Last year, ESPN sideline reporter Laura Rutledge had an awkward postgame interview with Justin Herbert, following a Los Angeles Chargers win on “Monday Night Football.”
Herbert was clearly trying to skip the postgame interview, before doing it reluctantly, and not giving Rutledge much to work with.
Rutledge made it clear that she had no “hard feelings.”
“I mean, he had a broken hand, and he was frustrated, I think, with the way that some of the parts of the game had gone and he had been so tough. He had played so well with everything he was dealing with. But I completely changed my interview structure because I wanted to get him out as fast as possible. I didn’t want to keep him any longer than we had to. I’m so sensitive to somebody not wanting to necessarily be there. … He doesn’t want credit. He loves to give credit to his teammates. I think that was a lot of the reason why it went the way that it did. But again credit to Justin for sticking through it—and doing the interview. No hard feelings by me,” she ended up admitting later that season.
Video of the postgame interview quickly went viral on social media.
Rutledge/IG
Over the weekend, ESPN’s Holly Rowe had a similarly awkward and reluctant postgame interview with Texas head coach Steve Sarkisian.
Sarkisian answered just one question before storming off and celebrating with his players.
Rowe was clearly annoyed. She was seen rolling her eyes on the air and not saying anything in response to Sarkisian’s comments, instead just walking off of the screen, upset.
Video of that interview went viral, too.
She was not happy.
Rutledge and Rowe had very different reactions to the postgame interviews, and their reactions have continued to strike up debates on social media.
Do we need sideline reporters doing postgame interviews, or halftime interviews, following games?
Fans are continuing to debate this as we head deeper and deeper into the 2026 football seasons.
