Most Big Brother seasons crown a deserving winner that fans are pleased to see take home the grand prize. But once in a while, a BB finale causes an uproar among fans who feel a certain houseguest was robbed of victory. Usually, this occurs because the jury cannot set aside their grievances. Jury management is a crucial part of a good Big Brother game and some players fall short when it comes to appeasing their fellow houseguests.
So, who are these Big Brother players who caused a stir in the fandom? Keep reading to find out.
Danielle Reyes deserved to win Big Brother 3
Danielle Reyes is the Robbed Goddess of Big Brother. Fans often refer to her as “the best to never win,” and her loss to Lisa Donahue in Season 3 has been a source of controversy among the fandom since 2002.
Dani played a masterful game, but her snarky confessionals cost her the $500,000 prize. In Big Brother 3, the jury was not sequestered, meaning the eliminated houseguests went home and saw her trash them on national television. Her confessionals soured the jury’s perception of her as a player. When finale night arrived, they chose to reward Lisa’s sweetness. Dani’s loss caused such an uproar that Big Brother began sequestering the jury the following season.
Dan Gheesling deserved to win Big Brother 14
Dan Gheesling schemed his way to victory in Big Brother 10 but wasn’t so lucky in Big Brother 14. The Michigan native made a series of bold moves that landed him in the final two chairs. But his lack of jury management cost him the win. His fellow players did not appreciate his manipulative gameplay strategy and chose to crown newbie Ian Terry. While Ian played a solid game, many fans criticized the BB14 jury for not giving Dan the win, especially after he staged one of the most brilliant coups in Big Brother history – Dan’s funeral.
Dan spoke about the loss in an interview with Big Brother Network in 2012. He told the outlet he felt “disappointed” by the jury.
“It’s unfortunate because the only thing I wanted, and maybe I’ll never know, all I wanted was a fair shake at four votes. Four people with an open mind to consider it,” he said. “What really, it didn’t bother me, but disappointing was I heard after the fact was Jenn voted based on solely because she didn’t want to give the game to someone else who had won it before as compared to someone on the merit of how they played the game. That was disappointing to me as a player and a lover of the game.”
Paul Abrahamian deserved to win Big Brother 18 and Big Brother 19
Paul Abrahamian made it to the finale of Big Brother 18 and Big Brother 19, but he was never able to convince a jury. The Clothing Designer was effective at rallying votes, making deals, and winning challenges when needed. But his aggressive gameplay style rubbed his fellow houseguests the wrong way. He ruled the BB House like a mad king and the houseguests didn’t want to reward his behavior. He arguably played a stronger game than BB18 winner Nicole Franzel and BB19 winner Josh Martinez, but his personality made him hard to root for. Like Dan, his lack of jury management cost him the game.
Tyler Crispen deserved to win Big Brother 20
In my opinion, Tyler Crispen deserved to win Big Brother 20. To this day, I regard his Big Brother 20 performance as one of the greatest of all time. He made the right alliances, manipulated his fellow houseguests into doing his bidding, and caused division in the house to his benefit. It was pretty genius. His game was impressive but like many greats that came before him, a scorned jury robbed him of the prize. The majority of the jury voted for Tyler’s Level Six ally, Kaycee Clark because they liked her more than him.
Big Brother is streaming on Paramount Plus.
TELL US – DO YOU AGREE WITH OUR LIST? WHAT OTHER BIG BROTHER PLAYERS DO YOU FEEL WERE ROBBED OF A VICTORY?