HOLLYWOOD—My summer guilty pleasure “Big Brother 20” has ended and now its times to re-evaluate, which has been one of the funniest seasons in all honesty since “Big Brother 14.” Yes, I liked “Big Brother 17,” but I think BB20 was a bit more cutthroat, not to the extent of BB14, but it was damn fun. So the question everyone wants to know is rather Kaycee deserved the win over Tyler? Tyler did deserve the win in my opinion; he played the better game, but as we all know, in BB it’s not always who played the better game; it’s about who the jury likes. Kaycee did not burn as many people on the jury as Tyler did and it cost him greatly.
However, I would make the argument that Tyler lost because he wasn’t able to explain his game fully to the jury. Tyler doesn’t like confrontation and because of that he hid a lot of his game moves; things that he could have explained to the jury, but he did not. Josh Martinez, the winner of “Big Brother 19” may have delivered the best strategy I’ve seen in years: GOODBYE MESSAGES ARE CRUCIAL! Josh expertly explained his game in his goodbye messages and it worked to his advantage greatly in the end.
Tyler did not do that, neither did Kaycee, heck, if it wasn’t for Angela coming to jury, the members of Foutte/The Hive, JC and Sam, would have NEVER known about Level 6. I liked that Brett didn’t spill the tea; it showed that he was keeping some cards close to his chest, vital information that could hurt some of the players in the game. I have to agree with several people who have commented that the BB20 Jury Roundtable was one of the worst that I have seen in years.
It was borderline boring, and it might be time to shake things up with someone besides Dr. Will. I mean you have the great Dan Gheesling, Janelle Pierzina, Rachel Reilly, and Danielle Reyes. All notable players who could easily take over as moderator, I’m ok with any of those, anyone except Derrick Levasseur. One of the best strategists we’ve seen in a while, but his personality is too flat to host the roundtable in my opinion. We learned that JC would have very well won the game if he managed to get to the end; I mean the jurors were ecstatic to learn JC won HOH and was the reason Angela was sent packing.
The jury was open to all of the final three and that’s great, because rarely do you see that in BB history. It’s always 2 great players and a GOAT. When I say goat, I’m referring to someone who hasn’t done anything and is being dragged to the end because they can easily be beaten. Final speeches by both Tyler and Kaycee were terrible in my opinion, they weren’t that convincing if I were to be casting a vote for a winner, but perhaps the show should go back to how things used to be post BB14. I mean it provides for more dramatic TV and really allows the jury to dig deep into the game of the final three.
I loved BB20 for the most part; I mean we got blindsides galore, not to mention eight consecutive weeks of just fun TV. I think that was a direct result of us not seeing any repeat HOH until week 9, that is where things started to go downhill in my opinion because it became predictable, all the way up till JC saved the season in my opinion by winning that crucial final 4 HOH. I don’t like predictability when it comes to reality TV, I want to be surprised and I will admit the hacker twist did shake-up the game in a big way.
If not for that competition, the season may have ended differently. Would Bayleigh still be back doored? Probably, but Haleigh would have struck at Tyler head first on her HOH win without hesitation instead of taking the safe route. We would have seen Rockstar remain in the house and Fessy wouldn’t have made that stupid move to nominate Scottie, and I think we see a jury that is more balanced and who ends up in the final three is a complete toss up at that point.
I think a few things can be done to re-catapult “Big Brother” to being the best reality competition ever. First, return to the original jury format and let’s slice that notion of nine jurors, let’s return to seven. It forces the players to be a bit more competitive in my opinion. Second, get rid of the twists! You really do not need them to deliver a great season. All you have to do is look at BB10 people! Next, give the damn audience what we’ve been asking years for: another All-Stars season. Like seriously, it has been over 12 years, and for reasons I cannot fathom you guys cannot make this happen. That excuse of not having enough players to choose from is BS. You know how you make it happen, up the prize money to $1 million for the winner, second place gets $250k.
That changes a lot and I’m certain you’d have plenty willing to play. I mean “Survivor” pays a million, why can’t “Big Brother” do the same. Third, change up some of the competitions; I’m sick of seeing the luck-based, same things done year after year. Throw the contestants off by introducing games not seen before and if anything let’s see the return of those epic endurance challenges that force the players to dig deep to win. Lastly, I want to see more players of a versatile age group. We don’t need all players in their 20s. I mean look at BB10 once again as evidence. Let’s get some more mature people in their 30s, 40s, 50s and even 60s, I mean Jerry was in his 70s people and the guy was a hoot to watch on TV.
“Big Brother 20” revitalized the fan base in a great way, now we can only hope this phenomenal season doesn’t rewind back time and give us another “Big Brother 19” scenario.