Thursday 10/19 episode

Wow, they really left a lot of stuff on the cutting room floor just to tell their stupid narrative because most of what they put forth was crap.

First of all where the hell was the part where America made an appeal to Jag to take her off the block thinking it was all a joke? This was the MAIN reason she was so upset and felt so betrayed and embarrassed. They made it look like NONE of that ever happened. Then we move on to the conversations and they show Cory talking to Blue first and thought he had her vote, which was NOT even close to what happened. Cory went and talked to Cirie first. He even made it a point to tell her he wanted to talk to her first and make his pitch. He made the pitch we saw, but the most important part of that entire pitch was where he said if he stayed and America left, Cirie would be his new #1 and he would do everything he could to protect her to the end of the game without any thoughts of anyone else at all. THIS is what made Cirie get on the Cory train for a hot minute. She told him he needed to get Felicia first and then they would figure out who would be the third one.

Cory went to Bowie and actually thought he had her vote, but she told him she would only CONSIDER IT if he had the other 2 votes locked in. Then he started his stupid plan to for Felicia to lie to Bowie and Blue about the noms next week being them and instead she outed him. When Felicia was talking to Cirie, they both entertained it until the next morning when Felicia said there was too much of a chance that Cory would go back to play with Matt and Jag to save his ass if he had to, but America never would according to them. Also, the thing that flipped Cirie back the other way was her conversation with Matt asking about keepig Cory and he pretty much said he likes Cory better, but he is much more dangerous and he would not want him to stay. Cirie wouldn't take the risk.

The joking and stuff at the eviction time was pretty good, at least that came a long way from the immature classless behavior that happened earlier in the week for sure. But I thought it was funny that Cory basically torpedoed the production narrative that he supposedly had Blue's vote when he said that was never going to happen and he knew it. Welp there went that little segment of the show, huh?

And why the hell did Cirie act like she was voting out her best friend in the house. She was almost acting like she did when she was losing Izzy and Jared. I thought it was very weird.

And I really wanted Julie to ask Cory about being a superfan of Cirie and Survivor to see if he said anything about asking all those questions recently, but it didn't happen. I would have also liked to hear what he said about who he thinks is winning the game, because everyone else seems to say Jag, but he says he would vote for Matt right now. I wanted to hear him talk about that now that he is out of the house.

The filler parts of he episode were bullshit. Cirie's punishment thing was way over the top, especially with all the complaining she did about it. Well that's what she gets, she was so proud to tell everyone in DR how she was throwing the comp, where the punishment was the consequences of that. So she can go fuck herself about what a pain in the ass it is.

Jags DR that America is playing the worst game ever was really out of place, esepcially with the guy who was evicted 10-0 and has made some very questionable game moves this season. I don't want to here that it worked for him because he's still there because he shouldn't be there. Stupid twists save him. And the part about if Matt didn't have the power to save him, the votes would have fallen different makes no sense. Why vote someone out just to use the power instead of saving it and voting the other person out?

Well Blue continues to be Blue, what is the deal with her and those goodbye messages? She must not understand jury management, especially after her DR about America not treating her as if she's a vote.

Cory may be asked some of the questions in follow up interviews, I'll try and see if I find any worth while

I don't think I made my point clearly about Matt's power. The point was that if he had said he wanted it used on Jag, but he wasn't evicted, the power basically is forfeited. If Jag had the votes, he would save the power for the following week. What he was TRYING to avoid was an "iffy" vote where it could go either way. They couldn't get the votes to be SURE or unanimous so the next best thing was to just let it go this way.

ok, if they couldn't get the votes or weren't sure, to me that is the same as being evicted. So yes, Jag got a second chance in the game and therefore does not deserve to win IMO. Yes, as a juror, I would hold that against him. That is not bitterness, that is based on game. I'd vote for the person never evicted over the person who was evicted almost every single time.

I want to add that in this scenario being unsure, the proper play is to use the power on Jag, still try to get the votes. This way if you're successful in getting the votes, you are still sending someone home.

ctown28 wrote:

ok, if they couldn't get the votes or weren't sure, to me that is the same as being evicted.  So yes, Jag got a second chance in the game and therefore does not deserve to win IMO.  Yes, as a juror, I would hold that against him.  That is not bitterness, that is based on game.  I'd vote for the person never evicted over the person who was evicted almost every single time.

What if that "other person" was Victoria, Andy, GinaMarie, Spenser or Kathy? The list could be longer of course. I just think since it IS part of the game it should not be a disqualifying situation. In fact it is usually a harder road because people want to send them right back out. If you were voting in Survivor for the winner, would you vote against someone who had saved themselves with several immunity idols or other powers? What about those who went to redemption island back in the day and had to play their way back in?

I just think it is a little closed minded just as it would be to only vote for someone who wins comps and is a target the entire game and not considering the person who had an effective coaster or floater strategy while manipulating others to take out their targets.

ctown28 wrote:

I want to add that in this scenario being unsure, the proper play is to use the power on Jag, still try to get the votes.  This way if you're successful in getting the votes, you are still sending someone home.

But they actually wanted to keep them both to keep their numbers, so why waste the power by forfeiting it?

chap5788 wrote:

ctown28 wrote:

ok, if they couldn't get the votes or weren't sure, to me that is the same as being evicted.  So yes, Jag got a second chance in the game and therefore does not deserve to win IMO.  Yes, as a juror, I would hold that against him.  That is not bitterness, that is based on game.  I'd vote for the person never evicted over the person who was evicted almost every single time.

What if that "other person" was Victoria, Andy, GinaMarie, Spenser or Kathy?  The list could be longer of course.  I just think since it IS part of the game it should not be a disqualifying situation.  In fact it is usually a harder road because people want to send them right back out.  If you were voting in Survivor for the winner, would you vote against someone who had saved themselves with several immunity idols or other powers?  What about those who went to redemption island back in the day and had to play their way back in?

I just think it is a little closed minded just as it would be to only vote for someone who wins comps and is a target the entire game and not considering the person who had an effective coaster or floater strategy while manipulating others to take out their targets.  

Not sure why yu mentioned Andy because he won the game, and notice I said almost every single time, you failed to list a single person that was sitting in the Final 2 chair, but let me give at least one exception I would have for it. Season 19, let's say Josh had been voted out and won his way back in, then I go with the exception based on all of the bullshit advantages that Paul was given. Season 14, if Ian had been evicted and won his way back in, I would have to give him consideration based on the fact that Dan did not enter the game until it was 25% over. Survivor is a different game, I stopped watching because of all the bullshit things they've added to the game for people to save themselves and the ways they can battle back in.

The sole purpose of the game is to NOT get evicted. Well Jag WAS evicted. Julie even stated "By a vote of 10-0, Jag, you have been evicted" So he was not saved by an idol, which would negate votes for him, or anything else that prevents people from voting for him. I guess what I'm saying is that they need to stop making it harder to evict someone. Some of these past players had been hard enough to evict as it is due to comp prowess. Even Cameron this season, he needed to be evicted twice and they only got him due to a backdoor. While I'm on htat backdoor topic, Cory and America need to stop claiming they were backdoored, theyboth played in both vetos thereby negating the backdoor

chap5788 wrote:

ctown28 wrote:

I want to add that in this scenario being unsure, the proper play is to use the power on Jag, still try to get the votes.  This way if you're successful in getting the votes, you are still sending someone home.

But they actually wanted to keep them both to keep their numbers, so why waste the power by forfeiting it?

Because the power was to save ONE person, not two. IT's bad enough that it was orchestrated by the clear majority of the house at the time and completely fucked Cam's HoH as he had to get that blood and had nothing to show for it. He had a huge uphill battle in this game based on that alone, his terrible social game was his own fault but that shouldn't negate an HoH.

Yes it was used to save ONE person, but if you are the one who won the comp to receive the power, isn't it smart to get as much out of that power as possible? It was very smart for Matt to keep 2 people in the game who were allies to him instead of forfeiting that power using it on someone who ended up having the votes.

And sure Cam's HOH was basically taken away from him which is why he was able to play in the next HOH to try to save himself. He just didn't win it to make it back to back HOH's the way Jag did this week. Seems you were okay about the "cardinal rule" being broken in that situation, but not when it involved Jag, and remember Cam was also evicted and reentered the game.

Apples to oranges. The week the power was used, it was akin to the week being reset as if it never happened. Same as in season 16 when they had the reset button and nobody got evicted, Frankie was allowed to play in the HoH since his was negated.. Same as in season 14 when the coaches voted to reset the game and nobody was evicted, Shane was allowed to play in the HoH since he was negated. See how this precedence thing works?

And yes, I know Cam was evicted and came back, and I didn't like that either and am glad he was sent right back out

ctown28 wrote:

Apples to oranges.  The week the power was used, it was akin to the week being reset as if it never happened.  Same as in season 16 when they had the reset button and nobody got evicted, Frankie was allowed to play in the HoH since his was negated..  Same as in season 14 when the coaches voted to reset the game and nobody was evicted, Shane was allowed to play in the HoH since he was negated.  See how this precedence thing works?

And yes, I know Cam was evicted and came back, and I didn't like that either and am glad he was sent right back out

I am aware of how precedence works, and I also know that production doesn't always follow it also. This is where the expect the unexpected come in, their excuse to change anything and everything they so choose.

It seems the part that you are hooked on is if NOBODY was evicted being the triggering factor here. Well guess what else is different. In all of the examples you posted here, NONE of them were told before the HOH that they would be playing the following week. It was something thrown in after the fact. In this case ALL of them were told they could play in back to back HOH's BEFORE the comp was played. So that ADVANTAGE was open to everyone and they knew it going in. That is where it is different.

Are you seriously playing the expect the unexpected card? I guarantee you that is not what production was thinking.

Of course in the examples that I listed they weren't told before hand that they would be playing the following week. You wanna know why? Because they didn't know that their HoH would basically be taken away from them as if it never existed, yet they still got the blood on their hands for nominations alone.

The only advantage their MIGHT be, is that someone would not throw the HoH because they wanted to be able to play in the following one, but that advantage is pretty much negated because a lot of times you throw based on how your allies are doing, but in individual ones, you have no idea how they're doing.

I wasn't playing a card, I am saying that is their out for everything they change up along the way and you know it. Anything new that they do could be the start of a precedent setting practice, so maybe this will happen every season now? Nobody knows, because they make it up as they go along. But I still say it made it fair and an even playing field for everyone involved because they KNEW the terms going into the competition. They didn't change it up AFTER Jag made his noms and veto was played.

And what you said goes with the invisible HOH too. If a person knows they are playing in the next one, they make a different move than if they didn't think they were playing (secret or not). Plus you had the 2 vetoes following behind it, so Jag would have nominated half the house and then not been able to play HOH, and even if he had not told ANYONE he was HOH, everyone would know he was regardless of the path he took.