ESPN’s cupcake props at Washington Football scheduling earns pie in the face

The weeks controversy of late starting games heated up thanks to the ESPN coverage of the California at Washington game. Use of cupcake props to illustrate Washington Football‘s non conference schedule deserve a pie in the face

The California at Washington game was rescheduled to accommodate the television needs of the ESPN network. The game time was pushed back to 7:45 p.m PT to allow for ESPN to televise the game from start to finish.  That hurts the home Washington Football team trying to fill the seats in the stadium of a home game.

But more than that, it cripples the legacy of Washington fans trying to expose children to the thrill of a home game. But moreso, with a coach like Chris Petersen who is working towards a national playoff bid, the timing of the game pushes their performance out of the range of so many east coast pundits who vote for the AP and the USA Coaches polls for the national rankings.

ESPN catches wind of controversy, and doesn’t let it go

That comment, innocently made by a head coach very aware of the challenge it caused the fanbase, simply voiced his concerns. A fair assessment. But his voice carried to the ears of ESPN.

And that began the controversy. But it was only the start of the tsunami of negative and subjective commentary.  ESPN invited Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott to comment on the late game scheduling. To no surprise, he defended the decision to acquiesce game times to the needs of the national television programmers.

And the tension and issue continued to grow.

ESPN cupcake commentary deserves a pie in the face

But the story of the night, amidst all the subplots, was the ESPN use of cupcakes to illustrate the non-conference schedule of the Washington Football team was over the top, even for this broadcast.

And to this, there is only one response. ESPN’s Quint Kessenich deserves this:

PIE IN THE FACE!!!

ESPN broadcasters ignorant about constructing non-conference schedules

Non-confrerence schedules take years to plan and coordinate. In fact,  ESPN’s own senior writer Heather Dinich writes a very informative article about the process.  Here is an extract from that article:

"“Even in the era of the College Football Playoff, when strength of schedule is a critical component of the selection committee’s evaluation process, athletic directors continue to schedule so far in advance that there’s no possible way of knowing how good those opponents will be, let alone who will be coaching them.”"

Now, in light of that information, either ESPN broadcaster Quint Kessenich is completely ignorant of the process, or his point had nothing to do with facts, but rather an adolescent attempt to belittle the Washington Football program to a captive national audience.

The hole in Kessenich’s cupcake theory

In either case, you might think someone would have the authority to say “No, we are not going there!”.

But no one involved in the broadcast stopped the embarrassing moment. FOR THE RECORD, Washington and Rutgers agreed to play one another in 2014.  At that time, Rutgers (2013) was 6-7 and Washington was 9-4. Montana was added to the schedule in 2012.

Fresno State appeared on Alabama’s schedule and put up an early fight in that game. Programs from smaller schools like Fresno State depend heavily upon that game revenue to fund the entire athletic program. All major college football schools include smaller programs for just such a reason.

What was ESPN thinking?

The insertion of those subjective and pointed commentary in a football broadcast was pretty bad. As Washington opened up a 31-0 lead against a perceived formidable Pac-12 opponent, the ESPN crew guffawed as they illustrated the non-conference football schedule with… cupcakes.

This opponent was the same California which was a touted “potential powerhouse” when they lined up against USC. This was the same California team which played USC to a dead heat for three quarters at USC.

California’s reputation seems to depend on which team they play.

Unbelievable

Now, subject to a thrashing of historic proportions, ESPN asserted to the national audience (at least the audience which remained awake), that Washington was “soft”

Most televised games attempt to promote the teams during the game, not roast them.

Poor ESPN decision to take the feud on-air

This was pretty upsetting commentary at a point in the game where the Washington Huskies completely dominated the California Golden Bears.

National college sports writers were dismayed

It wasn’t a soft poke. It was such a hard blow aimed directly at the Washington Huskies that unaffiliated sportscasters and college football pundits were surprised at the ESPN vitriol aimed at the Huskies.

And even more shock and disbelief followed

The only remaining question is Why? Why would a television crew go so far out of their way to attempt to ridicule an undefeated team ON THE AIR?  The answer revealed itself as time ran out.

Temper tantrum following no meeting with Coach Petersen

ESPN announcers admitted that they did not have the opportunity to meet with “Irascible and cantankerous” head coach Chris Petersen. They admitted as such on the air, with the inflammatory adjectives that should never be associated with a head coach of a major NCAA football coach.

Irascible means “easy to anger”.  Cantankerous means “bad-tempered” or “argumentative” or even “uncooperative”.

Name a single head coach referred to in this way during a nationally televised game.

Kevin King wades in

Even former Husky Kevin King had to wade in with commentary. He is hilarious during games and certainly worth a follow.

Now, the game ended completely lopsided at 38-7. It forces me to wonder just how the game would have been called had it been closer. Even the  ESPN game summary conflicts with the broadcasting team.  Their article names the game as a “rout”.

Television works, but the producers don’t understand the complaint

Fans certainly DO appreciate the televised games. Let’s clear that right up. And Pac-12 teams understand that games will typically start at 4:00 p.m to suit the needs of the national audience. But the fact is that television producers have plenty of discretion.

This was a featured game for the Washington Football team. It is Purple Reign, a game which is all about reaching out to the fans and thanking them for their continued support.  The game time could have begun at 4:00 pm PT. Instead, Fox Sports opted to place Washington State at Oregon in that time slot.  That dictated that ESPN would catch Washington late once more.

Timing decisions seems subjective

Pac-12 teams understand that late games happen in the conference. But late late games for Washington do not help the conference. The more competitive teams featured nationally as close to “prime time” as possible raise the reputation of the entire conference.

Games of teams making national headlines, like USC, do not seem to run into the late late late slot. It cannot be a matter of competitive games. USC played California too.

Washington is just a very good team which appears to be fighting for air time. Clearly today was another example of Washington Football’s dominance. But when the game ran to nearly 1:00 am ET, you have to wonder who saw the contest.  ESPN broadcast a lopsided win and had plenty of second half air-time to fill with drama and controversy which didn’t show up on the field.

Next: Tight End Hunter Bryant enjoys breakout game.

The choices made seemed to fill that air-time seemed beneath a nationally televised game. We can only hope future broadcasts do not opt for that level of commentary. Raise the bar folks. Washington Football team, now 6-0, deserves a little more respect.