| Author |
Message |
Leroy17
Member
08-01-2010
| Tuesday, August 17, 2010 - 12:56 pm 
I agree with all the people who are tired of lazy floaters.
Here's a simple suggestion to decrease the number of people throwing the HOH competition: until the number of HGs reaches 6 the HOH winner gets immunity for 2 weeks. This would prevent immediate revenge and make winning HOH much more important for everyone in the early weeks.
Similarly, it would put more spice in the game if the HOH nominated 3 people during the early weeks and the winner of the veto was required to use it on one of them. This would do away with the unfairness of people who couldn't play for the veto being back doored.
Are there any other ideas out there?
|
Lexie_girl
Member
07-30-2004
| Tuesday, August 17, 2010 - 1:11 pm
Actually, I like both of those ideas Leroy. I'm assuming while the HOH can't play the second week, at least he/she has immunity. I really hate that they throw comps - I would like to see an incentive for them to win. And then there are those that say they are throwing the comps (but they just suck so much - you really can't tell).
Another thing... and this has been one of my biggest pet peeves is I would love for them to get rid of the slop. Let them grow vegetables or something - or do stuff around the house to earn money to buy groceries. The whole slop thing is been there, done that. Let's move on, AG.
|
Bonbonlover
Member
07-13-2000
| Tuesday, August 17, 2010 - 1:19 pm
Another thing... and this has been one of my biggest pet peeves is I would love for them to get rid of the slop. Let them grow vegetables or something - or do stuff around the house to earn money to buy groceries. The whole slop thing is been there, done that. Let's move on, AG.
That is exactly what they did in BB1. They had a vegetable garden and chickens. I can't remember how they got their budget, but they had to get together as a house (thus weekly house meetings) and decide what groceries to buy. More toilet paper or more beer??
|
Caligirlinga
Member
08-25-2005
| Tuesday, August 17, 2010 - 1:25 pm
I love the idea of earning money to buy groceries and household staples (toilet paper, dish detergent, soap, etc.)
Either do it (earning funds) with comps or chores.
|
Leroy17
Member
08-01-2010
| Tuesday, August 17, 2010 - 1:26 pm
That was one of my favorite parts of BB1. It was very hard to win much of a budget and everybody had to agree on the shopping list. It creates lots of arguments about whose fault it was if they had little to spend, and creates the tension of having to cooperate on this versus competing to be the last one standing.
|
Dfennessey
Member
07-25-2004
| Tuesday, August 17, 2010 - 1:28 pm
dump slop and peanut butter and jelly and have them do a food comp.
|
Saguaro
Member
06-21-2005
| Tuesday, August 17, 2010 - 1:36 pm
I like the idea of 3 nominees, and I actually like the public to nominate 1 person, the HOH nominates the other two. The highest voted HG that wasn't picked by the HOH would get the nomination. I think the public choosing a nominee (not voting a person out) would have much more viewer involvement than choosing what type of food, or lame sabotage they want in the house.
|
Sincebb1
Member
08-22-2005
| Tuesday, August 17, 2010 - 1:47 pm
Totally agree on the "dump slop" and have them earn/win food and household items! It also would allow someone that did not want to put a target on themselves by winning HOH to make themselves valuable for winning food etc.
Also, with each HOH win if there was a monetary incentive...like $10,000 a car, a trip etc. It would guarantee that most players would not throw the comp.
BB1 did a lot of things right as far as keeping the HGs on a short leash and responsible for their actions and productive.
|
Lexie_girl
Member
07-30-2004
| Tuesday, August 17, 2010 - 1:51 pm
My only problem with the public nominating is I flat-out don't trust AG with the voting results - and I have felt that way ever since the season with Evil Dick and America's Choice, where she manipulated his win.
|
Leroy17
Member
08-01-2010
| Tuesday, August 17, 2010 - 2:05 pm
It would certainly give them a dose of reality to find out who America liked the least each week.
|
Lexie_girl
Member
07-30-2004
| Tuesday, August 17, 2010 - 2:19 pm
It would Leroy, but do you honestly think if we had voted this year that AG would have said that America dislikes Rachel the most? AG was lapping it up that America hated Rachel. She brought back in a HG that had "media contact" after her eviction. I just don't trust AG with the results as far as I can throw her.
|
Lostfan
Member
03-10-2010
| Tuesday, August 17, 2010 - 2:24 pm
Let them play there OWN game without ANY interference from AG or the DR ...
|
Leroy17
Member
08-01-2010
| Tuesday, August 17, 2010 - 2:30 pm
I feel like a lot of assumptions are being made about AG's behavior when in fact we can never know what the truth is unless one of her assistants decides to write a book. No matter what it looks like to us, any action we attribute to her is just guesswork.
|
Wilsonatmd
Member
01-23-2001
| Tuesday, August 17, 2010 - 2:59 pm
The Quebec version of BB this year had several things that they could use:
-HOH was called #1. The #1 could pick two HG's for eviction- as well as pick a #2. The #2 was the only other person allowed to sleep in the #1 bedroom (and even there it was at the foot of the bed), was immune from being evicted thru a POV, and could also pick a 3rd nominee for eviction. The #2 also could vote for eviction- #1 only voted in case of a tie.
-Sometimes, there were two POV's up for grabs in a comp- and they were all DPOV's (winner got to pick the replacement if used)
-Each evictee could throw a "grenade"- something that can affect other HG's. This could range from picking someone to be automatically nominated (in which case the #1 would only nominate one person), to excluding someone from being #1 or #2 the following week, to granting immunity to others, or to solitary confinement.
I'd also consider doing what some other versions have done- the prize money starts at zero, and they have to earn money in various ways- like in endurance HOH's, they can say "We'll add $100 to the winner's prize money for every minute the comp lasts, up to 10 hours and $60,000"- that'll stop quickie endurances. They can adjust the value of the comps to fit their budget- but there should be a possibility for the final prize total to be well over $500K- even $1 million plus (for the runner-up, just take 10% of the winner's total).
|
Puzzled
Member
08-27-2001
| Tuesday, August 17, 2010 - 3:01 pm
Agree they need incentives to actually play in the comps. Not money, because that puts a target on their backs. Maybe the top three could get prizes like seeing the yearly movie, or getting a steak dinner, or whatever the guests seem to prize.
The losers become have nots--agree no slop, though.
Give them tasks that make them interact, like the domino thing in BB1. Make them put on skits, make a BB song for their year. Make them debate things like "mosquitos are good for the environment" or "toilets should be square"...
Let's have some fun!
|
Kookliebird
Member
08-04-2005
| Tuesday, August 17, 2010 - 3:03 pm
On Thurday night, they do the HOH, Friday is the nom and Saturday is the POV..... Monday is the POV Ceremony, then Thursday again. Not much seems to change between these events. So, why not spread them out more. Maybe have HOH on Thursday, but do the Noms on Saturday, the POV on Sunday and the POV Cermemony on Tuesday.
I also like the idea of America putting a 3rd 'wildcard' nomination out there, as well.
|
Nerovh
Member
06-12-2005
| Tuesday, August 17, 2010 - 3:36 pm
Dump AG and give the show to Mark Burnett and Jeff Probst.
|
Seamonkey
Moderator
09-07-2000
| Tuesday, August 17, 2010 - 3:44 pm
Without reading the thread..
Fire Allison Grodner and go back to the producers from Season 1 (the ones for all the other BBs world wide)
Looking up.. Mark Burnett is involved with ruining some shows lately.. Design Star, for one. So I don't want him involved.
Better feeds and allow youtube clips..
|
Leroy17
Member
08-01-2010
| Tuesday, August 17, 2010 - 3:58 pm
Seamonkey, I don't think that's possible. Aaron Shapiro is Vice President of a company and no longer works for CBS. Returning to BB would be a big step down for him.
|
Callasin
Member
06-21-2005
| Tuesday, August 17, 2010 - 4:32 pm
I liked the way HOH was done in AU. Everyone nominated and got to pick two people. Their first choice got 2 points and the second got 1 point. After everyone had nominated they announced who was up and HOH got to save one person. However nobody, including HOH knew who was next in line to go up and sometimes it backfired on them. HOH also got to choose who did what chores.
|
Seamonkey
Moderator
09-07-2000
| Tuesday, August 17, 2010 - 4:38 pm
I don't want Arnold Shapiro back.
|
Marksman
Member
05-04-2007
| Tuesday, August 17, 2010 - 4:42 pm
I would like no talking about noms or votes.
Sure they will try to skirt the rules, but punish them for that.
Let us see what they do when they can't just sit around talking strategy and are never sure who is going to do what.
|
Leroy17
Member
08-01-2010
| Tuesday, August 17, 2010 - 5:09 pm
Oops, I had a brain fart, Seamonkey. Forgot about Jon de Mol. I doubt he would come back either, or that CBS would want him.
|
Sanfranjoshfan
Member
09-17-2000
| Tuesday, August 17, 2010 - 5:36 pm
I wish they'd make this change for at least one week, just to see how it works...
The HOH nominates 2 HG, they do the POV, blah blah... and then they vote one of them out....BUT the one that survives the vote automatically becomes the new HOH!
That would really mix it up. The HOH would want to nominate someone he wants evicted alongside someone he wants to be the next HOH (one enemy and one friend). It would add a whole new dimension to the nomination process unlike now, when they usually just nominate two enemies and then it doesn't really matter to the HOH (or his alliance) which one is evicted.
The different house alliances could even try to orchestrate it so that someone that keeps throwing the HOH comps would become HOH even if they didn't want it. That could force some people's loyalties out into the open and it could make some floaters pick a side whether they wanted to or not.
Every HOH would have to be extremely careful with their noms because each eviction would have the potential of becoming a total game changer.
|
Zgoodgirl
Member
08-22-2003
| Tuesday, August 17, 2010 - 5:46 pm
I don't want the jury in a jury house. I want them to stay in the house, just now out of playing for the money. They don't compete, they are not on slop, and they are not have-nots. They just get to sit around and stir up a whole mess load of drama and crap. Sorry, I love the drama and the fights.
I think I saw on the AUS BB that they compete for money that they will then send people into a 'grocery store' and get the food they need for the week. It would be good to see who goes for wants over needs, and where you could forget things like toilet paper and soap. It can also cause targets on people.
I hate the slop and the have not idea. And I do not like public voting. I want them to play the game the way they want to play, and want them to talk and plot with their alliance the way they want to without being in fear of pissing the viewers off. I don't want to interfere in their gameplay. But I do enjoy hearing them talk game and discuss noms and voting. If I remember, AUS is not allowed to do this. That makes some boring feeds at times.
|
