This season was so good for the first 4 episodes and the last 2 as well, but it got too game centric for me recently. Some of the storytelling has been awful though like us getting nothing from Abi as she finally votes Woo out concluding that story or the entire edit of Wigglesworth and how suddenly in her boot episode she's a social threat and close with Joe and surprise....gets booted. Kimmi and Keith have been given such shit edits and some edits have been ridiculous and forced to me. Still not a bad season, but can't see it being top 10.
It's actually one of my favorites from the last 10-11 seasons. I agree about a lot of the edits completely though. Especially the ones you listed though. I like a lot of the characters though and was rooting for several people all season instead of just one specifically. I love the game centric aspect of it personally. All that stuff is what I watch for. The blindsides, the strategy/social game, the challenges, the shitty weather and living conditions, the idol findings, etc. has been great.
This season was so good for the first 4 episodes and the last 2 as well, but it got too game centric for me recently. Some of the storytelling has been awful though like us getting nothing from Abi as she finally votes Woo out concluding that story or the entire edit of Wigglesworth and how suddenly in her boot episode she's a social threat and close with Joe and surprise....gets booted. Kimmi and Keith have been given such shit edits and some edits have been ridiculous and forced to me. Still not a bad season, but can't see it being top 10.
It's actually one of my favorites from the last 10-11 seasons. I agree about a lot of the edits completely though. Especially the ones you listed though. I like a lot of the characters though and was rooting for several people all season instead of just one specifically. I love the game centric aspect of it personally. All that stuff is what I watch for. The blindsides, the strategy/social game, the challenges, the shitty weather and living conditions, the idol findings, etc. has been great.
Yeah I do like gameplay and the weather stuff was cool,but I like to know the people more too. I think blindslides and etc mean more when we are given a significant reason to care. A more character driven season is what I prefer.
This season was so good for the first 4 episodes and the last 2 as well, but it got too game centric for me recently. Some of the storytelling has been awful though like us getting nothing from Abi as she finally votes Woo out concluding that story or the entire edit of Wigglesworth and how suddenly in her boot episode she's a social threat and close with Joe and surprise....gets booted. Kimmi and Keith have been given such shit edits and some edits have been ridiculous and forced to me. Still not a bad season, but can't see it being top 10.
I hate that "voting bloc" story line that was imposed on Stephen (or he imposed on himself). It was so stupid since people jump alliances all the time, nothing new. And he was part of a tight alliance anyways.
In a season specifically about redemption, characters deserved to be more indepth. I watched an interview with Wiggles where she said she really didn't want the whole edit anyways. Jeff pushed to make Wiggles the golden child, since this season theme basically derrived from her. The first runner-up, the one who lost by one point. And I also don't like Joe's edit. The whole he's a threat, when he's really not a threat. Idk, excuse my rant.
Oh yeah the voting bloc thing and how this is something new was really annoying since it happens quite a bit in modern survivor. Like even in season SIX, Rob Cesternino did this the entire postmerge.
I'm not basing it off just Tony, but what they've said as a whole on how Jefra played. The edit constantly ignores people who don't fit the narrative but are good players (Natalie White, Jenn Lyon, Artis, the list goes on and on). To just buy what the edit sells isn't something I'll ever do honestly. Yeah but that's more points for Tony, I mean it's not like they had an awful relationship between Tasha and Tony and I'm sure he would clue her in and talk to her about it. That latter part never happenef, Tony always planned to turn on Jefra because he knew she didn't trust him and only trusted Trish/Kass after the LJ vote. That's not taking away from Spencer lol, just making note that he could have literally gone when Tasha did. Neither was playing very better than the other as no one wanted them around. Mike is a pretty bad winner though, he deserved his win but would have been long gone if not for immunities and an idol. A better player is able to not need these things to make ftc. Nah, Tony was well covered by flipping but also having his alliance stuck in that if they flipped there were still Jeremiah/Spencer/Tasha left who were beats in the challenges and have a good shot in ftc. Tony never even had to use those idols and his game is still very similar without it.
I know you aren't just basing it off of Tony but that example is pretty much what you are basing it off. You do know the players are also biased and don't see everything that happens right? If they aren't around another player they don't know what they are doing/what game they are playing.
Also, I don't just buy what the edit sells but if someone did enough to win or were to make game changing moves/decisions it wouldn't be left on the cutting room floor. I know for a fact everyone has games that aren't shown, that's just obvious. But I can't root for someone based on moves that aren't shown, that just doesn't make any sense. That's like saying Jermiah found an idol and tried to blindside Tony but it wasn't shown so he should be in the top 5 players of the season. Doesn't work that way.
Spencer/Tasha played off of Tony's paranoia and used it to their advantage. You can't just say everything was Tony's idea. Because if Spencer and Tasha weren't there to put it in his head and do it, it wouldn't have happened. And yes again, Spencer may have gone instead but he didn't because he won immunity which is part of the game. A lot of good players would have gone home earlier if they didn't have immunity or idols. Mike was definitely a bad winner, but was the best of the season with Mama C as a close second. The whole season sucked. But again, idols and immunity ARE part of the game lol.
"No one was playing very better than the other as no one wanted them around" You do realize this is a game where you get rid of the threats and people who are playing good games/have a chance to win right? People don't usualy keep the best players around as it doesn't benefit them...
Yeah which is why you get a grasp on what the cast as a whole thinks. I would definitely trust their opinions as a whole over an edited 42 minute tv show that can often be deceiving for the sake of a specific narrative they want to spin. They didn't, Tony has had no problem calling himself out in interviews about things like his moves coming back to bite him potentially and who was playing strong games, etc and has no reason to lie since he and Spencer are good friends, but has said he planned to turn on Jefra regardless which is easy to believe for reasons already stated. To say if not for those two, Jefra doesn't go is wrong though even if we're beliving it to be true. We have no idea how things go. By all accounts, Rodney actually played a very good game behind the scenes and was running his alliance and even was extremely well liked and had a shot at ftc and fell short at the last tc. There were a few decent players top in Sierra, Carolyn, and then Mike. I have no problem with a player needing immunity for a vote or so, but when you need it like Mike did for like 5-6 votes then yeah it shows a serious flaw in your game. I'm not bashing Spencer for it since he didn't always need immunity like Mike, just noting he and Tasha were interchangeable with who won immunity. Pretty obviously but a better player is able to make themselves not seem like a threat despite being one. An example is Natalie A who was great, but never made herself come off that way to the others and hid it very well. A better player doesn't need immunity or an idol multiple votes, because they're doing so well socially and alliance wise that it's not needed. I definitely am willing to give people slack when it's just like one challenge or something or they're in a position through no fault of their own, but when you come off as a threat and people want you out so early yeah....you're doing something wrong.
If it wasn't for those two Jefra most likely wouldn't have gone home because Trish and Kass may not have been in on it. They were blindsided at that TC
Rodney played a pretty shitty a game. His alliance were ****** players like Dan and WIll. So controlling them isn't saying much considering they had no game. Most people that season sucked. Mike screwed up socially, that's why he NEEDED to win out. I agree that you shouldn't need to win every challenge to win but if you need to win out, and you do, you most likely deserve to win.
If you are someone like Joe who needs to win every single episode to get by you are definitely doing something write. But if you are someone who doesn't win or doesn't need to fight to win at all, then you aren't a threat, and don't have enough on your "resume" to win, especially if you aren't the one who is controlling the moves. Just being likeable and everyones friend doesn't cut it in my book.
If you can win 3-4 challenges here and there and people don't try to pull the trigger on that person, then their physical game AND social game is great. There are a lot of players like that. It doesn't just need to be one or the other like you make it seem
This season was so good for the first 4 episodes and the last 2 as well, but it got too game centric for me recently. Some of the storytelling has been awful though like us getting nothing from Abi as she finally votes Woo out concluding that story or the entire edit of Wigglesworth and how suddenly in her boot episode she's a social threat and close with Joe and surprise....gets booted. Kimmi and Keith have been given such shit edits and some edits have been ridiculous and forced to me. Still not a bad season, but can't see it being top 10.
It's actually one of my favorites from the last 10-11 seasons. I agree about a lot of the edits completely though. Especially the ones you listed though. I like a lot of the characters though and was rooting for several people all season instead of just one specifically. I love the game centric aspect of it personally. All that stuff is what I watch for. The blindsides, the strategy/social game, the challenges, the shitty weather and living conditions, the idol findings, etc. has been great.
Yeah I do like gameplay and the weather stuff was cool,but I like to know the people more too. I think blindslides and etc mean more when we are given a significant reason to care. A more character driven season is what I prefer.
I do like to know the people more too but this is second chances. We got to know them for the most part on their first season. I mean there is always more that we can learn about them to make us like them more, but I would prefer for them to not spend so much time on that when they have with these people already. If these were all new players I would deff agree.
I'm not basing it off just Tony, but what they've said as a whole on how Jefra played. The edit constantly ignores people who don't fit the narrative but are good players (Natalie White, Jenn Lyon, Artis, the list goes on and on). To just buy what the edit sells isn't something I'll ever do honestly. Yeah but that's more points for Tony, I mean it's not like they had an awful relationship between Tasha and Tony and I'm sure he would clue her in and talk to her about it. That latter part never happenef, Tony always planned to turn on Jefra because he knew she didn't trust him and only trusted Trish/Kass after the LJ vote. That's not taking away from Spencer lol, just making note that he could have literally gone when Tasha did. Neither was playing very better than the other as no one wanted them around. Mike is a pretty bad winner though, he deserved his win but would have been long gone if not for immunities and an idol. A better player is able to not need these things to make ftc. Nah, Tony was well covered by flipping but also having his alliance stuck in that if they flipped there were still Jeremiah/Spencer/Tasha left who were beats in the challenges and have a good shot in ftc. Tony never even had to use those idols and his game is still very similar without it.
I know you aren't just basing it off of Tony but that example is pretty much what you are basing it off. You do know the players are also biased and don't see everything that happens right? If they aren't around another player they don't know what they are doing/what game they are playing.
Also, I don't just buy what the edit sells but if someone did enough to win or were to make game changing moves/decisions it wouldn't be left on the cutting room floor. I know for a fact everyone has games that aren't shown, that's just obvious. But I can't root for someone based on moves that aren't shown, that just doesn't make any sense. That's like saying Jermiah found an idol and tried to blindside Tony but it wasn't shown so he should be in the top 5 players of the season. Doesn't work that way.
Spencer/Tasha played off of Tony's paranoia and used it to their advantage. You can't just say everything was Tony's idea. Because if Spencer and Tasha weren't there to put it in his head and do it, it wouldn't have happened. And yes again, Spencer may have gone instead but he didn't because he won immunity which is part of the game. A lot of good players would have gone home earlier if they didn't have immunity or idols. Mike was definitely a bad winner, but was the best of the season with Mama C as a close second. The whole season sucked. But again, idols and immunity ARE part of the game lol.
"No one was playing very better than the other as no one wanted them around" You do realize this is a game where you get rid of the threats and people who are playing good games/have a chance to win right? People don't usualy keep the best players around as it doesn't benefit them...
Yeah which is why you get a grasp on what the cast as a whole thinks. I would definitely trust their opinions as a whole over an edited 42 minute tv show that can often be deceiving for the sake of a specific narrative they want to spin. They didn't, Tony has had no problem calling himself out in interviews about things like his moves coming back to bite him potentially and who was playing strong games, etc and has no reason to lie since he and Spencer are good friends, but has said he planned to turn on Jefra regardless which is easy to believe for reasons already stated. To say if not for those two, Jefra doesn't go is wrong though even if we're beliving it to be true. We have no idea how things go. By all accounts, Rodney actually played a very good game behind the scenes and was running his alliance and even was extremely well liked and had a shot at ftc and fell short at the last tc. There were a few decent players top in Sierra, Carolyn, and then Mike. I have no problem with a player needing immunity for a vote or so, but when you need it like Mike did for like 5-6 votes then yeah it shows a serious flaw in your game. I'm not bashing Spencer for it since he didn't always need immunity like Mike, just noting he and Tasha were interchangeable with who won immunity. Pretty obviously but a better player is able to make themselves not seem like a threat despite being one. An example is Natalie A who was great, but never made herself come off that way to the others and hid it very well. A better player doesn't need immunity or an idol multiple votes, because they're doing so well socially and alliance wise that it's not needed. I definitely am willing to give people slack when it's just like one challenge or something or they're in a position through no fault of their own, but when you come off as a threat and people want you out so early yeah....you're doing something wrong.
If it wasn't for those two Jefra most likely wouldn't have gone home because Trish and Kass may not have been in on it. They were blindsided at that TC
Rodney played a pretty shitty a game. His alliance were ****** players like Dan and WIll. So controlling them isn't saying much considering they had no game. Most people that season sucked. Mike screwed up socially, that's why he NEEDED to win out. I agree that you shouldn't need to win every challenge to win but if you need to win out, and you do, you most likely deserve to win.
If you are someone like Joe who needs to win every single episode to get by you are definitely doing something write. But if you are someone who doesn't win or doesn't need to fight to win at all, then you aren't a threat, and don't have enough on your "resume" to win, especially if you aren't the one who is controlling the moves. Just being likeable and everyones friend doesn't cut it in my book.
If you can win 3-4 challenges here and there and people don't try to pull the trigger on that person, then their physical game AND social game is great. There are a lot of players like that. It doesn't just need to be one or the other like you make it seem
We have no idea what happens if it's just those 5 instead of 7 with Tasha and Spencer there, jumping the gun there.
I don't see how him controlling weak players says anything about his game. Good players constantly control weaker ones, doesn't take anything away from them.
Yeah that's actually won people the game so I'd disagree. It helps to have some moves down, but survivor isn't this insanely flashy game of big moves. It can often be as simple as people liking and respecting you more: see Samoa and HvV.
Making it seem? I'm not, I have no issue with people winning challenges at all, just with people NEEDING to win multiple challenges to get farther and being labeled a good player. JT, Tom, Danni, Chris, Kim all won immunity more than a few times and great winners.
This season was so good for the first 4 episodes and the last 2 as well, but it got too game centric for me recently. Some of the storytelling has been awful though like us getting nothing from Abi as she finally votes Woo out concluding that story or the entire edit of Wigglesworth and how suddenly in her boot episode she's a social threat and close with Joe and surprise....gets booted. Kimmi and Keith have been given such shit edits and some edits have been ridiculous and forced to me. Still not a bad season, but can't see it being top 10.
It's actually one of my favorites from the last 10-11 seasons. I agree about a lot of the edits completely though. Especially the ones you listed though. I like a lot of the characters though and was rooting for several people all season instead of just one specifically. I love the game centric aspect of it personally. All that stuff is what I watch for. The blindsides, the strategy/social game, the challenges, the shitty weather and living conditions, the idol findings, etc. has been great.
Yeah I do like gameplay and the weather stuff was cool,but I like to know the people more too. I think blindslides and etc mean more when we are given a significant reason to care. A more character driven season is what I prefer.
I do like to know the people more too but this is second chances. We got to know them for the most part on their first season. I mean there is always more that we can learn about them to make us like them more, but I would prefer for them to not spend so much time on that when they have with these people already. If these were all new players I would deff agree.
I still think they could put some stuff in there and give us new storylines or something apart from strategy. We saw this with Abi, Woo, Jeff Varner, and on HvV there was a lot more character stuff so I'd like to see more of that even in a returnee season.
I'm not basing it off just Tony, but what they've said as a whole on how Jefra played. The edit constantly ignores people who don't fit the narrative but are good players (Natalie White, Jenn Lyon, Artis, the list goes on and on). To just buy what the edit sells isn't something I'll ever do honestly. Yeah but that's more points for Tony, I mean it's not like they had an awful relationship between Tasha and Tony and I'm sure he would clue her in and talk to her about it. That latter part never happenef, Tony always planned to turn on Jefra because he knew she didn't trust him and only trusted Trish/Kass after the LJ vote. That's not taking away from Spencer lol, just making note that he could have literally gone when Tasha did. Neither was playing very better than the other as no one wanted them around. Mike is a pretty bad winner though, he deserved his win but would have been long gone if not for immunities and an idol. A better player is able to not need these things to make ftc. Nah, Tony was well covered by flipping but also having his alliance stuck in that if they flipped there were still Jeremiah/Spencer/Tasha left who were beats in the challenges and have a good shot in ftc. Tony never even had to use those idols and his game is still very similar without it.
I know you aren't just basing it off of Tony but that example is pretty much what you are basing it off. You do know the players are also biased and don't see everything that happens right? If they aren't around another player they don't know what they are doing/what game they are playing.
Also, I don't just buy what the edit sells but if someone did enough to win or were to make game changing moves/decisions it wouldn't be left on the cutting room floor. I know for a fact everyone has games that aren't shown, that's just obvious. But I can't root for someone based on moves that aren't shown, that just doesn't make any sense. That's like saying Jermiah found an idol and tried to blindside Tony but it wasn't shown so he should be in the top 5 players of the season. Doesn't work that way.
Spencer/Tasha played off of Tony's paranoia and used it to their advantage. You can't just say everything was Tony's idea. Because if Spencer and Tasha weren't there to put it in his head and do it, it wouldn't have happened. And yes again, Spencer may have gone instead but he didn't because he won immunity which is part of the game. A lot of good players would have gone home earlier if they didn't have immunity or idols. Mike was definitely a bad winner, but was the best of the season with Mama C as a close second. The whole season sucked. But again, idols and immunity ARE part of the game lol.
"No one was playing very better than the other as no one wanted them around" You do realize this is a game where you get rid of the threats and people who are playing good games/have a chance to win right? People don't usualy keep the best players around as it doesn't benefit them...
Yeah which is why you get a grasp on what the cast as a whole thinks. I would definitely trust their opinions as a whole over an edited 42 minute tv show that can often be deceiving for the sake of a specific narrative they want to spin. They didn't, Tony has had no problem calling himself out in interviews about things like his moves coming back to bite him potentially and who was playing strong games, etc and has no reason to lie since he and Spencer are good friends, but has said he planned to turn on Jefra regardless which is easy to believe for reasons already stated. To say if not for those two, Jefra doesn't go is wrong though even if we're beliving it to be true. We have no idea how things go. By all accounts, Rodney actually played a very good game behind the scenes and was running his alliance and even was extremely well liked and had a shot at ftc and fell short at the last tc. There were a few decent players top in Sierra, Carolyn, and then Mike. I have no problem with a player needing immunity for a vote or so, but when you need it like Mike did for like 5-6 votes then yeah it shows a serious flaw in your game. I'm not bashing Spencer for it since he didn't always need immunity like Mike, just noting he and Tasha were interchangeable with who won immunity. Pretty obviously but a better player is able to make themselves not seem like a threat despite being one. An example is Natalie A who was great, but never made herself come off that way to the others and hid it very well. A better player doesn't need immunity or an idol multiple votes, because they're doing so well socially and alliance wise that it's not needed. I definitely am willing to give people slack when it's just like one challenge or something or they're in a position through no fault of their own, but when you come off as a threat and people want you out so early yeah....you're doing something wrong.
If it wasn't for those two Jefra most likely wouldn't have gone home because Trish and Kass may not have been in on it. They were blindsided at that TC
Rodney played a pretty shitty a game. His alliance were ****** players like Dan and WIll. So controlling them isn't saying much considering they had no game. Most people that season sucked. Mike screwed up socially, that's why he NEEDED to win out. I agree that you shouldn't need to win every challenge to win but if you need to win out, and you do, you most likely deserve to win.
If you are someone like Joe who needs to win every single episode to get by you are definitely doing something write. But if you are someone who doesn't win or doesn't need to fight to win at all, then you aren't a threat, and don't have enough on your "resume" to win, especially if you aren't the one who is controlling the moves. Just being likeable and everyones friend doesn't cut it in my book.
If you can win 3-4 challenges here and there and people don't try to pull the trigger on that person, then their physical game AND social game is great. There are a lot of players like that. It doesn't just need to be one or the other like you make it seem
We have no idea what happens if it's just those 5 instead of 7 with Tasha and Spencer there, jumping the gun there. I don't see how him controlling weak players says anything about his game. Good players constantly control weaker ones, doesn't take anything away from them. Yeah that's actually won people the game so I'd disagree. It helps to have some moves down, but survivor isn't this insanely flashy game of big moves. It can often be as simple as people liking and respecting you more: see Samoa and HvV. Making it seem? I'm not, I have no issue with people winning challenges at all, just with people NEEDING to win multiple challenges to get farther and being labeled a good player. JT, Tom, Danni, Chris, Kim all won immunity more than a few times and great winners.
So if Spencer and Tasha weren't needed to get out Jefra and Trish and Kass helped Tony, it would be another instance of when Trish just followed whatever Tony wanted. I'm not talking abot Tony's game, and Spencer and Tasha are not weak players. If you seriously believe that you are more than delusional. Tony was great but was extremely paranoid and easily manipulated. He had a flashy game which I liked but not a perfect one. Him flipping on the people who trusted him more than once is proof of his not so great social game.
To me it's more about the game play, one person can be extremely cutthroat but make amazing moves, and someone can be really nice and sweet but completely useless. In the end I personally would root and vote for the cutthroat person. That's why I enjoy people like Spencer and Jenn's jury speeches. They tell people not to be bitter and vote for their friends but to vote for the person who played the better game.
Survivor isn't an insanely flashy game of big moves, that's why Ciera got the boot. That's all she wanted to do and her social game wasn't strong enough. Tony's game was flashy though. All of a sudden it's ok for him to do it but not others? Again it's not a flashy game of big moves, but if you don't do anything and are just nice, you don't deserve to win. This isnt the same game it was 15 seasons ago. The people who are most liked don't win and don't deserve to, unless they do something in the game.
I'm not basing it off just Tony, but what they've said as a whole on how Jefra played. The edit constantly ignores people who don't fit the narrative but are good players (Natalie White, Jenn Lyon, Artis, the list goes on and on). To just buy what the edit sells isn't something I'll ever do honestly. Yeah but that's more points for Tony, I mean it's not like they had an awful relationship between Tasha and Tony and I'm sure he would clue her in and talk to her about it. That latter part never happenef, Tony always planned to turn on Jefra because he knew she didn't trust him and only trusted Trish/Kass after the LJ vote. That's not taking away from Spencer lol, just making note that he could have literally gone when Tasha did. Neither was playing very better than the other as no one wanted them around. Mike is a pretty bad winner though, he deserved his win but would have been long gone if not for immunities and an idol. A better player is able to not need these things to make ftc. Nah, Tony was well covered by flipping but also having his alliance stuck in that if they flipped there were still Jeremiah/Spencer/Tasha left who were beats in the challenges and have a good shot in ftc. Tony never even had to use those idols and his game is still very similar without it.
I know you aren't just basing it off of Tony but that example is pretty much what you are basing it off. You do know the players are also biased and don't see everything that happens right? If they aren't around another player they don't know what they are doing/what game they are playing.
Also, I don't just buy what the edit sells but if someone did enough to win or were to make game changing moves/decisions it wouldn't be left on the cutting room floor. I know for a fact everyone has games that aren't shown, that's just obvious. But I can't root for someone based on moves that aren't shown, that just doesn't make any sense. That's like saying Jermiah found an idol and tried to blindside Tony but it wasn't shown so he should be in the top 5 players of the season. Doesn't work that way.
Spencer/Tasha played off of Tony's paranoia and used it to their advantage. You can't just say everything was Tony's idea. Because if Spencer and Tasha weren't there to put it in his head and do it, it wouldn't have happened. And yes again, Spencer may have gone instead but he didn't because he won immunity which is part of the game. A lot of good players would have gone home earlier if they didn't have immunity or idols. Mike was definitely a bad winner, but was the best of the season with Mama C as a close second. The whole season sucked. But again, idols and immunity ARE part of the game lol.
"No one was playing very better than the other as no one wanted them around" You do realize this is a game where you get rid of the threats and people who are playing good games/have a chance to win right? People don't usualy keep the best players around as it doesn't benefit them...
Yeah which is why you get a grasp on what the cast as a whole thinks. I would definitely trust their opinions as a whole over an edited 42 minute tv show that can often be deceiving for the sake of a specific narrative they want to spin. They didn't, Tony has had no problem calling himself out in interviews about things like his moves coming back to bite him potentially and who was playing strong games, etc and has no reason to lie since he and Spencer are good friends, but has said he planned to turn on Jefra regardless which is easy to believe for reasons already stated. To say if not for those two, Jefra doesn't go is wrong though even if we're beliving it to be true. We have no idea how things go. By all accounts, Rodney actually played a very good game behind the scenes and was running his alliance and even was extremely well liked and had a shot at ftc and fell short at the last tc. There were a few decent players top in Sierra, Carolyn, and then Mike. I have no problem with a player needing immunity for a vote or so, but when you need it like Mike did for like 5-6 votes then yeah it shows a serious flaw in your game. I'm not bashing Spencer for it since he didn't always need immunity like Mike, just noting he and Tasha were interchangeable with who won immunity. Pretty obviously but a better player is able to make themselves not seem like a threat despite being one. An example is Natalie A who was great, but never made herself come off that way to the others and hid it very well. A better player doesn't need immunity or an idol multiple votes, because they're doing so well socially and alliance wise that it's not needed. I definitely am willing to give people slack when it's just like one challenge or something or they're in a position through no fault of their own, but when you come off as a threat and people want you out so early yeah....you're doing something wrong.
If it wasn't for those two Jefra most likely wouldn't have gone home because Trish and Kass may not have been in on it. They were blindsided at that TC
Rodney played a pretty shitty a game. His alliance were ****** players like Dan and WIll. So controlling them isn't saying much considering they had no game. Most people that season sucked. Mike screwed up socially, that's why he NEEDED to win out. I agree that you shouldn't need to win every challenge to win but if you need to win out, and you do, you most likely deserve to win.
If you are someone like Joe who needs to win every single episode to get by you are definitely doing something write. But if you are someone who doesn't win or doesn't need to fight to win at all, then you aren't a threat, and don't have enough on your "resume" to win, especially if you aren't the one who is controlling the moves. Just being likeable and everyones friend doesn't cut it in my book.
If you can win 3-4 challenges here and there and people don't try to pull the trigger on that person, then their physical game AND social game is great. There are a lot of players like that. It doesn't just need to be one or the other like you make it seem
We have no idea what happens if it's just those 5 instead of 7 with Tasha and Spencer there, jumping the gun there. I don't see how him controlling weak players says anything about his game. Good players constantly control weaker ones, doesn't take anything away from them. Yeah that's actually won people the game so I'd disagree. It helps to have some moves down, but survivor isn't this insanely flashy game of big moves. It can often be as simple as people liking and respecting you more: see Samoa and HvV. Making it seem? I'm not, I have no issue with people winning challenges at all, just with people NEEDING to win multiple challenges to get farther and being labeled a good player. JT, Tom, Danni, Chris, Kim all won immunity more than a few times and great winners.
So if Spencer and Tasha weren't needed to get out Jefra and Trish and Kass helped Tony, it would be another instance of when Trish just followed whatever Tony wanted. I'm not talking abot Tony's game, and Spencer and Tasha are not weak players. If you seriously believe that you are more than delusional. Tony was great but was extremely paranoid and easily manipulated. He had a flashy game which I liked but not a perfect one. Him flipping on the people who trusted him more than once is proof of his not so great social game.
To me it's more about the game play, one person can be extremely cutthroat but make amazing moves, and someone can be really nice and sweet but completely useless. In the end I personally would root and vote for the cutthroat person. That's why I enjoy people like Spencer and Jenn's jury speeches. They tell people not to be bitter and vote for their friends but to vote for the person who played the better game.
Survivor isn't an insanely flashy game of big moves, that's why Ciera got the boot. That's all she wanted to do and her social game wasn't strong enough. Tony's game was flashy though. All of a sudden it's ok for him to do it but not others? Again it's not a flashy game of big moves, but if you don't do anything and are just nice, you don't deserve to win. This isnt the same game it was 15 seasons ago. The people who are most liked don't win and don't deserve to, unless they do something in the game.
And that matters why? Trish beats everybody else left in that final 5 so it's a moot point aside from you disliking players who aren't needlessly aggressive. I'm delusional for looking beyond a tv edit? How does that prove he didn't have a great social game? He flipped on LJ as he was a threat and Jefra for not trusting him after that LJ vote, he was respected and wel liked by most of his castaways. The Cagayan edit was so off and again just tries to paint a picture of Survivor as something it is not.
Yeah, but we are watching a TV show, these people on the jury personally know and have relationships with these people. It's nearly impossible to say leave your feelings out of it when survivor is so raw and the bonds you form. If a finalist can't convince a juror to vote for them, that's on the finlast and not the juror/ They mishandled them if the jury member doesn't want to vote for them. Those jury speeches are awful btw, easily some of the worst in survivor history. People can vote however they choose and so please.
lol Ciera got booted, because of an idol, you'll notcie she had a strong majority with 7-3 in that vote and even when Tasha notcies how Ciera is rising as this huge threat, still goes along with it. Tony's game is certainly flashy, where did I say it's not right? I said they try to paint the show as such, when really even without all those big moves, Tony is still a very good player who was well liked by his cast. The big moves just mae for better tv, he even has said for every hour they showed his idol and strategy talk, the rest of the day he'd be bonding with people and forming relationships. Those winners I listed won like 5 years ago, with one of them even winning twice. Every winner who has won has been the most well liked by the jury--every single one.
Kass doesn't vote for Trish, and at least Spencer/Tash/Jeremiah/Morgan do not vote for Trish in the end over Spencer/Tasha. Trish just did whatever she was told besides a move or two here. If she was smart she would have turned on Tony and stabbed him in the back before he did it to her. He already did it twice to his alliance, she should have seen it coming.
Tony did have a good social game. What I meant by not so great was that it had a lot of flaws in it, but most people do. And yes you are delusional if you don't think Spencer and Tasha were some of the top players/characters of the season. Especially when you say Jefra is better than them.
It's very hard to leave your personal feelings at the door. But it's a game, if you can't do that you shouldn't be there. You have to do what's best for you and the game, not play for other people, or be upset at someone else for playing the game.
Um "those jury speeches are awful, some of the worst in history" that's subjective and that's your opinion, not everyones. I highly enjoy those speeches over some of the pointless questions that are asked. I find them pretty powerful. "If a finalist can't convince a juror to vote for them that's on the finalist and not the juror". Spencer was helping Tony. There were 3-4 people who were bitter against him and may not have voted for him to win in the end. You're contradicting yourself a little bit there.
You say you don't need to have made moves, you just need to be liked. Some moves are ok but it doesn't need to be a flashy game. Yet Tony played a flashy game and it was a good one.
Yes Ciera got booted because of an idol, but if her social game was soooo strong, she wouldn't have been the blindside option. People with great social games aren't threats according to you, remember. Every winner has been well liked but not necessarily the most well liked out of the three.
In the end this was an argument over Jefra and has completely changed directions.
Tony's good, Spencer's good, Trish was ok, Jefra didn't do anything. You are not going to change my views on that no matter how many times you argue the same point over and over again, and contradict yourself while doing it.
K*** doesn't vote for Trish, and at least Spencer/Tash/Jeremiah/Morgan do not vote for Trish in the end over Spencer/Tasha. Trish just did whatever she was told besides a move or two here. If she was smart she would have turned on Tony and stabbed him in the back before he did it to her. He already did it twice to his alliance, she should have seen it coming.
Tony did have a good social game. What I meant by not so great was that it had a lot of flaws in it, but most people do. And yes you are delusional if you don't think Spencer and Tasha were some of the top players/characters of the season. Especially when you say Jefra is better than them.
It's very hard to leave your personal feelings at the door. But it's a game, if you can't do that you shouldn't be there. You have to do what's best for you and the game, not play for other people, or be upset at someone else for playing the game.
Um "those jury speeches are awful, some of the worst in history" that's subjective and that's your opinion, not everyones. I highly enjoy those speeches over some of the pointless questions that are asked. I find them pretty powerful. "If a finalist can't convince a juror to vote for them that's on the finalist and not the juror". Spencer was helping Tony. There were 3-4 people who were bitter against him and may not have voted for him to win in the end. You're contradicting yourself a little bit there.
You say you don't need to have made moves, you just need to be liked. Some moves are ok but it doesn't need to be a flashy game. Yet Tony played a flashy game and it was a good one.
Yes Ciera got booted because of an idol, but if her social game was soooo strong, she wouldn't have been the blindside option. People with great social games aren't threats according to you, remember. Every winner has been well liked but not necessarily the most well liked out of the three.
In the end this was an argument over Jefra and has completely changed directions.
Tony's good, Spencer's good, Trish was ok, Jefra didn't do anything. You are not going to change my views on that no matter how many times you argue the same point over and over again, and contradict yourself while doing it.
Against K***, Trish wins like 9-0, against Tony, Trish gets votes of Sarah/Jeremiah/LJ/Jefra/Tasha and maybe Morgan and wins, against Woo wins 8-1 or 7-2, against Jefra also 8-1 or 7-2 so yeah she was likely winning against any of those four. Trish was easily a great player in the season and definitely one of th ebetter players to never win. She didn't need moves to be made at all, but even then pulled the merge vote as well as the Cliff one and was well liked by almost everyone and had a killer social game. She did have the flaw of not turning on Tony when she had to, but she was planning on taking him to f2 and would win in said case so she just one error really. People don't have to play a super proactive game for it to be good or great. There was absolutely no point of turning on Tony when Spencer/Tasha/Jeremiahahw ere still around and taking him out could have let Woo jump ship to that side and mae it so she doesn't even have majority anymore. Closer to the end is where she should have cut Tony.
Such as? The only problems people had was only Tony blindsiding them and his lies, nothing with his social game. apart from Tasha. Yeah Tasha definitely wasn't a big character in the season,t hat's Spencer/Tony/K***/Woo towards the end and yeah I've literally laid out why they aren't and you respond with things that were edited in on the show.
Yeah ftc would be absolutely awful if we had a jury full of people who are all "yeah you got me, good job! haha not like I just lost a shot at a million dollars or anything". The bitter jury speeches and reactions are what make the end so fun and powerful. Some of the best speeches have been those super emotional and raw ones like Sue, Trish, Eliza, Helen, etc.
I mean obviously, I didn't thin I had to include that being an opinion since it's clear as day. Yeah, no even Spencer says that speech didn't sway much and at most, MAYBE Jefra/Sarah but definitely not as much as 4 votes lol. K*** has even said she wanted to vote Woo just so spite Spencer and his condescending *** speech.
Yeah, you don't HAVE to, it isn't ana sboltue necesitty to win the game. Is that going over your head or? Tony did have to do to get where he got, but you saying big moves on your resume and etc is what wins the game and has to be done for jury votes is not true at all.
Yeah I never said she had a flawless social game where absolutely nobody was after her or anythings o again your point? No every winner was the most well liked from that f3 or f2.
Tony's great, Trish is very good, Spencer is average and his fans just buy the edit because it helps sell that he's a better player than he actually is. I haven't contratdicted myself at all, you're just showing yourself to be a very casual fan in this entire argument.
K*** doesn't vote for Trish, and at least Spencer/Tash/Jeremiah/Morgan do not vote for Trish in the end over Spencer/Tasha. Trish just did whatever she was told besides a move or two here. If she was smart she would have turned on Tony and stabbed him in the back before he did it to her. He already did it twice to his alliance, she should have seen it coming.
Tony did have a good social game. What I meant by not so great was that it had a lot of flaws in it, but most people do. And yes you are delusional if you don't think Spencer and Tasha were some of the top players/characters of the season. Especially when you say Jefra is better than them.
It's very hard to leave your personal feelings at the door. But it's a game, if you can't do that you shouldn't be there. You have to do what's best for you and the game, not play for other people, or be upset at someone else for playing the game.
Um "those jury speeches are awful, some of the worst in history" that's subjective and that's your opinion, not everyones. I highly enjoy those speeches over some of the pointless questions that are asked. I find them pretty powerful. "If a finalist can't convince a juror to vote for them that's on the finalist and not the juror". Spencer was helping Tony. There were 3-4 people who were bitter against him and may not have voted for him to win in the end. You're contradicting yourself a little bit there.
You say you don't need to have made moves, you just need to be liked. Some moves are ok but it doesn't need to be a flashy game. Yet Tony played a flashy game and it was a good one.
Yes Ciera got booted because of an idol, but if her social game was soooo strong, she wouldn't have been the blindside option. People with great social games aren't threats according to you, remember. Every winner has been well liked but not necessarily the most well liked out of the three.
In the end this was an argument over Jefra and has completely changed directions.
Tony's good, Spencer's good, Trish was ok, Jefra didn't do anything. You are not going to change my views on that no matter how many times you argue the same point over and over again, and contradict yourself while doing it.
Against K***, Trish wins like 9-0, against Tony, Trish gets votes of Sarah/Jeremiah/LJ/Jefra/Tasha and maybe Morgan and wins, against Woo wins 8-1 or 7-2, against Jefra also 8-1 or 7-2 so yeah she was likely winning against any of those four. Trish was easily a great player in the season and definitely one of th ebetter players to never win. She didn't need moves to be made at all, but even then pulled the merge vote as well as the Cliff one and was well liked by almost everyone and had a killer social game. She did have the flaw of not turning on Tony when she had to, but she was planning on taking him to f2 and would win in said case so she just one error really. People don't have to play a super proactive game for it to be good or great. There was absolutely no point of turning on Tony when Spencer/Tasha/Jeremiahahw ere still around and taking him out could have let Woo jump ship to that side and mae it so she doesn't even have majority anymore. Closer to the end is where she should have cut Tony.
Such as? The only problems people had was only Tony blindsiding them and his lies, nothing with his social game. apart from Tasha. Yeah Tasha definitely wasn't a big character in the season,t hat's Spencer/Tony/K***/Woo towards the end and yeah I've literally laid out why they aren't and you respond with things that were edited in on the show.
Yeah ftc would be absolutely awful if we had a jury full of people who are all "yeah you got me, good job! haha not like I just lost a shot at a million dollars or anything". The bitter jury speeches and reactions are what make the end so fun and powerful. Some of the best speeches have been those super emotional and raw ones like Sue, Trish, Eliza, Helen, etc.
I mean obviously, I didn't thin I had to include that being an opinion since it's clear as day. Yeah, no even Spencer says that speech didn't sway much and at most, MAYBE Jefra/Sarah but definitely not as much as 4 votes lol. K*** has even said she wanted to vote Woo just so spite Spencer and his condescending *** speech.
Yeah, you don't HAVE to, it isn't ana sboltue necesitty to win the game. Is that going over your head or? Tony did have to do to get where he got, but you saying big moves on your resume and etc is what wins the game and has to be done for jury votes is not true at all.
Yeah I never said she had a flawless social game where absolutely nobody was after her or anythings o again your point? No every winner was the most well liked from that f3 or f2.
Tony's great, Trish is very good, Spencer is average and his fans just buy the edit because it helps sell that he's a better player than he actually is. I haven't contratdicted myself at all, you're just showing yourself to be a very casual fan in this entire argument.
Lmao so Spencer plays a good game and it's not good it's just his edit. Jefra plays no game, but she's one of the best, but the edit didn't show it, ok. And I'm not a very fan, you've contradicted yourself several times and don't even realize it which shows you don't know much about what you're talking about.
One second it's ok for someone to do something or they are a good player because of this and then one second it's not ok to do this and this person isn't a good player even though it's the same thing person A did. OK
Lmao so Spencer plays a good game and it's not good it's just his edit. Jefra plays no game, but she's one of the best, but the edit didn't show it, ok. And I'm not a very fan, you've contradicted yourself several times and don't even realize it which shows you don't know much about what you're talking about.
One second it's ok for someone to do something or they are a good player because of this and then one second it's not ok to do this and this person isn't a good player even though it's the same thing person A did. OK
Yeah, I don't get why that's hard to get. Samoa is the same way with Russell and Natalie White, lol this isn't some groundbreaking thing to happen and nothing against Spencer at all, fan favorites constantly get generous edits and people are ignored in the edit adn seen as bad players because of it. I haven't contradicted myself at all, but if you could bring some examples up that'd be cool.
That is literally the most generic comment ever, how is this supposed to help the conversation move along?
Worlds Apart is one of my all time least favorite seasons. It was horrible to me.
Back to Jeremy I like him a lot, I just don't think people like predictable winners and he's sitting pretty so naturally we want him to be taken off his thrown by an underdog.
But I would be more than happy for Jeremy to win. I did like him a bit more on SJDS though because he was less a gamebot and more a funny character. He always ranted in his confessionals about his castmates and it was so funny to watch. He was the pretty much Sean Rector 2.0 from Marquesas who is one the best male characters of all time. It's ridiculous Sean was never brought back.. he was so fun to watch.
I'm actually pretty pumped for next season.. i've heard good things about it. Apparently it was one of the most tortureous seasons as well (weather wise)... I don't remember, but did we figure out if there was a twist? Last time I remember hearing about it, it was just a fresh batch of rookies (and a BB player) with no specific theme... (three tribes?).
beauty vs brain vs brawn
ahhh right, i do remember that now!! - well cagayan was pretty good, so hopefully lightning strikes twice haha
Caleb from BB16.. eh
Some washed out basket ball player too, just don't recall his name.
Lmao so Spencer plays a good game and it's not good it's just his edit. Jefra plays no game, but she's one of the best, but the edit didn't show it, ok. And I'm not a very fan, you've contradicted yourself several times and don't even realize it which shows you don't know much about what you're talking about.
One second it's ok for someone to do something or they are a good player because of this and then one second it's not ok to do this and this person isn't a good player even though it's the same thing person A did. OK
Yeah, I don't get why that's hard to get. Samoa is the same way with Russell and Natalie White, lol this isn't some groundbreaking thing to happen and nothing against Spencer at all, fan favorites constantly get generous edits and people are ignored in the edit adn seen as bad players because of it. I haven't contradicted myself at all, but if you could bring some examples up that'd be cool.
That is literally the most generic comment ever, how is this supposed to help the conversation move along?
It's not, I'm ending it so we don't have the same argument over and over again and get no where.
An interview wit LJ said that Jefra didn't do too much and that she was kinda just there waiting for her turn.
Jeremiah said that Jefra could have changed the course of the game allowing her to get a lot further but she was easily scared into not flipping. And that she is too nice of a person and doesn't want to hurt anyone so she admitting to flipping which was bad gameplay and her downfall. He also said it would be hard to beat Spencer in the end. He said it would be hard because in the end you want to take a goat, but you also want the person who you really think has played the game to win.
Jefra said that she would have flipped and worked with the other alliance had she known Spencer had an idol and that Tasha is a dangerous player. She's smart, a beast at challenges, and likable. She also said that she tried to flip but Kass and Trish wouldn't do it with her. And that she begged Tony to get Tasha out instead of Morgan. She also said she knew Tony was a threat and had to go home. She also said that Tony was very antsy, paranoid, and didn't actually target people as shown on TV.
A lot people said Tony had a messy game and made a lot of bad moves, but got lucky enough to escape harm from those bad moves.
Spencer also said based on the jury he felt like he had a good shot to beat Tony in the end but wouldn't bring him if he didn't have to. That's why he fought so hard for Tony in his jury speech because a lot of people were very bitter.
An interview wit LJ said that Jefra didn't do too much and that she was kinda just there waiting for her turn.
Jeremiah said that Jefra could have changed the course of the game allowing her to get a lot further but she was easily scared into not flipping. And that she is too nice of a person and doesn't want to hurt anyone so she admitting to flipping which was bad gameplay and her downfall. He also said it would be hard to beat Spencer in the end. He said it would be hard because in the end you want to take a goat, but you also want the person who you really think has played the game to win.
Jefra said that she would have flipped and worked with the other alliance had she known Spencer had an idol and that Tasha is a dangerous player. She's smart, a beast at challenges, and likable. She also said that she tried to flip but Kass and Trish wouldn't do it with her. And that she begged Tony to get Tasha out instead of Morgan. She also said she knew Tony was a threat and had to go home. She also said that Tony was very antsy, paranoid, and didn't actually target people as shown on TV.
A lot people said Tony had a messy game and made a lot of bad moves, but got lucky enough to escape harm from those bad moves.
Spencer also said based on the jury he felt like he had a good shot to beat Tony in the end but wouldn't bring him if he didn't have to. That's why he fought so hard for Tony in his jury speech because a lot of people were very bitter.
ILol didn't you just say you were done with this, but links? I'd be interested in reading all of that, the only parts I recall are the bits of what Jefra and Jeremiah said. I have no idea what the last part is supposed to for me though.
Heroes vs Villains with Coach, JT, Tyson, James, Russel, Rupert, Amanda and Rob is tragic as cast for me. But I will give it chance. And so glad to see Steph again.
Heroes vs Villains with Coach, JT, Tyson, James, Russel, Rupert, Amanda and Rob is tragic as cast for me. But I will give it chance. And so glad to see Steph again.
Heroes vs Villains with Coach, JT, Tyson, James, Russel, Rupert, Amanda and Rob is tragic as cast for me. But I will give it chance. And so glad to see Steph again.
She's horrible. I liked her on Palau, but I absolutely hated that ***** on Guatemala and HvV.
Loved her in Guatemala! Her and Judd were the mains villains.
I actually like Amanda, but I don't think she was necessary in this season. And rest the people I have listed- they annoys ME, so I don't want to see theirs dusty ***** all over again.
And Jerri really was huge villain in Australia? If she was, I gotta watch this season. Kimmi <3
I don't understand why Rob is that liked. He did something cool in the past? As now, the way he speaks... is awful and ********. Mybe it's his accent, idk.
I would have liked Steph (and Tom + Colby for that matter) more but she went after Amanda, which is unacceptable to me. Which is too bad, because I liked them a lot more before HvV.
I feel like Amanda is underrated tbh because of how she does at ftc. She went to the end twice as the favorite to win, just gives awful jury speeches. Even in HvV, she goes to the end if Heroes get majority come merge. She obviously has some big flaws and her lying to Parv was laughably bad, but she's always gonna be a contender in any season she's in. She's pretty boring and weird as a 3 time player when there are so many bigger female characters, but she was pretty cool in Micronesia.
It's actually one of my favorites from the last 10-11 seasons. I agree about a lot of the edits completely though. Especially the ones you listed though. I like a lot of the characters though and was rooting for several people all season instead of just one specifically. I love the game centric aspect of it personally. All that stuff is what I watch for. The blindsides, the strategy/social game, the challenges, the shitty weather and living conditions, the idol findings, etc. has been great.
Yeah I do like gameplay and the weather stuff was cool,but I like to know the people more too. I think blindslides and etc mean more when we are given a significant reason to care. A more character driven season is what I prefer.
Oh yeah the voting bloc thing and how this is something new was really annoying since it happens quite a bit in modern survivor. Like even in season SIX, Rob Cesternino did this the entire postmerge.
If it wasn't for those two Jefra most likely wouldn't have gone home because Trish and Kass may not have been in on it. They were blindsided at that TC
Rodney played a pretty shitty a game. His alliance were ****** players like Dan and WIll. So controlling them isn't saying much considering they had no game. Most people that season sucked. Mike screwed up socially, that's why he NEEDED to win out. I agree that you shouldn't need to win every challenge to win but if you need to win out, and you do, you most likely deserve to win.
If you are someone like Joe who needs to win every single episode to get by you are definitely doing something write. But if you are someone who doesn't win or doesn't need to fight to win at all, then you aren't a threat, and don't have enough on your "resume" to win, especially if you aren't the one who is controlling the moves. Just being likeable and everyones friend doesn't cut it in my book.
If you can win 3-4 challenges here and there and people don't try to pull the trigger on that person, then their physical game AND social game is great. There are a lot of players like that. It doesn't just need to be one or the other like you make it seem
I do like to know the people more too but this is second chances. We got to know them for the most part on their first season. I mean there is always more that we can learn about them to make us like them more, but I would prefer for them to not spend so much time on that when they have with these people already. If these were all new players I would deff agree.
We have no idea what happens if it's just those 5 instead of 7 with Tasha and Spencer there, jumping the gun there.
I don't see how him controlling weak players says anything about his game. Good players constantly control weaker ones, doesn't take anything away from them.
Yeah that's actually won people the game so I'd disagree. It helps to have some moves down, but survivor isn't this insanely flashy game of big moves. It can often be as simple as people liking and respecting you more: see Samoa and HvV.
Making it seem? I'm not, I have no issue with people winning challenges at all, just with people NEEDING to win multiple challenges to get farther and being labeled a good player. JT, Tom, Danni, Chris, Kim all won immunity more than a few times and great winners.
I still think they could put some stuff in there and give us new storylines or something apart from strategy. We saw this with Abi, Woo, Jeff Varner, and on HvV there was a lot more character stuff so I'd like to see more of that even in a returnee season.
So if Spencer and Tasha weren't needed to get out Jefra and Trish and Kass helped Tony, it would be another instance of when Trish just followed whatever Tony wanted. I'm not talking abot Tony's game, and Spencer and Tasha are not weak players. If you seriously believe that you are more than delusional. Tony was great but was extremely paranoid and easily manipulated. He had a flashy game which I liked but not a perfect one. Him flipping on the people who trusted him more than once is proof of his not so great social game.
To me it's more about the game play, one person can be extremely cutthroat but make amazing moves, and someone can be really nice and sweet but completely useless. In the end I personally would root and vote for the cutthroat person. That's why I enjoy people like Spencer and Jenn's jury speeches. They tell people not to be bitter and vote for their friends but to vote for the person who played the better game.
Survivor isn't an insanely flashy game of big moves, that's why Ciera got the boot. That's all she wanted to do and her social game wasn't strong enough. Tony's game was flashy though. All of a sudden it's ok for him to do it but not others? Again it's not a flashy game of big moves, but if you don't do anything and are just nice, you don't deserve to win. This isnt the same game it was 15 seasons ago. The people who are most liked don't win and don't deserve to, unless they do something in the game.
And that matters why? Trish beats everybody else left in that final 5 so it's a moot point aside from you disliking players who aren't needlessly aggressive. I'm delusional for looking beyond a tv edit? How does that prove he didn't have a great social game? He flipped on LJ as he was a threat and Jefra for not trusting him after that LJ vote, he was respected and wel liked by most of his castaways. The Cagayan edit was so off and again just tries to paint a picture of Survivor as something it is not.
Yeah, but we are watching a TV show, these people on the jury personally know and have relationships with these people. It's nearly impossible to say leave your feelings out of it when survivor is so raw and the bonds you form. If a finalist can't convince a juror to vote for them, that's on the finlast and not the juror/ They mishandled them if the jury member doesn't want to vote for them. Those jury speeches are awful btw, easily some of the worst in survivor history. People can vote however they choose and so please.
lol Ciera got booted, because of an idol, you'll notcie she had a strong majority with 7-3 in that vote and even when Tasha notcies how Ciera is rising as this huge threat, still goes along with it. Tony's game is certainly flashy, where did I say it's not right? I said they try to paint the show as such, when really even without all those big moves, Tony is still a very good player who was well liked by his cast. The big moves just mae for better tv, he even has said for every hour they showed his idol and strategy talk, the rest of the day he'd be bonding with people and forming relationships. Those winners I listed won like 5 years ago, with one of them even winning twice. Every winner who has won has been the most well liked by the jury--every single one.
Kass doesn't vote for Trish, and at least Spencer/Tash/Jeremiah/Morgan do not vote for Trish in the end over Spencer/Tasha. Trish just did whatever she was told besides a move or two here. If she was smart she would have turned on Tony and stabbed him in the back before he did it to her. He already did it twice to his alliance, she should have seen it coming.
Tony did have a good social game. What I meant by not so great was that it had a lot of flaws in it, but most people do. And yes you are delusional if you don't think Spencer and Tasha were some of the top players/characters of the season. Especially when you say Jefra is better than them.
It's very hard to leave your personal feelings at the door. But it's a game, if you can't do that you shouldn't be there. You have to do what's best for you and the game, not play for other people, or be upset at someone else for playing the game.
Um "those jury speeches are awful, some of the worst in history" that's subjective and that's your opinion, not everyones. I highly enjoy those speeches over some of the pointless questions that are asked. I find them pretty powerful. "If a finalist can't convince a juror to vote for them that's on the finalist and not the juror". Spencer was helping Tony. There were 3-4 people who were bitter against him and may not have voted for him to win in the end. You're contradicting yourself a little bit there.
You say you don't need to have made moves, you just need to be liked. Some moves are ok but it doesn't need to be a flashy game. Yet Tony played a flashy game and it was a good one.
Yes Ciera got booted because of an idol, but if her social game was soooo strong, she wouldn't have been the blindside option. People with great social games aren't threats according to you, remember. Every winner has been well liked but not necessarily the most well liked out of the three.
In the end this was an argument over Jefra and has completely changed directions.
Tony's good, Spencer's good, Trish was ok, Jefra didn't do anything. You are not going to change my views on that no matter how many times you argue the same point over and over again, and contradict yourself while doing it.
Against K***, Trish wins like 9-0, against Tony, Trish gets votes of Sarah/Jeremiah/LJ/Jefra/Tasha and maybe Morgan and wins, against Woo wins 8-1 or 7-2, against Jefra also 8-1 or 7-2 so yeah she was likely winning against any of those four. Trish was easily a great player in the season and definitely one of th ebetter players to never win. She didn't need moves to be made at all, but even then pulled the merge vote as well as the Cliff one and was well liked by almost everyone and had a killer social game. She did have the flaw of not turning on Tony when she had to, but she was planning on taking him to f2 and would win in said case so she just one error really. People don't have to play a super proactive game for it to be good or great. There was absolutely no point of turning on Tony when Spencer/Tasha/Jeremiahahw ere still around and taking him out could have let Woo jump ship to that side and mae it so she doesn't even have majority anymore. Closer to the end is where she should have cut Tony.
Such as? The only problems people had was only Tony blindsiding them and his lies, nothing with his social game. apart from Tasha. Yeah Tasha definitely wasn't a big character in the season,t hat's Spencer/Tony/K***/Woo towards the end and yeah I've literally laid out why they aren't and you respond with things that were edited in on the show.
Yeah ftc would be absolutely awful if we had a jury full of people who are all "yeah you got me, good job! haha not like I just lost a shot at a million dollars or anything". The bitter jury speeches and reactions are what make the end so fun and powerful. Some of the best speeches have been those super emotional and raw ones like Sue, Trish, Eliza, Helen, etc.
I mean obviously, I didn't thin I had to include that being an opinion since it's clear as day. Yeah, no even Spencer says that speech didn't sway much and at most, MAYBE Jefra/Sarah but definitely not as much as 4 votes lol. K*** has even said she wanted to vote Woo just so spite Spencer and his condescending *** speech.
Yeah, you don't HAVE to, it isn't ana sboltue necesitty to win the game. Is that going over your head or? Tony did have to do to get where he got, but you saying big moves on your resume and etc is what wins the game and has to be done for jury votes is not true at all.
Yeah I never said she had a flawless social game where absolutely nobody was after her or anythings o again your point? No every winner was the most well liked from that f3 or f2.
Tony's great, Trish is very good, Spencer is average and his fans just buy the edit because it helps sell that he's a better player than he actually is. I haven't contratdicted myself at all, you're just showing yourself to be a very casual fan in this entire argument.
Worlds apart was a pretty good season game play wise tbh.
Lmao so Spencer plays a good game and it's not good it's just his edit. Jefra plays no game, but she's one of the best, but the edit didn't show it, ok. And I'm not a very fan, you've contradicted yourself several times and don't even realize it which shows you don't know much about what you're talking about.
One second it's ok for someone to do something or they are a good player because of this and then one second it's not ok to do this and this person isn't a good player even though it's the same thing person A did. OK
were we watchingthe same season?
World's Apart was pretty bad.
Yeah, I don't get why that's hard to get. Samoa is the same way with Russell and Natalie White, lol this isn't some groundbreaking thing to happen and nothing against Spencer at all, fan favorites constantly get generous edits and people are ignored in the edit adn seen as bad players because of it. I haven't contradicted myself at all, but if you could bring some examples up that'd be cool.
That is literally the most generic comment ever, how is this supposed to help the conversation move along?
Worlds Apart is one of my all time least favorite seasons. It was horrible to me.
Back to Jeremy I like him a lot, I just don't think people like predictable winners and he's sitting pretty so naturally we want him to be taken off his thrown by an underdog.
But I would be more than happy for Jeremy to win. I did like him a bit more on SJDS though because he was less a gamebot and more a funny character. He always ranted in his confessionals about his castmates and it was so funny to watch. He was the pretty much Sean Rector 2.0 from Marquesas who is one the best male characters of all time. It's ridiculous Sean was never brought back.. he was so fun to watch.
Some washed out basket ball player too, just don't recall his name.
It's not, I'm ending it so we don't have the same argument over and over again and get no where.
Sometimes I forget that vytas was on this season. Just thought I'd say this.
An interview wit LJ said that Jefra didn't do too much and that she was kinda just there waiting for her turn.
Jeremiah said that Jefra could have changed the course of the game allowing her to get a lot further but she was easily scared into not flipping. And that she is too nice of a person and doesn't want to hurt anyone so she admitting to flipping which was bad gameplay and her downfall. He also said it would be hard to beat Spencer in the end. He said it would be hard because in the end you want to take a goat, but you also want the person who you really think has played the game to win.
Jefra said that she would have flipped and worked with the other alliance had she known Spencer had an idol and that Tasha is a dangerous player. She's smart, a beast at challenges, and likable. She also said that she tried to flip but Kass and Trish wouldn't do it with her. And that she begged Tony to get Tasha out instead of Morgan. She also said she knew Tony was a threat and had to go home. She also said that Tony was very antsy, paranoid, and didn't actually target people as shown on TV.
A lot people said Tony had a messy game and made a lot of bad moves, but got lucky enough to escape harm from those bad moves.
Spencer also said based on the jury he felt like he had a good shot to beat Tony in the end but wouldn't bring him if he didn't have to. That's why he fought so hard for Tony in his jury speech because a lot of people were very bitter.
ILol didn't you just say you were done with this, but links? I'd be interested in reading all of that, the only parts I recall are the bits of what Jefra and Jeremiah said. I have no idea what the last part is supposed to for me though.
Heroes vs Villains with Coach, JT, Tyson, James, Russel, Rupert, Amanda and Rob is tragic as cast for me. But I will give it chance. And so glad to see Steph again.
Nothing tragic about JT and Amanda.
She's horrible. I liked her on Palau, but I absolutely hated that ***** on Guatemala and HvV.
Or a majority of those people listed tbh
I actually like Amanda, but I don't think she was necessary in this season. And rest the people I have listed- they annoys ME, so I don't want to see theirs dusty ***** all over again.
And Jerri really was huge villain in Australia? If she was, I gotta watch this season. Kimmi <3
I don't understand why Rob is that liked. He did something cool in the past? As now, the way he speaks... is awful and ********. Mybe it's his accent, idk.
I would have liked Steph (and Tom + Colby for that matter) more but she went after Amanda, which is unacceptable to me. Which is too bad, because I liked them a lot more before HvV.
I feel like Amanda is underrated tbh because of how she does at ftc. She went to the end twice as the favorite to win, just gives awful jury speeches. Even in HvV, she goes to the end if Heroes get majority come merge. She obviously has some big flaws and her lying to Parv was laughably bad, but she's always gonna be a contender in any season she's in. She's pretty boring and weird as a 3 time player when there are so many bigger female characters, but she was pretty cool in Micronesia.
3 successful idol plays is pretty good to me tbh.
Pages