TV: Big Brother 20, Part 2 - We've got the numbers

Status
Not open for further replies.

dahrougem2

Registered User
Dec 9, 2011
36,409
36,610
Edmonton, Alberta
That's not 7 competition wins because Angela won that PoV. You're only proving that he's been overrated with these humongous reaches to give him credit for things he didn't earn. To pretend like this particular season compares to those other ones is intentionally being misleading because it isn't. Tyler wasn't some mastermind. He was a part of an alliance that ran the show against an alliance that was historically awful. He wasn't the best all-around. Kaycee was for the reasons I listed. She was better socially because she didn't piss people off in jury and she was a better competitor.
Nah man, the lengths that you're going to discredit Tyler and credit Kaycee as the best overall player when she clearly wasn't are absurd.

And yes, it is 7 competition wins. Just because he chose to give the Veto away in the only competition all season where that was allowed doesn't mean he didn't win that competition. Him being able to decide who gets the veto is proof enough that he won that competition, so the only one reaching here is you.
 

Finnish your Czech

J'aime Les offres hostiles
Nov 25, 2009
64,457
1,986
Toronto
There were a lot of dumb people in the house this season and that's the reason why Kaycee won. And really, Kaycee wasn't very smart either. She played zero strategic game other than choosing to be in a F2 with Tyler. She was very rarely shown in the DRs because she had nothing to say. Her speech/responses on the final episode said nothing.

I don't think Tyler was a particularly great player either because he did a poor job to end out the season, but he should have won.
 

Pinkfloyd

Registered User
Oct 29, 2006
70,238
13,611
Folsom
Nah man, the lengths that you're going to discredit Tyler and credit Kaycee as the best overall player when she clearly wasn't are absurd.

And yes, it is 7 competition wins. Just because he chose to give the Veto away in the only competition all season where that was allowed doesn't mean he didn't win that competition. Him being able to decide who gets the veto is proof enough that he won that competition, so the only one reaching here is you.

That literally meant that he didn't win the competition and you're going to turn around and tell someone else about absurd lengths? He didn't win that competition. Attempting to argue otherwise is complete BS.
 

dahrougem2

Registered User
Dec 9, 2011
36,409
36,610
Edmonton, Alberta
That literally meant that he didn't win the competition and you're going to turn around and tell someone else about absurd lengths? He didn't win that competition. Attempting to argue otherwise is complete BS.
Yes, because he did win the competition. He simply chose not to take the Veto as his prize and instead took the trip. That doesn't change the fact that he won the competition. I genuinely don't understand how it's difficult for you to get this.
 

Pinkfloyd

Registered User
Oct 29, 2006
70,238
13,611
Folsom
Yes, because he did win the competition. He simply chose not to take the Veto as his prize and instead took the trip. That doesn't change the fact that he won the competition. I genuinely don't understand how it's difficult for you to get this.

Except he didn't win. This is a binary thing. Choosing to lose is still losing and not winning. You need to stop this nonsense if you want to be taken seriously here.
 

TNT87

Registered User
Jun 23, 2010
21,353
8,094
PA
Are they planning an all-star edition any time?

I don't want to see what they have done and bring back four former houseguests. Either have all new houseguests or just a full all star season.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rodgerwilco

Rhaegar Targaryen

Registered User
Jun 25, 2016
6,375
4,203
Are they planning an all-star edition any time?

I don't want to see what they have done and bring back four former houseguests. Either have all new houseguests or just a full all star season.

I think Dick said the all star seasons don’t get as many viewers as normal seasons so that’s why we haven’t seen another one.

It would be cool, and I share the same belief as you (make it all stars or completely new).
 
  • Like
Reactions: TNT87

Deen

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
12,571
4,905
I think Dick said the all star seasons don’t get as many viewers as normal seasons so that’s why we haven’t seen another one.

It would be cool, and I share the same belief as you (make it all stars or completely new).

That just means another season of Paul. No thanks.
 

Pinkfloyd

Registered User
Oct 29, 2006
70,238
13,611
Folsom
Lol. Sure bud. I'm done explaining this, you clearly aren't going to understand.

It's more like you clearly don't understand basic words. Winning is actually not losing. I'm surprised you need this to be explained to you. Choosing to lose is still losing. It isn't winning. It isn't any clearer than that. Throwing a competition isn't winning.
 

dahrougem2

Registered User
Dec 9, 2011
36,409
36,610
Edmonton, Alberta
It's more like you clearly don't understand basic words. Winning is actually not losing. I'm surprised you need this to be explained to you. Choosing to lose is still losing. It isn't winning. It isn't any clearer than that. Throwing a competition isn't winning.
He won the Power of Veto. He chose to give it to someone else in the only competition all season where you could choose to do so. Winning and choosing to give it to someone else =/= losing.
 

Pinkfloyd

Registered User
Oct 29, 2006
70,238
13,611
Folsom
He won the Power of Veto. He chose to give it to someone else in the only competition all season where you could choose to do so. Winning and choosing to give it to someone else =/= losing.

No, he did not. For him to have won the power of veto, he would have had to choose the power of veto. Thus, and this is as basic of logic as you're ever going to get, he didn't win the power of veto.
 

dahrougem2

Registered User
Dec 9, 2011
36,409
36,610
Edmonton, Alberta
No, he did not. For him to have won the power of veto, he would have had to choose the power of veto. Thus, and this is as basic of logic as you're ever going to get, he didn't win the power of veto.
Agree to disagree. I think you're wrong. You think I'm wrong. Let's leave it at that.
 

Pinkfloyd

Registered User
Oct 29, 2006
70,238
13,611
Folsom
Agree to disagree. I think you're wrong. You think I'm wrong. Let's leave it at that.

It's not really one of those things. Either he won the power of veto and the competition or didn't. He didn't. Those are the facts. Alternative fact world I guess.
 

Cor

I am a bot
Jun 24, 2012
69,648
35,246
AEF
He won the Power of Veto competition. He did not win the Power of Veto, as he chose to win something else.

He is not a Veto winner from that comp.
 

Cor

I am a bot
Jun 24, 2012
69,648
35,246
AEF
I think Dick said the all star seasons don’t get as many viewers as normal seasons so that’s why we haven’t seen another one.

It would be cool, and I share the same belief as you (make it all stars or completely new).

Actually this is false (not that Dick said it, but the premise itself). Season 7 averaged more viewers than the season before, AND every season after it until Season 12. Season 13, a season with almost 50% returnees, averaged the highest viewership since Season 5. Season 14 lost nearly 800K viewers, but is still more watched than the seasons since then. The only "returnee" season that did bad was Season 18, which was largely seen as a really bad season, with Nicole being the highlighted returnee ayway.

This season, featuring an all new cast, saw the lowest average viewership ever.

Quite frankly, they need to do an all-star season to bring some excitement back to the show. It's time.
 

Cor

I am a bot
Jun 24, 2012
69,648
35,246
AEF
Damn average viewers were down 650k compared to last season.

Mhmm.

There were actually rumours that CBS was going to shop the show to other networks. That seems to have subsided given the renewal of Celebrity Big Brother and them opening the casting for Season 21.

There needs to be some sort of change. I personally think it’s time to alter the jury system. I’ve previously suggested a panel of past houseguests, I think it’s the best way. I know someone suggested that you can still form juries out of the current seasons players, but they vote on the following seasons winner. (Rather than it be the 9 houseguests before the runner up and winner, it would be the winner, runner up, and 5-7 previous evicted houseguests)

I almost think the show needs to evolve back to what it used to do, which I know sounds weird. A lot of the seasons from BB14 onward had some sort of theme attached to it.

Since BB14, and the coaches, they haven’t really done anything like that. It was just the people on the show. Fans have been pretty vocal about not liking the casting (well, up to this season) and the show has consistently tried to rely on their casting to tell the story rather than having a planned story/theme to fallback on.

I’d be curious to see how the response would be to them going the survivor route and filming the entire season before airing it. Though that would depend on how much they make from the feeds.
 

Peasy

Registered User
May 25, 2012
16,679
13,996
Star Shoppin
The season is way to long IMO. I'm sure they make more money this way, but personally I stopped watching the last 3 weeks or so for at least 5 years now. I still follow whats happening, but it becomes a chore to watch the episodes. I think they also have to switch the format up somehow. Have a double eviction super early in the season. Everyone knows the format of the show now and nothing is really a surprise anymore.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rodgerwilco

King Mapes

Sub to My YouTube Blocks_4_days
Feb 9, 2008
28,862
1,162
Edmonton
He won the Power of Veto competition. He did not win the Power of Veto, as he chose to win something else.

He is not a Veto winner from that comp.
He might not credit but face it, he won that competition.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->