On Interview Skills

by abender20 on Feb 24, 2009 8:38 AM PST in Seahawks News & Rumors

We once again hop onto The Magic School Bus and journey into the mind of Danny O'Neil. Most of the piece covers the combine experience from the writers perspective mixed with some miscellaneous thoughts from Indy, including the observation that Mark Sanchez looks like Vincent Chase. However, at bullet point number 4 (the second one), O'Neil brings up an interesting topic:

Wake Forest's Aaron Curry conducted an interview that was the absolute hit of the combine.

...

As a reporter, I love a good interview as much as anyone. It's fun to ask questions of someone who is engaged and lively and enjoys talking about himself, and I wish Curry well. He seems like a fine dude, and there are plenty of people who consider him one of the best two or three players available in this draft, but that's more likely because he plays like a heat-seeking missile than his personality in an interview.

O'Neil goes on to explain that Walter Jones gives an awful interview. Lofa Tatupu, despite being engaging in a personal conversation, goes flat when the microphones are on and the questions are flying. Interview skills are great for public relations and sound bites, but they don't have any bearing on ability to play football.

It's nice to see a member of the media recognizing this fact. Beat writers tend to stick up for players who are great in front of a camera but maybe not so great on the field. In fact, beat writers probably invented "intangibles" and "grit" for this exact purpose. An effusive athlete is certainly easier to like, but do you really want your team selecting a player on the merits of his silver tongue (and no, Ocho Cinco, you don't get credit for your grill)?

How much weight should be placed on the ability to give a good press conference?

Tweet Comment 14 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I would give it no weight at all.

Personally, I hate public speaking and talking in front of a crowd. It’s not that I don’t like being the attention of a lot of people though, since I’m fine with playing sports when a bunch of people are watching. I don’t really think talking and playing sports are related.
Also when athletes play sports, they’re doing something they’ve done all their life and have prepared for all season. They care about their performance. They’re not preparing for interviews because it’s just not that important to them, or at least shouldn’t be. And obviously while charisma can be learned, some people just have more of it to begin with, but I don’t see how charisma affects on the field performance, except for possibly a few calls here and there.

by LantermanC on Feb 24, 2009 8:43 AM PST reply actions

I think Walter Jones is considered one of the funniest guys on the team too

interview shminterview

by B.B.Finnegan on Feb 24, 2009 9:27 AM PST reply actions

Absolutely zero.

Walter Jones and Marcus Trufant are both soft-spoken individuals who really bring it on the field. Some people simply aren’t good with oratory, and that’s perfectly fine because it has literally nothing to do with on field performance.

"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."

by Fearless Frog on Feb 24, 2009 10:03 AM PST reply actions

Then why even interview the players (then evaluate said interview)?

I’m merely playing Devil’s Advocate, but it’s not as simple as you would make it out to be.

by abender20 on Feb 24, 2009 10:15 AM PST up reply actions

depends on who's judging

do you mean the reporters or the coaches? The reporters mostly want soundbites and charisma, I would think coaches have a much different criteria and evaluation process, i.e. soft spoken and quiet isn’t a bad thing. They just want to find out what makes a player tick and (in Ruskell’s case) whether or not they are a good person. A player who comes in as a charismic arrogant blowhard could just as easily do far worse by saying the wrong thing then if he were quiet.

by B.B.Finnegan on Feb 24, 2009 11:11 AM PST up reply actions

To make sure they aren't dumb as bricks?

There’s a difference between impressing the media with high vocabulary and confidence in front of a mic and impressing team officials with your knowledge about the game in situations and the like. There’s this video on NFL.com of Steve Hutchinson breaking down the science behind a running play, it was amazing, and I assume that’s what scouts are looking for.

"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."

by Fearless Frog on Feb 24, 2009 11:19 AM PST up reply actions

A few months ago when the Huskies signed Holt to be the D-Coordinator and assistant head coach,

He said that one of his recruiting tactics was to get really close to a recruit and ‘invade his personal space’. And that if the player backed down, he was too timid, but if he stood up and looked him straight in the eye, he knew he was a competitor.
I don’t know, maybe it’s just because I’d back down (respect for elders/authority), but I think this way of recruiting is stupid.

by LantermanC on Feb 24, 2009 10:19 AM PST reply actions

If said player punches him in the face and breaks several of the coach's bones, you know he's fierce.

In all seriousness, this happens at the combine too (via Peter King):

My favorite story involved a defensive coach for one team asking Ohio State linebacker James Laurinaitis why they should pick him. "Tell me something,‘’ the coach said. "When is the last time a linebacker from Ohio State came to the NFL and was worth a s—-?’’ That shook the Buckeye out of whatever confident zone he might have entered the room in.

by abender20 on Feb 24, 2009 10:28 AM PST up reply actions

that's an EASY one!

Andy Katzenmoyer!!!!

Oh… wait a sec! hmm. Matt Wilhelm? AJ Hawk?

Hmm… okay, I pass.

I'm kinda sad Shanahan is gone... I liked the Donkeys being 8-8 every year...

by Tyler Jorgensen on Feb 24, 2009 1:34 PM PST up reply actions

Most pro athletes are Type A/Alpha Male personalities.

To get the best of the best, you want the guys who aren’t afraid to tell someone to back off when they get into your domain. Standing up for yourself and not taking shit is an important quality in an athletes makeup in my opinion. The elders and authority have to earn your respect, you don’t just give it, and I think that’s Holt’s strategy. He wants the player to earn his respect and vice versa. It’s not really that out of the ordinary.

Yesterday's Pants
A blog-thingy about the Mariners and stuff.

by BrettJMiller on Feb 24, 2009 11:14 AM PST up reply actions

Yeah, but I kind of feel like we're going backwards.

This is something dogs or a pack of wolves do. The Alpha male gets first dibs on the meat, and decides everything, and the other dogs have to beg at his feet and can’t look him in the eye.
I agree, with athletes in general you want a guy who’s supremely confident and it’s safer to recruit alpha males, but some players are just different on the court. Take for instance Chris Paul, he said in an interview that you don’t want to play basketball with him, because he’s just not a nice person. He’s aggressive and pushy and has win-at-all-costs attitude. Off the court he’s a totally different guy though.
As for earning their respect. If I were a top #20 recruit, I would probably stare Holt down, since I wouldn’t worry about ‘hurting his feelings’ or acting rude. but if I were a fringe recruit, then Holt has already ‘earned’ my respect by having something that I want, namely a scholarship offer at a top school.

by LantermanC on Feb 24, 2009 11:55 AM PST up reply actions

Personally, I don't think Holt is all that great of a coach.

Though I hope I’m terribly wrong.

"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."

by Fearless Frog on Feb 24, 2009 11:20 AM PST up reply actions

Seriously???

That is simply retarded…

I understand his theory behind it, but just because a player backs away it doesn’t mean he is “backing down” There is such thing has being polite and whatnot, and just because you’re polite doesn’t mean you aren’t a competetor.

I Bleed Blue and Green

by DSAhawker on Feb 24, 2009 11:31 AM PST up reply actions

Congeniality?

none. This is not the only purpose of the interviews though. Being funny and charismatic and having good ‘presence’ is not the only thing a guy can exhibit in an interview.

You also are able to learn a bit about these guys’ cognitive abilities. Can you explain something to him on the field quickly or is he a just plain dumb.

I think the interview is not to establish interview specific qualities but as a way to investigate issues that the other aspects of your scouting (game tape, combine, etc.) have led you to ponder. If you are worried that a guy is stupid and therefore difficult to coach, an interview may shed light on this. you might be able to learn a bit more about a guy being selfish, defensive, etc. I don’t think the interview can MAKE any prospect, but I certainly see how it could break one. It is prudent to at least meet the guy before making a big investment in him.

It is the same in many job, school, or other application processes. There is a lot of data collected that is basically a check box. Doing excellently won’t get you in, but somehow raising a red flag will keep you out.

by michaelfox99 on Feb 24, 2009 3:51 PM PST reply actions