Select Player · Episode 4Taylor

Active Player Big Brother 28 · Through Episode 4

Taylor

Episode 4 Rank3of 17

Taylor remained nominated but received reassurance from Barrett, coordinated with LaTrice and Lyric, and joined the temporary keep-Taylor voting bloc. Referent and Informational Power held at 3. Tied for Rank 3 of 17 with a Total Power Score of 11.

Official Big Brother 28 cast portrait of Taylor
Photo: Evan Mulling ©2026 CBS Broadcasting, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Taylor

Power Rating By Episode

11Episode 4 Score
6121824E1E4
How to read this graph: The Power Rating is the sum of a player’s six individual power scores. Each power is scored from 1 to 4, so the highest possible Power Rating is 24. Hover over, focus, or select A–A for a short explanation.

01

Player at a Glance

Protection and Vote Information Keep Taylor’s Power Steady

Taylor remained nominated but received reassurance from Barrett, coordinated with LaTrice and Lyric, and joined the temporary keep-Taylor voting bloc. Referent and Informational Power held at 3.

Current Position: Tied for Rank 3 of 17 with a Total Power Score of 11.

Rank and Score Movement: tied for Rank 3 of 17 → Tied for Rank 3 of 17; Total Power Score 11 → 11.

Clearest Response: Barrett reassured Taylor, LaTrice remained committed, and Lyric placed Taylor in a desired endgame group.

What Changed: No individual power rating changed; Total Power Score remained 11.

02

Current Power

These are the clearest and most consequential examples supporting Taylor’s six current power ratings—not every observed or attempted use of power.

Current Ratings

Legitimate Power1

No current recognized decision right is demonstrated.

Reward Power1

No current valued benefit changes another player’s response.

Coercive Power1

No current credible consequence changes another player’s response.

Expert Power2

Other players had not repeatedly followed Taylor’s advice or judgment.

Referent Power3

Several voluntary relationships produce trust, protection, or coordination.

Informational Power3

Information repeatedly changes planning or coordination.

Clearest Supporting Evidence

PowerEvidence and ResponseWhy It Mattered and Where It Stopped
Referent PowerBarrett reassured Taylor, LaTrice remained committed, and Lyric placed Taylor in a desired endgame group.The support was meaningful but still depended on the Blockbuster matchup and delivered votes.
Informational PowerTaylor stayed active in vote checks and target information.The information supported planning without raising the rating.

03

Relationships and Alliances

Most Significant Relationships

Taylor strengthened with Barrett and remained close to LaTrice and Lyric.

Most Significant Alliances and Groups

Taylor was part of the temporary anti-Ashley/keep-Taylor voting bloc. It was coordinated but not a durable alliance.

04

Power Shifts

Taylor’s Total Power Score Holds at 11 Because Her Protection and Vote Network Remain Active without Changing a Rating

Total Power Score: 11 → 11

Why: Taylor remained nominated but received reassurance from Barrett, coordinated with LaTrice and Lyric, and joined the temporary keep-Taylor voting bloc. Referent and Informational Power held at 3.

What Changed: No individual power rating changed; Total Power Score remained 11.

What Stayed the Same: Legitimate Power 1, Reward Power 1, Coercive Power 1, Expert Power 2, Referent Power 3, and Informational Power 3.

Why It Matters: Taylor had a plausible protection network and useful vote information. The game structure still mattered because the Blockbuster could change whom the coalition needed to beat.

05

Position Analysis

Protection and Vote Information Keep Taylor’s Power Steady

Taylor had a plausible protection network and useful vote information. The game structure still mattered because the Blockbuster could change whom the coalition needed to beat.

Bottom Line: Taylor retained meaningful protection and information channels (Referent 3, Informational 3). The next test is whether those players deliver votes if she remains on the block.

06

Performance, Structure, and Chance

Taylor was a final nominee and under high pressure with direct Blockbuster access. The competition offered guaranteed safety but remained unresolved.

Round 1 Time Capsule voting remained active with no known recipient or result. The future Blockbuster could change safety and the final matchup, but its outcome was outside this boundary.

07

Best Move Right Now

Best Move Right Now: Keep repairing trust, convert reassurance into explicit votes, and prepare for the Blockbuster.

What Would Show It Worked: Named voters commit to Taylor and still protect her after the final matchup is known.

08

What the Rating Means

The current score shows which forms of influence produced responses for Taylor at this cutoff. Referent Power and Informational Power supplied the clearest evidence, while the limits keep temporary structure and incomplete promises from being overstated.

09

Public Opinion

No completed public-opinion result is available at this Evidence Cutoff.

Official Audience Action: Round 1 Time Capsule voting remained active, but no recipient or result was known. It is recorded separately from fan ranking.

10

What to Watch For Next

Who delivers the protection promised to Taylor?

Why It Matters: The final vote would distinguish real Referent Power from matchup-dependent reassurance.