Has the POV been a bust?
TV ClubHouse: Archive: ARCHIVE TWO:
Has the POV been a bust?
Patman | Thursday, September 12, 2002 - 06:34 pm     After being used by Gerry in week 1, the POV hasn't been used at all since then. Seems to me, sure, it may have stirred up more anxiety in the house for 3 days/week, but in actual gameplay, it's been a bust. They need to finetune the POV for next season. Either create a monetary incentive to use POV, or just flat out force the POV holder to use it (unless they are HoH or one of the nominees). |
Ketchuplover | Thursday, September 12, 2002 - 07:03 pm     agreed |
Lancecrossfire | Thursday, September 12, 2002 - 07:06 pm     Or get HG's with a little intsetinal fortitude. |
Poser | Thursday, September 12, 2002 - 07:10 pm     The veto might work if a nominee can veto him or herself. Imagine the competitions. Everybody trying to knock out the nominees! HOH's having to nominate 3 people every week. It would be much better. This year it was pretty good just the same. It created a whole lot of problems for Gerry and showed just how stu^h^h^h uh... unwise Marc could be. |
Puttergirl | Thursday, September 12, 2002 - 07:12 pm     I really have to disagree (that it was a bust)!!! Even though it was only used once, it provided a great deal of suspense and helped to shape the game on 2 occasions. You couldn't ask for more suspense than tonight!!! So, in other words, I don't think it necessarily has to be used to serve its purpose. It made tonight's show one of the best so far, in my opinion!!!!! |
Bmh | Thursday, September 12, 2002 - 07:14 pm     I agree Puttergirl..this game wouldn't be the same w/o the veto..no matter if it is used or not...it created suspense and unpredictablity all season..I loved it!..I think it was a great twist to the game..and at one point in the back of everybody's head..no-one was safe every week..any body would go..thats what made the veto so cool |
Patman | Thursday, September 12, 2002 - 08:11 pm     If the veto for next season always the golden Veto, it would totally compel the houseguests to compete hard without all that "throwing of competitions" that gets old by the 3rd week. Plus it give the nominees a chance to change their fate with immunity after being put up on the block. |
Patman | Thursday, September 12, 2002 - 08:14 pm     Also, I wanted to see fortunes change at the drop of a hat. That's true drama and human reactions that the golden veto would inflict. As it is, most of the evictions were decided before the Thursday shows, and that took the air out of the sails for many of the Thursday live eviction shows. |
Closetfan | Thursday, September 12, 2002 - 08:18 pm     I think that in it's current form, it was a bust...if it were always like the golden veto...excellent! Definitely needs a bit of refining, but not a bad idea. |
Starz | Thursday, September 12, 2002 - 08:23 pm     What about if the veto user could pick the replacement? |
Wilsonatmd | Thursday, September 12, 2002 - 08:25 pm     you read my mind... if they had made it so that veto could have saved himself, that might have worked...or perhaps you couldn't save yourself, BUT, veto holder not only could veto, but choose the replacement person!! (HOH would be immune), that would have shaken things up.....imagine if you were nommed, couldn't save yourself, but could choose your eviction partner....I bet it would have been used several times.. |
Pulk | Thursday, September 12, 2002 - 08:26 pm     That would be like HOH Pt2 Starz thus taking away HOH's power although i did think about that when it was POV was announced. |
Patman | Thursday, September 12, 2002 - 08:26 pm     I think that's almost too much power (unless they could not take themselves off the block but still select the nomination mate). That was the main reason why POV wasn't used, the insecurity of the HoH's next nomination in line. |
Eden | Thursday, September 12, 2002 - 08:37 pm     The way I see it, NOT using the POV is just as strategic a move as USING it. It isn't supposed to shake the game up everytime. It is supposed to be a strategic OPTION! It has definitely added to the suspense of the show. Several POV ceremonies were nail biters! All that being said, Marcellas NOT using the GPOV was the biggest bonehead move in the history of BB!! No one this late in the game should be that secure.... EVER! |
Niceguy | Friday, September 13, 2002 - 06:47 am     The only entertainment value in watching the POV comp last night was having it confirmed that Danielle's the least graceful woman I've seen on Reality TV. Did you hear her wishing she was Catherine Zeta Jones(as if). What an oaf. |
Vanillarose | Friday, September 13, 2002 - 06:53 am     I've never liked the POV in the first place. I've always thought that the big "twist" should have been something different. |
Craziel | Friday, September 13, 2002 - 07:18 am     The POV this year has universally sucked because it is always in the best interests of the HG's NOT TO MAKE ENEMIES BY ROCKING THE BOAT. You have to entice people to use the POV. You do that by giving the POV holder power. Allow the Veto holder to: 1. Save themselves. See point 3. 2. Select the replacement for the vetoed nominee, provided they don't veto themselves, with nobody 'safe' from selection, not even HOH. 3. If they veto themselves, the HOH picks their replacement. 4. IF they veto somebody they are excluded from the HOH competition next week. 5. If they veto nobody, they auto-win HOH next week. If they are currently HOH, or are evicted by not using the veto, they pick the next HOH immediately after the eviction vote is revealed. It becomes a powerful tactical move - like a mini HOH, but one that you can choose not to exercise - and there is a motivation NOT to use it on yourself, because then you lose the power to pick your replacement. Furthermore, everyone WILL go for the POV, because its like a HOH competition if you don't use it, and is a mini HOH if you do. Complicated though. |
Romans8_1 | Friday, September 13, 2002 - 07:31 am     I think they'll fix this for next year. We haven't seen the last of Mr. Veto. We have the technology. We can build him better than before. |
Poser | Friday, September 13, 2002 - 07:32 am     "What about if the veto user could pick the replacement?" I think the person saved by the veto should pick the replacement, AND, the HOH would not be exempt! That would be a hoot. |
Niceguy | Friday, September 13, 2002 - 07:48 am     Poser, I like your mind. Talk about fussing and cussing. |
Lurknomore | Friday, September 13, 2002 - 08:16 am     I think the biggest element that has caused POV to be a flop is that for most of the year the house have voted in unison and folks haven't wanted to rock that boat. We got our nominees, rest of the house got together and planned who was going, theh went YAWN. I do agree if they made a few tweaks to it as I read in earlier posts ie the POV holder could save themselves or choose the replacement, then it might get interesting. Thing is BB house dynamics change every year. If they were not all working together and talking and planning together the POV could have worked better. No way to know how that will go when they are casting. Even I will give my pal Arnie that one. Good idea but could use some tweaking. But I still think there are much better/creative ideas they could encorporate that would add more to the game. |
Gina8642 | Friday, September 13, 2002 - 11:42 am     I don't think the POV was a flop. Like Puttergirl said up at the top. The idea of the POV being used casued lots of stuff to happen, strategies to form, relationships revealed. I think it helped the game. It kept strategy tension on a high for more days than last year. A lot less down time. |
Litafreak | Friday, September 13, 2002 - 12:44 pm     POV seemed like a good idea at first, but it was only used once.... and there was a lot of worry about it every week (over nothing) It was like the new twist on Survivor last year... no one ever gave their immunity to anyone, did they? |
Ptomaine | Friday, September 13, 2002 - 01:25 pm     The effectiveness of POV is not dependent is its use. Throwing POV and winning it is just as important. Most recently Lisa threw POV so that either Amy or Marc would win it -- if it wasn't an influencing factor, why should Lisa feel like she had to throw it? Some key moments: 1. Amy winning POV. Will she keep her word and veto out Roddy? 2. Marcellus winning POGV. Will Marc use it to save himself? or Amy (nah...)? Roddy throwing veto competition. Will Chiara feel that this is a betrayal or will Roddy be able to convince her he had legitimate reason to throw POV? Gerry winning POV. Will he use it to save either Roddy or Chiara? ... Additionally, the threat of its use had a major impart on nominations. Chiara when putting up Roddy and Josh had to ask Gerry to not use POV if Gerry won it (ie). It is simplistic to think that because it was only used once, POV is a bust. A gun may only be used once to kill a person, that doesn't mean it is an ineffective weapon. |
Moedog | Friday, September 13, 2002 - 02:54 pm     The Golden Veto Winner |
Beagle | Friday, September 13, 2002 - 02:56 pm     Yes, it's been a bust. The veto should come with a price, a money price that is. Offer them $1000 to use it. OR they could make the use of it manditory, they must veto someone. This would make the job of the HOH a tricky situation. The HOH would be lible to put someone he or she doesn't want evicted up in the hopes the POV holder will take them off the block. No one will be safe with a method like that.
 |
Jagger | Friday, September 13, 2002 - 03:06 pm     I agree it added excitement to the house, but it really had little effect on the show, except for Gerry's use of it in the beginning. I would like to see them allow them to use it on themselves, but than not be allowed to compete in next HoH, that would allow for some more excitement father on in the game when someone has to nominate someone they really don't want to. |
Wadsters | Friday, September 13, 2002 - 03:14 pm     I like the Veto...adds to the game. What I would like to see...if the POV is used then POV winner spins a wheel with all of the HG names on it except his/her. Even the person saved could be back up..or HOH. That would be exciting! |
Keiffer | Friday, September 13, 2002 - 03:25 pm     The threat of the veto changed more than one nommination throught the summer. The one that sticks out of course is the Roddy/Chiara nommination by Amy. The only reason that Roddy went up was because Danny convinced Amy that with the Veto if Roddy won it he would save Chiara and Chiara wouldn't get voted out. That whole week would have been different were it not for the Veto. It would have been Jason v Chiara... and who know with the house having the chance to get Jason out they might have. Almost every nommination was influenced by the threat of the Veto. It is why Eric and Lisa... ROddy Chiara... Marcy and Amy... and to sime extent Josh and Tonya were put up together. The truth was though that when it came time to actually use the Veto it never seemed to make since in the game to use it. I would bet if he could change it Gerry would have not used the Veto... at least if he thought about it in a game way, not a life statement way. I agree that GPOV rules would have made the POV comps much more intense, and if you are going to bother having it why not provide imunity to anyone who might win it. |
Starz | Friday, September 13, 2002 - 03:34 pm     I kind of like the idea of the POV user chosing the replacement because; 1. Not knowing who HOH would put in was often what prevented its use. 2. If the house is divided into two camps, which happens, group A gets HOH and noms 2 people from group B. Group B wins veto, removes one of their own and pops in a group A player. Then it comes down to a dog fight for votes! It would also make the stronger alliance work harder to survive because they'd have to win both competions to ensure their agenda plays out. |
Corriecat | Friday, September 13, 2002 - 03:34 pm     To make the game exciting the POV could be different every week using the different suggestions we have made on the board. Before the game begins each POV and it's instructions are sealed in a special box. These boxes are on shelves next to the memory wall photographs. Each week the HOH opens one box for that weeks competition and reads the rules for it's use AFTER it has been won. Some of the POV's would have to be used so they could not agree as a group not to every use them. They would never be sure exactly what was in store for them. |
Woodpecke® | Friday, September 13, 2002 - 04:04 pm     The amazing thing about the veto is its obvious lack of use. The houseguests in this game are overly concerned with offending anyone. They ponder using the veto, then decide it is too risky. Meanwhile, they knife these same people behind their backs and show no mercy in their words and insults. I do not understand. Even Turnipbrain was too confident to use it to SAVE HIMSELF. I say we should make every veto a Golden Veto. I hear a converstion from BB 4 already. "I am using this veto on myself because I don't want to make the same mistake as that Turnipbrain on BB 3!" |
Patman | Friday, September 13, 2002 - 04:25 pm     Heck, I think it should a mandatory usage clause for the winner of POV. Now THAT would stir up a lot of stuff. That way not only does the HoH makes enemies, but possibly another houseguest (POV winner) makes an enemy, and that's good for the game, not so good for the houseguests trying to slide under the radar. And allow for the POV holder to save anyone (including themselves if nominated) and put up anyone (except for HoH). Sure, it could wind up being the hot potato contest (if people all try to throw the competition, but someone will be the unlucky loser/winner of the POV - and remember that the 2 on the nomination block will go for POV just to save themselves, so there will be some competition for POV even if some people intentionally try to lose it.) I think that's the tweak that would really make for some tense 4 days in the house from Thursday to Monday. |
|