Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Now Playing - TV Show Talk' started by Steveknj, May 7, 2020.
If someone from Edge wins it will be back to back two of the worst seasons in Survivor history.
If someone from Edge wins (and I think there's a 50/50 chance that happens unless Tony/Sarah make it to the final three, then it's a 25% chance), then I will never watch a Survivor season with EoE or any other concept where there's a chance someone voted off can get back in the game. It will mean both times they've tried the concept, the EoE player who came back toward the end of the game won. Like I said I get why they did it this time, but it should have ended at the merge. I could have lived with that.
I don't think they take it away from Tony if he makes it, but those other odds are on point.
I think it's remarkable that both Tony and Sarah have made it this far. Sarah was literally my last pick in my fantasy league. I thought for sure she'd be targeted early because people know how much of a threat she is. If she somehow manages to win, in my eyes she is the undisputed best player ever. Not only did she win twice, but both times it was during an all stars season.
Tony has been playing a more aggressive game this season, but I think Sarah hasn't been getting as much credit as she deserves. Her social game is a huge factor in why the two of them made it this far.
I agree with most of what you say, but IMO Tony has clearly controlled the game better so far. He even back stabbed Sarah by blindsiding her, and she hasn't made a move to counter him.
I think Sarah is receiving credit for being the second best player so far, but right now if they went head to head I believe the jury would give the nod to Tony for these reasons.
Don't underestimate how those who've played most of the game with someone like Natalie, and realize what kind of beast she is on EoE and all the work she's done to try and get back in the game, might think about her winning. It's nice to say they are "professional" Survivors and so on, but that doesn't mean they can be influenced. I can't tell you how many times in these threads we've discussed how there is no way the jury could be influenced by this or that, and yet they are. But I do think with Tony and Sarah, there might be enough of a "game play" in the regular game that can mitigate that. But I still think there's a chance that they vote for the EoE player regardless, in which case it's even MORE egregiously bad.
What is it lawyers say? When a jury is deciding anything can happen.
Oh, I absolutely agree with you that Tony is playing a better game and deserves to win. I'm just saying that Sarah hasn't just been riding his coattails. She's an integral part of their success. It's kind of like Denise and Malcolm in Philippines. Denise played a great game, but she would have had a much more difficult path to the end without Malcolm.
The advantage that the returning Edge player has over the other players is HUGE, and it's even more magnified this season because of the competitions on Edge for the fire tokens. On top of that, Natalie, Tyson and Rob have full blown idols if they get back into the game. Chris Underwood only had half an idol and he was forced to give the other half away.
While it's not exactly comparing apples to apples, I think Rick Devens did an excellent job of illustrating this point after his season:
You are uniquely qualified to answer this, because you did spend time on Extinction Island and you were back in the game. Did Chris have an advantage in the fact that he was able to kiss and make up to most of the jury in a non-game setting at Edge, while Gavin and Julie were not?
"Oh my gosh, the advantage is monumental. I had a great relationship, when I won my way back in, with Reem, and Aubry, and Chris, and Keith, and Wendy because the only thing you have over there is time to make peace with these people. So Chris, not only did he have all that, where, like you said, you’ve been out there providing them with rice in the morning, and coconut, and fish, whereas Julie and Gavin are scrambling to stay alive in the game.
And then, when Chris comes back in with all that information from the Edge, the fact that Lauren has an idol, none of us would’ve ever known that. He came back, that you didn’t see, with written notes from some of the contestants. He had a written note from Ron, telling Julie to trust him. I mean, these are monumental advantages in the game. So that’s also something that came into my thought process when I gave Gavin the vote."
Wow. Ron gave him a note to give to Julie, saying to trust Chris?
"Yes. And I saw that note. And from my perspective … And I’d like to hear it, because I haven’t had a chance to talk with them, but it seems like everyone on the Edge was basically out there telling each other how to win. So, of course, you put your guy back in the game, and he’s basically an avatar for the entire Edge of Extinction."
I’m not going to be mad if someone from EOr wins. They went through a lot out there, and if it’s someone who battled back in because of their fire tokens then even better for them.
I get that sentiment, and many on the jury who spent time with that person might feel the same way. My feeling is that the person didn't play "Survivor", that player played "Edge of Extinction" after being voted out. It's not the same game.
What your discounting is how much time the jury spent with the remaining players. Yes if Natalie gets back in she may get a lot of votes from the early jury but the late jury spent more time with the remaining players.
The jury has learned a lot from the incoming players on how the game is currently going and the skill of the remaining players.
Hopefully they will look at the final players and not award to somebody who slipped into the finals by being the quiet one.