Big Brother competitions have been a part of the show since its inception. They’re a fundamental part of the game. However, are they becoming too important? Big Brother 26 introduced the AI Arena, now called the BB Blockbuster. It made the game unpredictable because your whole fate could come down to a competition win. If you didn’t win people over with your social game, or if you hadn’t maneuvered your way off the block with strategy and gaming, then you still had one last Hail Mary with the AI Arena.
It injected some excitement into Thursday nights. The BB Block Buster did the same for Big Brother 27. Then, it became a bit more of a hassle when it went beyond the jury phase. It meant that people who had used their social skills, bonds, and strategy could end up on the block just because a Head of Household ran out of nomination options.
The BB Block Buster itself has some merits and works to spice up Thursday nights. However, it needs an expiration date that happens before the jury phase. This allows the game not to become so competition-focused. Yes, it allows players more chances to win their way off the block, but it lets them neglect other skills, like social gaming, that prevent them from going on the block in the first place, or getting off it without a competition win.
Rachel’s elimination may be one of the most controversial moments in Big Brother history. Many think it’s fair, and some others have been eliminated in similar ways. However, many also think that it goes against some of the major principles and essence of the game. No one who makes it past day 5 should be eliminated from a competition. That’s not how Big Brother should work. Yes, the show’s motto is expect the unexpected, but let’s be serious.
That’s not a ‘get out of jail free’ card for just any random thing that the producers may come up with.
As we approach the Big Brother 27 finale, we have three different types of players at the end. We have a comp beast in Morgan, a social player in Ashley, and Vince, who has a bit of social and competition wins. They’re about equal on strategy, but with Morgan having a little more of an edge. We all know how many M&Ms died to get her to this place in the game.
Although all three players have strengths, the jurors seem to respect Ashley’s game the least. They don’t believe she has done much in the game, and that’s partly because of her lack of competition wins. She couldn’t control the outcome of the week with power, so it’s perceived that she hasn’t done much.
Ashley has done a lot more than is credited, not only to stay in the house this long but also to influence some of the decisions. Players like Ashley are no longer valued because they don’t have a million comp wins. This seems to be the norm of the new era Big Brother. In early seasons, there are many great players and some beloved winners who have barely won any competitions.
They would probably lose in modern Big Brother. An increase in competitions make them too critical to ignore as an important factor in crowning a winner. Competitions are important and have always been, but should someone’s whole worth as a player be based or dependent on their win ability?
