The Next Food Network Star Season 5: Looking ahead

Well, it's time for Season 5 of The Next Food Network Star. This is (or should be) an unparalleled opportunity for someone that sees themselves as the next Rachael Ray or Guy Fieri to show their stuff. And, unlike the Bravo's Top Chef—which I also love—this competition is about food and personality. The winner here gets their own limited-run show with the possibility of getting renewed for more, so it's about more than just who cooks the best.

While I'm looking forward to this season, I'm hoping the powers-that-be avoid some of the mistakes of years-past. Don't misunderstand me, I love The Food Network, but there are some things about this particular competition that keep it from being as great as it could be. So here, for your consideration, are some of my pet-peeves and suggestions.

The Name:
"The Next Food Network Star". Really? This is season 5, and other than the ubiquitous Guy Fieri (season 2 winner), they have failed to produce a breakout star. Aaron McCargo Jr. (last year's winner) seems like a nice guy, but think quick—when is his show on? Yeah, me neither. In fact, the runner-up last year, Adam Gertler, wound up with a prime time show, while Aaron got a weekend slot.

Whether it's their contestant selection process, the shows' format, or the judging...I don't know, but eventually the failure to produce a star falls back on the people running the company. To their credit, they are still better than those "America's Next Top Model" folks.

Picking A Winner:
Remember when we viewers got to pick the winner? Me too. Even though the viewers are the ones that picked the aforementioned Mr. Fieri, we have been removed from the selection process. I don't know if they will continue that this year, but I believe viewers will respond better to a winner they helped select, rather than being told "Here's the person we know you will like".

"A Food Network Star has to...":

If this isn't the most over-used phrase on the show, it's in the top three. It's not just that they seemingly use it constantly throughout each episode, but often what they are saying doesn't make sense. Once, they had the contestants do a cooking segment where the producers hid a piece of equipment to see how the contestant would overcome it. The justification? A Food Network Star has to be able to adapt and think on their feet. Of course, saying "cut", finding what you need, and then starting again is what they probably actually do. Or remember last season when Nipa lost it and walked off of the set? When she came back, She was told that if one of the Food Network Stars (there it is again!) had done that, that would have been their last show. Yeah...I'm sure if Giada throws a fit one day, they will fire her. Uh-huh. Sure.

Let The Contestants Be Who They Are:

Follow the logic: You ask people to send in a tape showing off who they are and what they can do so you can (for the winner) build a show around them. You select a group that you find unique and promising. Then, once the competition begins, you put them through challenges that revolve around seeing how well they perform in the formats of shows you already have. If a contestant fails at an Iron Chef America or Dinner Impossible challenge, all you have learned is that they aren't good in a format for which you had no intention of hiring them anyway. I don't get that.

Protect Your Brand/The Simon Factor:

Why do we watch cooking shows? For the food? Sure, but the networks don't hype the food nearly as much as they do the personalities. We like Rachael Ray, we find Alton Brown to be funny and quirky, and Duff Goldman makes us laugh. Then, when they become guest judges, they lose the personalities we have come to know and love and become Simon Cowell. It's not smart to take the people we tune in to see because we like them, and then show them being unlikeable. After seeing a (I can't stop myself) Food Network Star being snarky as a judge, will I believe them as the lovable person-next-door on their own show? The only personality that I have not seen succumb to this is Paula Dean. She's pretty much always just Paula, and that's a good thing.

Another error (in my opinion) is the way they treat the contestants. Throughout any episode, we learn about the contestants—where they came from, why they love cooking, their dreams and aspirations. The producers draw us in, get us interested in the people, and then let us watch as the judges treat them rudely. Don't get me wrong, the judges have to judge. They have to point out the problems. But this show doesn't have "villains" as contestants. As I begin to like a particular contestant, if a judge is rude or crass in how they deal with them, I don't think less of the contestant, I think less of the judge. I don't see how this is good for The Food Network long-term.

It may not sound like it, but I really am a huge Food Network fan. Despite the criticisms I mentioned, I really am looking forward to this season of The Next Food Network Star, and hope they find someone that lives up to the title.

That's good for the network, and for us.

I really like Ted Allen—So who is THIS guy?

Anybody remember the show "Queer Eye For The Straight Guy"? The show had five guys come to the rescue of some helpless sap that was in desperate need of a whole-life makeover. One of the guys helped out with clothing, one with interior design, one shot energy bolts from his eyes...wait—that's the X-Men. Anyway, my favorite on that show was Ted Allen. Ted was the Food and Wine expert, and I thought he was the best thing on the show. He was knowledgeable, relatable and smart. I don't remember listening to any of his recommendations and going, "huh?". He always seemed to make sense.

Well, Ol' Teddy has himself a couple of shows on The Food Network now: Food Detectives, and Chopped.

Food Detectives is an interesting enough premise. Think Mythbusters for foodies. They answer burning questions like, "Does eating turkey really make you sleepy?", "Is the last sip of a bottle of water really mostly backwash (no, by the way)?", "What are the effects of MSG", etc. The problem is, the relatable and knowledgeable Ten Allen that I used to like has been replaced by a Ted Allen that is part carnival barker, and part Billy Mays (the Oxy Clean guy). Okay, that last one may have been redundant, but you get my point. Ted always seems like he is "doing" a character—putting on a voice. At its best, it's annoying, at its worst, it's unwatchable. Ted comes across as insincere and hokey, and it just doesn't work. How the good folks at The Food Network haven't worked with him on this, I don't know.

Chopped is Ted's other show. Here, he is the host of a cooking competition which has 3 rounds and begins with 4 chefs. At the end of each round, the chef's offerings are judged, and one chef is...eliminated? removed? excused? No, he is "chopped". Once again we are dealing with Ted using his put-on announcer and host voice, and again it just doesn't work. Good premise. Bad execution. I don't know how the contestants stand there with a straight face while they listen to Ted say, "I'm sorry chef "X", you have been chopped".

Quick side note: The blame for these types of hokey taglines, as well as most of our modern day problems—global warming, over-population, people putting 13 items through the 10-item express lane—can all be blamed on Donald Trump. People have been getting eliminated from competitions on TV for decades. In the past, a simple "Thank you for playing" would send the contestant back to their regular life. Ever since The Donald uttered his first "You're Fired" on The Apprentice, everybody has been searching for their own cool "send 'em packing" phrase. The problem is, most of them seem contrived and silly. Thanks, Donald.

Despite how how much I don't care for Ted on Food Detectives and Chopped, I still haven't given up on him completely. He occasionally is a judge on Iron Chef America, and it's there that I see the real Ted Allen. When he is judging, he's not trying to "do" a character. He's just regular ol' Ted Allen.

That's the guy I like.