[Roy Mars III]

Originally Posted by Bluerang1

Yeah, no.



And your rebuttal is that they don't count right?

Those are all **** housemates though, who cares what they think? And Evel Dick is just sad that people don't consider him the best player ever

[SoBig]

Originally Posted by Roy Mars III

Those are all **** housemates though, who cares what they think? And Evel Dick is just sad that people don't consider him the best player ever

My new favorite poster.

Evel Dick is just all around bitter. He gets PISSED whenever someone ranks Dan as the best or second best player ever. Its sad really. Evel Dick is not even in the top 3 players of all time.

[Munchkins]

Ew i hate evil dick
bastard should have been removed for what he did to Jen
i wanted Dani to win

[TheManWhoLaughs]

Originally Posted by Roy Mars III

Those are all **** housemates though, who cares what they think?

True, the opinions of Grodner-***** Jessie or trainwreck Michele don't matter. The housemates only care about fame or TV time love Ian; the ones who actually care about the game were pro-Dan.

Ian managed to survive because of his vetos/HoHs, the coach's comp in Week 1 and the "magic veto ball". He 'deserved' to win but he wasn't a very good player - he played a very basic and lucky game, just like Jordan.

[SoBig]

Originally Posted by TheManWhoLaughs

True, the opinions of Grodner-***** Jessie or trainwreck Michele don't matter. The housemates only care about fame or TV time love Ian; the ones who actually care about the game were pro-Dan.

Ian managed to survive because of his vetos/HoHs, the coach's comp in Week 1 and the "magic veto ball". He 'deserved' to win but he wasn't a very good player - he played a very basic and lucky game, just like Jordan.

Exactly. When ********* Dr. Will, Danielle Reyes and Janelle said you played the best game you know you are doing something right.

LMAO @ bringing up that loser Jessie.

Ian said it best. He lucked into his win like Bob from Survivor did.

[Macie Lightfoot]

So you're using Janelle as evidence for Dan being robbed of his win. The same Janelle who voted for Ivette to win BB6. Right...

This is just the Samoa finale over again. Dan lost because of what he did. He gave them all reasons to be bitter. Everyone just needs to get over it.

[SoBig]

Originally Posted by troynuncdicit

So you're using Janelle as evidence for Dan being robbed of his win. The same Janelle who voted for Ivette to win BB6. Right...

This is just the Samoa finale over again. Dan lost because of what he did. He gave them all reasons to be bitter. Everyone just needs to get over it.

Did he gave a Jenn a reason to be bitter? She said that she did NOT VOTE for Dan because she wanted someone NEW to WIN THE GAME. She was anti-coach since the reset. She even admitted that Dan played a better game.

[Macie Lightfoot]

And that's her decision to do so. That'd make it 5-2 and Dan still loses significantly.

[SoBig]

Originally Posted by troynuncdicit

And that's her decision to do so. That'd make it 5-2 and Dan still loses significantly.

What did Dan do to Ashley and Joe?

Those were the three main players that were very anti-coach. Nearly everyday on the live feeds they said that they would NEVER vote for a coach to win. Joe - "A Coach will win this game over my dead body." I knew Dan had zero shot at winning BB the night the reset button was hit. Those players wanted the coaches out and they would never vote for any of them if they made the final 2 against a newbie. I said that several times on here too.

[Macie Lightfoot]

Ashley was closer with Ian and Dan was HoH when Joe was evicted. Juries vote for who they like more, or in the case both people are hated the lesser of two evils. They all loved Ian and nobody really liked Dan that much. If you're not more likable than your opponent, you won't win. I know you're blaming it all on the fact that Dan was a Coach, but with the way he played do you actually think he'd get any votes if he wasn't a Coach? If so, see Russell vs. Natalie, Rob vs. Amber, etc. History repeats itself.

[Donovan.]

As much as I hate to admit it, Ian played the best game this season. And that's why he won. Sure Dan made some amazing moves, but the game isn't about manipulating or winning comps, it's about making it to the end with the votes to win. That's what Ian did. I can't sit here and say, "Jodi played the best game...until she was evicted on night one," so I can't take it seriously when people say think Dan played the best game.

[TheManWhoLaughs]

Originally Posted by troynuncdicit

This is just the Samoa finale over again. Dan lost because of what he did. He gave them all reasons to be bitter. Everyone just needs to get over it.

I don't really get many of the Hantz comparisons because Natalie repeatedly manipulated him into doing things that were better for her than for him (like getting rid of John and Shambo). Ian had absolutely no strategic input in anything except being the 5th vote for the Quack Pack.

Ian only got as far as he did because of comps, to an even greater extent than any of the 'controversial' winners (Lisa, Jordan, Amber etc). It's a legit win but a bit underwhelming and luck-driven like Fabio's on Survivor.

[SoBig]

Originally Posted by troynuncdicit

Ashley was closer with Ian and Dan was HoH when Joe was evicted. Juries vote for who they like more, or in the case both people are hated the lesser of two evils. They all loved Ian and nobody really liked Dan that much. If you're not more likable than your opponent, you won't win. I know you're blaming it all on the fact that Dan was a Coach, but with the way he played do you actually think he'd get any votes if he wasn't a Coach? If so, see Russell vs. Natalie, Rob vs. Amber, etc. History repeats itself.

Dan was liked in the house. People at the start didn't trust him because of his BB reputation. Dan only started to receive hate after Frank and Boogie were nominated and then again after the funeral, because everyone thought it was real. Dan treated all the house guest with respect. That's why they all trusted him at the end and got them to do whatever he wanted them to.

Ian wasn't loved in the house. Only Dan, Ashley and Britney loved him.

But that should tell you how much of a joke the jury voting is sometimes. Ozzy would have won South Pacific on a 8-1 vote over Sophie and Coach if he had made it to the final 3. Even though his game play wasn't that great outside of comp wins. But the jury is always right though right?

[SoBig]

Originally Posted by TheManWhoLaughs

I don't really get many of the Hantz comparisons because Natalie repeatedly manipulated him into doing things that were better for her than for him (like getting rid of John and Shambo). Ian had absolutely no strategic input in anything except being the 5th vote for the Quack Pack.

Ian only got as far as he did because of comps, to an even greater extent than any of the 'controversial' winners (Lisa, Jordan, Amber etc). It's a legit win but a bit underwhelming and luck-driven like Fabio's on Survivor.

Natalie never manipulated Russell Hantz. Get that right. But you are right about Ian. Dan and Britney controlled Ian's every move.

I still can't believe that some people are still crediting Ian for creating the Quack Pack. That alliance was already formed a week before Dan pulled him into it. It was either going to be Jenn or him as the 5th member, but Dan thought he could trust Ian more, so they picked him. He didn't even come up with the name. Britney did.

[LemonJam]

Ozzy would have won South Pacific on a 8-1 vote over Sophie and Coach if he had made it to the final 3. Even though his game play wasn't that great outside of comp wins. But the jury is always right though right?

He would have indeed, because he had a great social game. The people on his tribe respected him and Sophie and Coach didn't seem popular with people on their own tribe, let alone the others. Ozzy's strategic game wasn't great, but that just goes to show how important the social game is.
The BB14 jury just didn't respect Dan's game. Maybe had the game had contestants with different moral compasses he would've won, but he didn't seem to realise how much the jury put morals into their decision.

[Marc]

I've said it before and I'll say it again... BBadAss season

[Roy Mars III]

I wouldn't say Russel and Dan were that similar, many of the other contestant's biggest complaint with Russel was that he used his anger and almost bullied people to make them do things. Dan wasn't like that al all.

They are both top players though

[TheManWhoLaughs]

Originally Posted by SoBig

Natalie never manipulated Russell Hantz. Get that right.

If you want to completely deny her of credit, you can at least say that Russell made some terrible jury decisions on his own by getting rid of John and Shambo, as he would have had a decent chance of beating them.

Dan, on the other hand, didn't really have anyone he could go up against who he had a shot against given the anti-coach sentiment. It's one thing to mess up a potentially winning game and another to go balls out because you know you don't have much of a chance.

[Macie Lightfoot]

Originally Posted by SoBig

Natalie never manipulated Russell Hantz. Get that right.

Of course she didn't keep telling yourself that.

Originally Posted by Roy Mars III

I wouldn't say Russel and Dan were that similar, many of the other contestant's biggest complaint with Russel was that he used his anger and almost bullied people to make them do things. Dan wasn't like that al all.

They are both top players though

It's not a personal comparison, just a situational comparison. And Russell's far from a top player. Getting 2 out of 18 possible Jury votes is not indicative of a "top player."

[SoBig]

Joe said he wish he had voted for Dan after re-watching the show and learning new information.

He hated Dan because he thought the funeral was real and he thought Ian created the QP....

What a fool.

[starry]

Originally Posted by TheManWhoLaughs

If you want to completely deny her of credit, you can at least say that Russell made some terrible jury decisions on his own by getting rid of John and Shambo, as he would have had a decent chance of beating them.

I don't think Natalie deserved to have a shot against Russell either. Anyway Russell won the popular vote and that says something in Survivor at times.

[Macie Lightfoot]

Originally Posted by starry

I don't think Natalie deserved to have a shot against Russell either. Anyway Russell won the popular vote and that says something in Survivor at times.

Natalie definitely deserved a shot. And the popular vote never means anything.

[starry]

Totallly disagree on the popular vote. There have been some good winners of it on Survivor, sometimes preferable to the jury vote winner. The storyline of the show is followed by the audience and not by the cast of course, so naturally the popular vote can be far more acceptable.

[SoBig]

Originally Posted by starry

I don't think Natalie deserved to have a shot against Russell either. Anyway Russell won the popular vote and that says something in Survivor at times.

She didn't. Most people agree.

[Macie Lightfoot]

Originally Posted by starry

Totallly disagree on the popular vote. There have been some good winners of it on Survivor, sometimes preferable to the jury vote winner. The storyline of the show is followed by the audience and not by the cast of course, so naturally the popular vote can be far more acceptable.

So you're saying that the vote of the public, who sees ~42 extremely edited minutes for every 72 hours (effectively less than 1% of the time), is more acceptable than the vote of the people who actually played? The storyline may be followed by the audience but the storyline is written by the cast. So naturally the real ending is the one that matters.

The only rule to the game is that you win if you get people to vote for you at the end. You can't win on your own, nobody's ever cast four jury votes for themselves. If you can get enough people to vote for you, you win. People like Russell don't see this and people like Natalie do. This is why the Natalies and the Sandras will always beat the Russells in Survivor. Nothing's unfair about it, nothing makes someone like Natalie undeserving of the win.