Jury

May as well start this thread.

News came out today that Dr Will will no longer serve as the jury round table host

https://parade.com/entertainment/big-brother-dr-will-kirby-steps-down-jury-roundtable-host

To be honest this is no big deal to me at all. The question is who will they get to replace him? I honestly don't think you need a host but I hope it's not a former player because then it will be someone I don't like such as Frankie, or Taylor. If they insist they need a host, let Jerry O'Connell do it, we know he likes the game

Not Frankie or Taylor or Derrick or Cody or Janelle or Jeff or Jesse, and the list goes on. I like idea of Jerry O'Connell to a certain extent, but I think he would just kind of be a clown of sorts.

I would like to see someone like Britney because she appreciates different ways to play the game, would be entertaining and wouldn't make it about her. Matt from the Brigade would be pretty good too. It has to be someone who can appreciate different ways to play the game and don't care if they are the star of the episode.

They should just cancel the roundtable, let them talk game anytime they want in the jury house and then have each person come to the stage with their own question instead of having to all agree on a few select things that production pushes down their throat.

There is only 1 former player that could fit the bill of not making it about them or any of the other nonsense. Ian Terry, but he will never do it. He doesn't want to be in the spotlight. He lived out that dream of his and now just wants to go about his life. But he'd definitely be the most objective. Jeff would ask stupid questions. Unfortunately, they will never go away from the format of scripted questions and such

ctown28 wrote:

There is only 1 former player that could fit the bill of not making it about them or any of the other nonsense.  Ian Terry, but he will never do it.  He doesn't want to be in the spotlight.  He lived out that dream of his and now just wants to go about his life.  But he'd definitely be the most objective.  Jeff would ask stupid questions.  Unfortunately, they will never go away from the format of scripted questions and such

Yes, Ian would be great because he is objective. I do think Britney or Matt would do well to, plus I like their weird, dry humor with a well placed comment here and there.

I think Britney would be horrible at it. She'd get mad at people who don't see it the way she see's it. And she would literally overuse the word literally.

Matt would just be trying to force jokes. It's just such a small list of who would be good at it without trying to make it about themselves

ctown28 wrote:

I think Britney would be horrible at it.  She'd get mad at people who don't see it the way she see's it.  And she would literally overuse the word literally.

Matt would just be trying to force jokes.  It's just such a small list of who would be good at it without trying to make it about themselves

Nah, Britney would not have a dog in the fight, so she wouldn't care. Now would she poke the bear a bit and make people see other aspects of things? Yes, of course, but that is what a moderator is SUPPOSED to do.

The only problem with Ian is I think these people would walk all over him and not hear a thing he said. Actually what they should look at is some of the podcasts that are out there for people who know the game, but have some objectivity. I don't listen to any myself, but my husband sometimes listens to Rob has a podcast and he says it is pretty good. There have to be A LOT of these people out there and if they were careful they might find a good one.

Oh hell, what am I saying, we are talking about production trying to find someone OBJECTIVE? When pigs fly!

Well there are so many that have now thrown their hat in the ring to be the replacement. Yep Frankie was one, Cody, Nicole F. Janelle actually had a good idea for once and said no replacement, just let them do a fireside chat.

But I got to thinking, there is another that I think would do a fabulous job with it simply becasue he had no moral compass in the game. Dan Gheesling. His thoughts would be strictly on gameplay and nothing personal

ctown28 wrote:

Well there are so many that have now thrown their hat in the ring to be the replacement.  Yep Frankie was one, Cody, Nicole F.  Janelle actually had a good idea for once and said no replacement, just let them do a fireside chat.

But I got to thinking, there is another that I think would do a fabulous job with it simply becasue he had no moral compass in the game.  Dan Gheesling.  His thoughts would be strictly on gameplay and nothing personal

I saw that Cody was thanking people for pushing for him to be the replacement, but I think that would be terrible. Nicole F would be awful too.

I thought about Dan, but I think Dan has lost a step after watching him on Traitors. He REALLY wants people to agree with him and I could see him getting a bit too involved if their thoughts were different than his own.

I guess they don't have to have a moderator, but then I think some people wouldn't even get to express any opinion and some points of view would be lost. But, of course, how much do they listen to ideas that are different from their own anyway?

His problem on Traitors was that he was trying to play a Big Brother game and it is way too different. I still can't believe he missed the obvious (at least obvious to me) ruse they pulled on him. What better way to throw off the scent by trying to murder the guy they just told you has protection. If they were rlying, you got the guy out and if they weren't, no suspicion that it's you

ctown28 wrote:

His problem on Traitors was that he was trying to play a Big Brother game and it is way too different.  I still can't believe he missed the obvious (at least obvious to me) ruse they pulled on him.  What better way to throw off the scent by trying to murder the guy they just told you has protection.  If they were rlying, you got the guy out and if they weren't, no suspicion that it's you

That's true, but he just didn't seem to have the logical scheming skills he once had. His biggest problem is that he followed his gut instead of his brain. I'm excited to see the new season once it starts. Well, I think I might wait until it is over and then binge watch it like I didn't the first 2 seasons. I hope they get back to the basics they had in season 1 and dump some of that shit they did in season 2 because it took away from the game.

But anyway, I was never really entertained by Dan, in awe of his misting ability yes, but not entertained in any way really.

I think my favorite part of season 2 was watching Janelle get outplayed in every aspect of the game. Then still be bitter about it. I think she was mostly pissed because she wanted to be a traitor so bad. But you are right, back to what made season 1 so good and quit the stunt bullshit

ctown28 wrote:

I think my favorite part of season 2 was watching Janelle get outplayed in every aspect of the game.  Then still be bitter about it.  I think she was mostly pissed because she wanted to be a traitor so bad.  But you are right, back to what made season 1 so good and quit the stunt bullshit

Yes, that was probably the best part of the season. She will hold that grudge for not being chosen to be a Traitor for years. She is still butt hurt for things that happened on big brother. She is a piece of work, but I LOVED watching her flail around not being able to save herself no matter what. I knew she wasn't a traitor, but watching her from my living room I suspected she was for crying out loud!