While fans of Big Brother had high hopes for the latest All-Stars season, the second-ever in the show's long history, it didn't quite pan out. Out of the gate, the season was marred with controversy as rumors floated about the absence of some key "all-stars" and what might have led to that.
Then there were All-Stars who were rumored to have been pre-gaming, some who tested positive for COVID-19 right before production, and a couple of houseguests who many, including fellow players, didn't think deserved to be there at all. Sure, there were some good moments through the season. But it was, by and large, a pretty lackluster season overall. Needless to say, if Big Brother has plans for a third All-Stars edition, some things need to change.
Only Have True All-Stars
While it was great that players like David got a second chance on the All-Stars season, it would have made far more sense to have him appear on a later season as a returning player, not one called "All-Stars."
David got voted out first on his season, and while he remained in the house for weeks after due to the Camp Comeback twist, he still wasn't officially playing. There was also nothing memorable about him. A next All-Stars seasons needs to include only true, bonafide All-Star players.
Twists That Actually Shift Power
The twists of late haven't done much for the game. They have either fallen in favor of the dominating alliance anyway, weren't used, or led to no major shift in the game. More elaborate twists need to be introduced or brought back that can really shake things up should the house become too predictable.
Maybe, for example, new All-Stars could be added to the house each week to replace evicted ones, except you don't know who they are. Or, having twists that force two people in rival alliances to secretly work together so they have to prove how they can be crafty and some surprise votes happen.
No Previous Winners
If they want to have a season just for former winners like Survivor did with Winners at War, that would be great. But mixing former winners with people who placed second and third, people who played multiple times, and some who barely played at all, didn't make sense.
Ideally, the season would only include true All-Stars who fit the definition with a combination of having gotten fairly far in the game, playing multiple times and were popular among viewers for one reason or another. But the one prerequisite is that you cannot have won already.
Have An America's Player Again
Remember way back on season eight when Eric had his entire game ruined by being deemed America's Player? Every week, viewers voted on crazy things they wanted him to do to shake up the game, and he had to do them if he wanted to win cash prizes.
He arguably lost the game because of this, being forced to vote against his own alliance. (He was previously in a great position in the game). But this could actually be a good twist for an All-Stars season, tempting a player to go against their alliance in an effort to secretly win money. If the cash or other prize is enticing enough, they might just go for it and that would make things more interesting.
Have The Battle Back
On a regular season, the idea of the Battle Back competition is annoying because a player who was rightfully sent home has the chance to return. But in an All-Stars season, it's dog-eat-dog. No one has to prove themselves a good player, they have already done so. It's just a matter of not getting voted out first.
So being able to come back, especially if the evicted people competing are all from the underdog alliance, would be a great way to try and level the playing field. Otherwise, a dominant alliance rules the roost through the entire game, which always seems to happen in the latest seasons.
A Coup d'Etat
Remember when Jeff got the Coup d'Etat power that allowed him to essentially take over Chima's HoH, removing the people she put up and putting his own two nominees on the block? It caused a massive uproar in the house. So much so, in fact, that Chima was evicted from the game for angrily throwing her mic pack into the pool!
Bringing that power back, or exploring other similar ideas of twists with extreme power, could be just the type of shake-up an All-Stars season needs, especially if houseguests are hold in advance that the power exists and will be granted to someone at any time. Whether you're HoH or not, the risk of the Coup d'Etat being dropped will always be looming over everyone's heads.
Only Previous Winners
As noted above, an All-Stars season shouldn't have previous winners…unless the cast was entirely made up of previous winners. It's difficult to imagine an All-Stars season happening without the most prolific players in the game who were good enough to actually win: Will Kirby, Dan Gheesling, Derrick Levasseur, Rachel Reilly, Ian Terry, Hayden Moss, Jordan Lloyd, Dick Donato, Mike "Boogie" Malin, the list goes on.
This would be the ultimate All-Stars season. Of course, it would require getting these players to come back and compete, and many have indicated that they would not return. Nonetheless, never say never.
Make It All-Stars Villains
While an All-Stars season just featuring villains would be pretty cut-throat, and include most of the previous winners, it would make for an interesting, and potentially explosive, dynamic. Imagine Dick Donato playing with Rachel Reilly? Or Jessie Godderz going toe-to-toe with Jackson Michie?
In any typical season, there's a group of outcasts who instantly become the underdogs. In a season of all villains, no one in the non-dominant alliance will roll over and be stepped on.
Go Way Back In Time
It wasn't fair to Janelle and Kaysar that they were instantly ostracized for being the "old school" players even though they are more fitting All-Stars than many of the others. Why not have an entire season of old-school players? Harken back to All-Stars from the first 10 seasons of the series.
In addition to Janelle and Kaysar, that might include players like Dan Gheesling, James Zinkand, Dick Donato, Eric Stein, and even Will Kirby himself.
Create Incentives To Flip
While it's admirable when a group forms a strong, dominant alliance and refuses to deviate from that – after all, why would they when it's a rock-solid plan that works? – producers need to fix such instances from making the game predictable by providing enticing incentives to flip.
Imagine if a player, for example, was offered immunity for the next three weeks if they flipped alliances? Or if someone who felt like they were on the bottom of their dominance alliance was promised $10,000 for flipping, then another $10,000 for every week they lasted after that? It would require larger cash prizes throughout the game versus just the big winner one at the end. But an All-Star season should come with an All-Star budget.