her delivery was excellent with the in between match updates and recap of the placements on the podium too. I like her and agree with an earlier comment that she will be very successful and will advance in this field. Would love to see her with the ESPN coverage in 2 weeks.

I never liked the interview immediately after they finish their match, they do it in track and field too. I kind of understand why they do in the order of things, and it would be hard to track down the wrestler later. But in the end that's not her choice, she is given a job to do and does it well. Keep up the good work Hannah!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Reslo and ccdiver
Why? Because he believes in God and not worldly things? That's actual Christian teaching going back 100's of years. It's actually quite normal. Maybe you just don't like religious people. If so, maybe keep your indoctrination bs off the board.

WT already told us his opinion on theism. He's hostile, and he said you should raise your kids without any faith, and apparently he's going reach for an arrow every time somebody mentions religion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ccdiver and Hotshoe
WT already told us his opinion on theism. He's hostile, and he said you should raise your kids without any faith, and apparently he's going reach for an arrow every time somebody mentions religion.
Even athletes. How pathetic.
 
Give Cael more time. He turned around Gilman's public speaking.
Didnt take metcalf long to lose the robot script either.

I prefer my iowa teams to be rough around the edges. when they were doing to the tony videos and talking about fun it was just silly because it was manufactured. embrace your dbagness and stick to it. Turk does and so should the iowa team.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT