|
Post by Outlast on May 2, 2015 18:25:10 GMT -5
Ehhhh.... I don't think it was as bad as people thought, I'm a fan of Boston Rob so I actually sort of liked this season, I would say Palau was the worst season, not RI. David had potential, probably would've been a threat if Rob wasn't leading the Ometepes. This season would've been a lot better if: - No returning players (Or maybe not Boston Rob and Russell after just one season of them not appearing) - RI only happens pre-merge and nobody knows about the challenges, so the person who rejoins at the merge is a complete surprise. - Maybe have an immunity idol at RI, as a sort of veto if somebody doesn't want to compete in a challenge, the duel is then held off until the next person arrives. Just saw this, why do you think Palau is worse than RI or that Palau is the worst season? I still think Palau was kind of boring, but I apologize for that post, RI is for sure the worst season lol.
|
|
|
Post by briqsquad on May 3, 2015 9:54:19 GMT -5
Thumbs up! He definitely improved with each season but, it took him 4 times to win. He's overrated. Not to mention he played well 1/4 times and only won because of who he was against (Ashley would've easily beat him). A bunch of the jurors even said they wanted to not vote Rob, but the other two didn't even put up any kind of argument to give them the win. Phillip argued and antagonized the juror and Natalie looked to Rob before answering each question lol. Props to him taking goats. Rob also played well on all-stars. I would at least give him 2/4 lol
|
|
|
Post by Jhonmarco on May 3, 2015 9:57:13 GMT -5
Not to mention he played well 1/4 times and only won because of who he was against (Ashley would've easily beat him). A bunch of the jurors even said they wanted to not vote Rob, but the other two didn't even put up any kind of argument to give them the win. Phillip argued and antagonized the juror and Natalie looked to Rob before answering each question lol. Props to him taking goats. Rob also played well on all-stars. I would at least give him 2/4 lol At the same time, a lot of the best could beat some competition or at least had stronger social ties. I wouldn't give him all stars, he built up that resentment from the jury and was never gonna get the votes of Alicia, Tom, Lex, and Shii Ann.
|
|
|
Post by Coke on May 3, 2015 10:33:49 GMT -5
Yeah I've kinda lost my Boston Rob love a little bit with this season. He played with a lot of scrubs who didn't see how big of a threat he actually was. Andrea was the only one who would've gone after him, but he had everyone else in the Final 6 wrapped around his d*ck. So it wouldn't have worked. It was smart for him to take who he did to the end, tho I don't think any of them besides Andrea could've beat him.
|
|
|
Post by Jhonmarco on May 3, 2015 11:54:19 GMT -5
Yeah I've kinda lost my Boston Rob love a little bit with this season. He played with a lot of scrubs who didn't see how big of a threat he actually was. Andrea was the only one who would've gone after him, but he had everyone else in the Final 6 wrapped around his d*ck. So it wouldn't have worked. It was smart for him to take who he did to the end, tho I don't think any of them besides Andrea could've beat him. I definitely think Ashley could and most of them said they would've voted for her. A lot of people could've beaten Rob imo.
|
|
|
Post by briqsquad on May 3, 2015 13:18:37 GMT -5
Props to him taking goats. Rob also played well on all-stars. I would at least give him 2/4 lol At the same time, a lot of the best could beat some competition or at least had stronger social ties. I wouldn't give him all stars, he built up that resentment from the jury and was never gonna get the votes of Alicia, Tom, Lex, and Shii Ann. he only lost 4-3 and what did he exactly do to shii anne again? Losing 4-3 didn't mean your social game is bad but the other was better. Should be acknowledged/praised on how he controlled that season
|
|
|
Post by Jhonmarco on May 3, 2015 13:39:44 GMT -5
At the same time, a lot of the best could beat some competition or at least had stronger social ties. I wouldn't give him all stars, he built up that resentment from the jury and was never gonna get the votes of Alicia, Tom, Lex, and Shii Ann. he only lost 4-3 and what did he exactly do to shii anne again? Losing 4-3 didn't mean your social game is bad but the other was better. Should be acknowledged/praised on how he controlled that season Not really, it was bad. He mocked his allies and belittled them with a lot of it not shown. Control means nothing when you build a jury that doesn't respect your game, at that point it's irrelevant imo. That's why his feud with Russ in HvV is fun, because it's like a mature Rob is feuding with his younger self in Russell.
|
|
|
Post by Nate on May 3, 2015 13:56:01 GMT -5
I think Rob still played a good game besides his jury management. I would not classify it as bad by any means.
|
|
|
Post by Jhonmarco on May 3, 2015 13:57:19 GMT -5
I think Rob still played a good game besides his jury management. I would not classify it as bad by any means. Eh imo you can't play a good game if you have that poor of jury management.
|
|
|
Post by Joey on May 3, 2015 15:31:26 GMT -5
I think Rob still played a good game besides his jury management. I would not classify it as bad by any means. Eh imo you can't play a good game if you have that poor of jury management. Wholeheartedly agree, jury management is an integral part of the game and if you lack that, your game isn't as good as you think.
|
|
|
Post by briqsquad on May 3, 2015 17:07:26 GMT -5
His jury management wasn't as bad if he lost 4-3. Jury management is bad if you're like dan on bb 14. Jury management is extremely important but can't overlook everything else he did that game, that'd be too specific. You guys are bssically saying that strategy and physical game don't mean anything in survivor when determining someone's skills.
|
|
|
Post by Nate on May 3, 2015 18:03:26 GMT -5
Not to mention, Rob was never terrible to anyone just for kicks or did anything crazy to f*ck up people's games. He just played the game well and had to screw people over in the process. Then there are people like Tony for example, who do crazy things that don't really have much reason to them besides paranoia and ADHD, yet he won. If Rob played the game he played just 4 years later, he would have won I think. It was still during the time where people were lame and thought you were an awful person if you made a deal with someone and turned your back on it, which is now something that happens 90% of the episodes.
I still don't think he played an amazing game or anything because yeah, he sucked at the jury management, but he definitely deserves credit for playing a good game.
|
|
|
Post by Jhonmarco on May 3, 2015 18:16:46 GMT -5
His jury management wasn't as bad if he lost 4-3. Jury management is bad if you're like dan on bb 14. Jury management is extremely important but can't overlook everything else he did that game, that'd be too specific. You guys are bssically saying that strategy and physical game don't mean anything in survivor when determining someone's skills. Well physical really doesn't mean anything. I guess in BB it could carry some weight because there's more emphasis on comps and how much more they help you get further. No one has ever won because they had a great physical game. It's bad because he was always going to lose 4-3.
|
|
|
Post by Joey on May 3, 2015 18:20:21 GMT -5
If someone was going to win based on physical prowess Colby would have mopped the floor with Tina...so physical attributes in Survivor are pretty much at the bottom of the ladder.
|
|
|
Post by Jhonmarco on May 3, 2015 18:20:36 GMT -5
Not to mention, Rob was never terrible to anyone just for kicks or did anything crazy to f*ck up people's games. He just played the game well and had to screw people over in the process. Then there are people like Tony for example, who do crazy things that don't really have much reason to them besides paranoia and ADHD, yet he won. If Rob played the game he played just 4 years later, he would have won I think. It was still during the time where people were lame and thought you were an awful person if you made a deal with someone and turned your back on it, which is now something that happens 90% of the episodes. I still don't think he played an amazing game or anything because yeah, he sucked at the jury management, but he definitely deserves credit for playing a good game. But Tony was actually a lot better than Rob. He had much better social skills and formed much better relationships with people. Rob was a little sh*t to people, I mean people say they were bitter against him when Amber was the one with a lot of the pregame connections and yet the jury didn't hold it against her and she won.
|
|
|
Post by briqsquad on May 3, 2015 20:49:24 GMT -5
Not to mention, Rob was never terrible to anyone just for kicks or did anything crazy to f*ck up people's games. He just played the game well and had to screw people over in the process. Then there are people like Tony for example, who do crazy things that don't really have much reason to them besides paranoia and ADHD, yet he won. If Rob played the game he played just 4 years later, he would have won I think. It was still during the time where people were lame and thought you were an awful person if you made a deal with someone and turned your back on it, which is now something that happens 90% of the episodes. I still don't think he played an amazing game or anything because yeah, he sucked at the jury management, but he definitely deserves credit for playing a good game. But Tony was actually a lot better than Rob. He had much better social skills and formed much better relationships with people. Rob was a little sh*t to people, I mean people say they were bitter against him when Amber was the one with a lot of the pregame connections and yet the jury didn't hold it against her and she won. so you're saying he didn't play a good game on allstars? Thats ridiculous imo, amber would have gone home if it wasn't for rob convincing the other tribe to send away there own and keep amber.
|
|
|
Post by Jhonmarco on May 3, 2015 21:35:53 GMT -5
But Tony was actually a lot better than Rob. He had much better social skills and formed much better relationships with people. Rob was a little sh*t to people, I mean people say they were bitter against him when Amber was the one with a lot of the pregame connections and yet the jury didn't hold it against her and she won. so you're saying he didn't play a good game on allstars? Thats ridiculous imo, amber would have gone home if it wasn't for rob convincing the other tribe to send away there own and keep amber. Where did I say he didn't have control? He did, he just misused it poorly and even then it's not like they just decided to do it for Rob and not like Amber did nothing to better her position.
|
|
|
Post by afstallion13 on Jun 1, 2015 18:41:12 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Joey on Dec 14, 2015 9:05:32 GMT -5
Just finished listening to the TEOS chapter for this season and reminded me of such great moments like Russell's nasty pits, Ralph and all the help Phillip had from his great grandfather Jessum Herring.
|
|
|
Post by Coke on Dec 14, 2015 9:23:41 GMT -5
Phillip is great this season if you don't take him too seriously. One of the only saving graces for this poor, poor season.
|
|