It's the "everyone recognizes they're a threat which makes them a shield, but then that makes them not a threat because nobody is going for them, but then that makes them a big threat because nobody is going for them" cycle of gameplay.

Simple, trying to use Rachel for their own benefit, knowing that these days she’s not particularly good at comps and they can get rid of her in the endgame. Same reason why Cirie was kept in the game for so long. (And yes, I know Rachel in her prime was pretty good at comps, but this season she won 1 comp in 8 weeks, and that 1 comp was a “memorize the scene and answer questions” comp, which typically only happens once a season)

Had Rachel not fallen victim to the White Locust twist, she’s likely picked off someone around Final 6 to Final 4 whenever the house finds it convenient to do so in that particular week

And considering everyone in the Final 5 was working closely with Rachel to an extent, whereas most of the people working against her went home earlier, I’d say the strategy was working for those who chose to work with Rachel. Especially considering that arguably her closest ally in the game went on to win the season

That's just typically how it goes with legends. The first week or 2 is always "Yeah we HAVE to get this legend out" but it's really hard to hold that mentality when the game is actively progressing in multiple other ways. These are people you're living with and the intimidation factor goes down a lot with a seemingly short amount of time. Combo that with the fact that the BB27 cast had a lot of players with 0 backbone, and it's not surprising at all that Rachel made it as far as she did.

Rachel is someone willing to vote for confrontational people and "Big move makers", Like it was said repeatedly, most wanted her on the jury, and out as soon as jury started, and while the players themselves weren't given the chance, thats exactly what happened. furthermore, rachel is a good ally but not someone really good at comps, meaning shes very vunerable at the late game.

I'd also like to add that while, yes, rachel is a legend, i honestly wouldnt call her an even above average player before 27, so i think its appropriate for no one to really fear her early on.

Rachel did a good job of lowering her threat level. She told multiple people that they had guaranteed wins sitting next to her in F2. People even convinced themselves that Rachel was perfect for jury. 

Also other players became bigger targets. Keanu was the main target Weeks 2-5, and then Mickey was Weeks 6-8. Keanu saved himself 4 weeks in a row. Then Mickey saved herself 2 weeks in a row. So from Weeks 2-7, the majority kept missing on the target. By the time they actually got one with Mickey out, it was right before jury.

I don’t feel many people saw Rachel as an actual threat. Maybe it’s because she’s an older not super fit mom but after week 1 people barely looked at Rachel as a major threat even though she was a past winner.

Fear, as usual.

Half the house viewed her as a bigger target than them, so wanted her to stay.

The other half wanted to work with her as a legend of the game / play to the cameras.

I've never understood either mindset, personally - I always think of there's returning players coming into the house, it's a perfect way for the rest of the house to band together and agree to a few easy weeks while they just get those i big returnees out.

They wanted Rachel in Jury to be an impartial Jury vote, and would have targeted her Early Jury but I believe that even backfired because Rachel grew such strong relationships Pre Jury that Nobody really wanted to target her Early Jury anymore haha .. White Locust really did screw her game 

For those first few weeks, some players recognized she was a threat and it made sense to keep her as a shield. Other players recognized that as a former winner it was less likely that a jury would award her a 2nd time, and she could be dragged as a goat.

Then I think some even had a subconscious mindset of “she’s a legend, she’s this seasons twist, the viewers/producers wouldn’t want us targeting her yet”. and so they didn’t.

After those first few weeks, I think the fact that Rachel wasn’t winning any challenges did a good job at neutralizing her threat level and letting her blend into the cast.

I personally think they were just waiting for the double eviction. I think if someone wanted to make the move, they wanted it to be quick and efficient as opposed to drawn-out and tenuous.

I don't think it's a coincidence that the double eviction came so late in the game. I think the show recognized that was the point where people would likely take a shot.

Being friends in the house, leads to being friends outside of the house, which leads to more social media exposure which is all these players care about now.

She was the shield because most everyone wanted her out. You need to keep bigger targets in to make it to the end. The tricky part is knowing when to make the big move. Keeping her is a good game move.

One thing we never saw because of the twist was if the cast was actually going to turn on her. There was some talk brewing of a potential Rachel boot like 1-2 votes into the jury at the time.

I personally feel like Rachel would have been axed during the double if she stayed. Even Ashley hinted at turning on Rachel in a few votes. Probably only Keanu really takes her to endgame.

A combination of things. For some people, it would make no sense to take her out. Why would anyone in the judges (besides Vince for who Rachel leaving is definitely not a bad thing for basically the whole prejury) have any reason to take her out over an active problem for them like Lauren or Keanu or Kelley when she's not coming for them anytime soon. As for the people on the other side, it's a combination of being intimidated and cowering out when they got power, and it just being not a good call/not being able to make it happen when they aren't in power. Like, Zae went against her but it really wasn't a good call he shouldn't have been so vocally against her when people wanted to keep her in. And for people like Keanu, well, he never had any sway and being against Rachel was... really not good for him. Like the only time he had any real "social" capital in the prejury was Rachel working to keep him, because he was not liked by the other side, so whenever he went against Rachel he was actually just putting himself on a side with people who were ready to take him out first chance they get vs on a side with people who were ready to take him out first chance they get but were also willing to consider not doing that.

She had an impeccable social game

why? Why should Ashley or Will take out Rachel when she will eventually be taken out, targeted before them, and whose ideal final 3 is with them.

Why should Ava take out Rachel, what does it do for her game? The thing is everyone who might have benfited from taking out Rachel early was either out early or didnt win an hoh (Kelley). Lauren could have but if Rachel wins that blockbuster she destroys all of thier little realtionship. Blockbuster, the few people who benfited from taking out Rachel Prejury not winning Hoh, and Rachel just playing pretty well all factor into why. It wasnt that people where playing bad (and alot still where), Rachel really worked.

Working with the vets is always a good idea. Not just on a gameplay level because of thier experince, but on a meta level where you know the game will be bent a little to increased the odds that as many vets on the season make jury so production gets thier moneys worth. On a meta level, its better to work with the vets so that the producers thumb thats on the scale as much as legally allowed also benfits you. (this is true for any season of reality TV if you can identify who favorites are, working with them is always good for meta reasons)

For everyone on her side of the house it made absolutely no strategic sense for any of them to try to take Rachel out prior to final 9 (when white locust eliminated her). All of her close allies (Ashley, Morgan, Will, etc) discussed their intentions to take her out before the endgame (probably between F7-F4) and not a single one of them had any intention of bringing her to the final 2. If she had shown potential of having the same prowess for comps she had on her first two seasons I could see the argument for it being risky not to target her, but since they didn’t there was no reason for any of them to try and target her before they got closer to the endgame. She was a shield for all of them who the other side of the house could try to target first and she was a number for their side (obviously they liked her on a personal level as well but it would’ve been detrimental for any of her close allies to target her in the first half).

As for Lauren and Vince (the only people on the other side who won HOH); they are two of the biggest scardy cats in bb history and Vince was incapable of not doing what Morgan wanted when she put the pressure on him. Also Keanu wanted Vince to target Rachel (which at that point before she found out about it and was the only person in the house genuinely trying to work with him would’ve been absolutely terrible for his game), he cowered at the thought of taking the shot himself. When Vince said he was going to use the fact that Keanu ratted out Rachel to Vince as his reason for putting her up he freaked out insisted Vince couldn’t say anything. He was happy for Vince to do it, but only if he could pretend he had nothing to do with it and stay on good terms with her. In theory I understand what you are saying about Rachel being a huge threat, but because of the time the white locust took her out it would not have been a good move for any of her close allies (who were essentially the only people who showed basic competency and motivation to play the game).

One thing that separated Rachel from other lone returnees like Paul, Jessie, and Cirie (she's from survivor but still) is that they commanded alot of respect from their fellow houseguests. Rachel didn't. Alot of the early power players in the game, especially Mickey (R.I.P), did not think highly of her as a player but they still wanted her around because they only thought of her as jury fodder that could vote for them in the end cause of her tendencies to reward strong gameplay. So even though she was well socially integrated, it never really felt like she ever had true power in the game.

Funny enough, I felt like out of all 3 of her games this was the strongest gameplay she ever put on cause she wasn't a comp beast anymore, nor did she have Brendon with her. She actively had to play the social game hard. She used this perception that she was a washed up player from a bygone era to lower her threat level just enough to where she was a strong contender to win, but not too much of a threat to where she needed to go ASAP. She would've genuinely beat anybody in a final 2 during the jury phase cause of how well respected she was.

week 1 - Immunity
week 2 - Jimmy HoH. He targeted Amy because she was talking crap about him. Any other HoH would've probably also not put her up when so many other fights happened week 1
week 3 - Lauren is scared of her own shadow. And Rachel was in a better spot without Amy
week 4 - Rylie didn't fully dislike her. And Rachel was always able to get on Mickey's good side too. Other HoHs could've potentially looked at her, but there were so many other targets around
week 5 - Ava was down to put up people who didn't play with her. Ava didn't wanna play with Rachel but they did play at least somewhat. With this HoH comp being played like this it was unlikely she would've been put up week 5 anyway
week 6 - Pretty much the first week Rachel could've been put up and very likely would've been put up with the house driven by Mickey and Morgan. She pretty much earned safety strictly due to the comp
week 7 - Vince is scared of making a move for himself. But Rachel could've been put up by some other people, like Katherine or Kelley
week 8 - Don't even ask me about Keanu. She was lucky he wasn't annoyed by her that Friday. Other than that, as the week before, Rachel could've been put up by Lauren or Kelley

Returning players in seasons like this typically have one huge advantage on their side besides experience: Production.

The last time Rachel played, she or Jordan let it slip "yeah, they [production[ promised us all 'at least jury'" on the feeds. Production likewise made sure to sweep their more troublesome behaviour under the rug (You think editing swept Rylie's behaviour under the rug? OH HO HOOO~). The next year, coaches got a free three weeks of safety, got to pick their "Teams". Then when Nicole, Frank, Da'Vonne, and James returned a few years later they once again got to pick their teams and then got immunity when one of them won.

Rachel is the poster child for Production Interference - after all, even if it wasn't as blatant as with Paul, production showed their hand that they will save her this time and that if she did end up getting booted early, she'd get another blatantly contrived bailout. (See: The Accomplice. You just know that if someone was gonna go after her week 3-4 suddenly they'd start giving messages to the house...)

Naturally, if you see a returning player? You don't wanna gun for them like you "should" - You typically wanna let them either fall into a hole they themselves dug (Paul, Frank), or let them make jury and then gun straight for them - preferably while giving production as little time to react as possible. (There's a reason people were predicting Rachel would be evicted during a DE which she... kinda was.)

They'll also typically get a really good edit no matter what they do - so someone going after a Production interference Threat who can't be hidden by editing will be made out to be the devil.

It’s a mix of reasons. Chiefly that there was short-term and long-term risk of working with Rachel. Say for example that you’re in a spot where a bloc of four wants to take you or your close allies out while the returnee is not only a shield but wants to work with you. This means that taking the returnee out takes out a potential number for yourself while getting rid of someone that can take the shot before you, freeing up the bloc of four to come after you. Players in this position weigh the short-term risk versus the long-term risk of working with the returnee. A returnee understands this and tries to leverage this to their advantage. It’s a game of seeing who will shoot first when working long-term with a returnee.

Taking them out early means strengthening the power base of my enemies, but keeping them longer means they have a bigger chance of worming their way into people’s minds. It’s all a risk. It’s a matter of which risk are you more comfortable with and capable of undertaking.

Why would I target Rachel when somebody else would? Extra week of safety for me, No blood, Zae-Keanu-Mickey can be the Jury threat Evicted whenever for having that on their resume 

Morgan respected her a lot Mickey and her had a real bond at the beginning and liked the idea of her being in jury she was Ashley’s top ally the other side feared her Keanu was obsessed with the idea of playing with a legend and a lot of things just fell her way

I don’t think it was intimidation. I think that they all knew if she made it to the end, no one would vote for her because she had already won. Of course we don’t know if that’s actually how it would play out, but I think that was their mindset and that she was not a threat to them.

They didn't target her because they where all weak players.

Was better to stay on Rachel’s good side early on so she didn’t fuck ur game up like she did with Rylie. Coming after her in jury phase would be easier because you need less numbers to pull it off.

It’s very clear Rachel wasn’t gonna go much further than jury. If the judges made final 5, Rachel would’ve been out first amongst them if Vince won that standing up with the stick long and Morgan won veto.

Well I mean the Zae situation certainly made people afraid of going against her honestly. That helped a ton to start.

It’s a decision that nearly ruined this season for me. If I was casted on this show and I was told a returning winner, a millionaire, is now gunning for my prize when I have no million dollars just laying around I would absolutely vote her out first and target her until she’s out,

This is my first season, so I could really relate to what some of these players of bb27 were thinking. Zae was the only sane person. It should’ve been everyone’s priority to get her the F out since she’s already had her spotlight and win. It’s not like she was a runner up. Or got 3rd place.

And just abandoning the Ashley shower gate as if it never happened was the second worst decision in that first week. Ashely was public enemy number 1, who just uses someone else’s shower for a personal multi hour long spa day and play it off as it nothing happened. Production clearly had the their hands in this pot and that resulted in Ashely winning when she should’ve been gone week 2

The blockbuster

The cast was full of a bunch of morons

Probably because if you take a shot at someone like Racheal you absolutly can not miss

They did not know how to play the game

They also probably purposely cast people with her in mind

Because it wasn't necessary. She would get eliminated from the hamster wheel.

1) they just didn’t know how to play the game or didn’t care to play it. it’s pretty clear many of bb27 cast cared more about being AFP than winning so they didn’t want to play. many viewers themselves say that it wasn’t until the week 6 eviction aka rachel’s hoh reign where she put up rylie, one of the biggest social threats of the house & someone that no one was targeting as a replacement nom and got him evicted. that led to everyone later deciding to finally start playing the game

2) people wanted to take her to jury where they would eventually take her out early on to “strength their resume,” imagine saying you evicted a former winner on your hoh reign. that’s a huge boost during the jury questioning if you’re in the final 2. however, let’s say the judges alliance made it to the final 5, it’s very possible rachel or will would’ve been the first two evicted, rachel making it to the final 2 in that scenario was a long shot as her two closest allies who would likely had taken her to the final 2 didn’t win many comps compared to vorgan

3) she was going to be another dan gheesling if she made it to the final 2. as much as people don’t like to admit it, rachel only winning scenario would be if she sat next to kelley vince or keanu and its very likely she would’ve took ashley morgan or will instead. i don’t think the jury would’ve given her the win considering she was already a previous winner + morgan played a better game while ashley jury answers was brilliant that i think she genuinely wins against anyone but morgan if the other person can’t beat her

4) she had alot of luck in those weeks. besides the first week where she had immunity, the rest of the weeks, either one of the hohs was “too scared to put her up or make their own moves,” they were one of her allies, or they had bigger targets in mind. alot of the people who either wanted to take out rachel either couldn’t win hoh or got put up/taken out

they're stupid

Also just putting this out there. We didn’t have the most savvy bunch this year when it comes to strategy

Because they were awful players.