Purple Rock Survivor Podcast: Millennials vs. Gen X episode 2 “Love Goggles”

On #InternationalPodcastDay, the MOST international of podcasts discusses the second episode of Survivor: Millennials vs. Gen X and these delightful four young people who surely aren’t making you want to punch your computer screen.


Purple Rock Survivor podcast: Millennials vs Gen X episode 2 “Love Goggles”

Subscribe on iTunes
Subscribe on Stitcher
Subscribe on Google Play

We hope you’ll all get past your broken dreams and broken fantasy teams to listen to us discuss:

  • How it felt to watch a million souls get snuffed when Mari was sent packing.
  • Who to give credit to for her ouster.
  • Who to give blame to for the same.
  • Michelle’s handling of Hannah and Hannah’s handling of voting.
  • Why on Earth did Michaela change her vote?
  • Why did Will?
  • Can you believe Tails and Figs got away with this? #Figlor
  • The season’s REAL power couple: Ken and David
  • Do we care about any of the other Gen-Xers?
  • Mailbag questions about fan love for gamers, eliminating past seasons of Survivor from history, the power couple’s next move, how Ken rates among male models, and hockey(?)
  • What’s gonna happen next week.

For this season, we hope to do a weekly mailbag segment, so if you have questions for next week, you can comment here, @ us on Twitter, or send us an email.

133 thoughts on “Purple Rock Survivor Podcast: Millennials vs. Gen X episode 2 “Love Goggles”

  1. Even though I think Shii Ann was by far the best Not Boston Rob part of All Stars, even I can let Thailand go.

    Glad we are appreciating Michaela’s TV value. She seems to be somewhere between Sandra and Abi Maria, which is a wonderfully entertaining combo. I don’t where she is on that scale though.

    Michelle’s play is still blowing my mind. I don’t know if I’ve ever been so impressed by a person this early on in the game. On top of everything her and Jay did well, they were also so smooth when Jeff asked them questions at tribal. Did casting know Michelle would be this good when they found her? She’s such a great, surprising casting choice. I’m obsessed.

    1. I am a bit concerned that her abilities could seem amplified due to the nature of her marks (i.e. a high schooler and a bag of neuroses). I’m interested to see how she’ll handle the alpha types on Gen-X.

  2. Thailand needs to be shoved further into the blackhole that the Producers have shoved it in. That is easily the most miserable, soul-draining season Survivor has ever had.

  3. I talked about this in the liveblog thread, but there was a real Prisoner’s Dilemma aspect to this tribal council. We can talk about how flipping was a bad move for Will, Michaela, and Hannah, but you know what’s an even worse move? Being caught on the wrong side of the first vote. Yes, if they had been able to check in with each other mid-tribal (or if somebody in the majority had bothered to lock down their votes beforehand), they all would have benefited by sticking with the Freaks and Geeks. But if you’re one of those three, and you think another has flipped, you damn well better flip too.

    My theory about why Michaela continued to beef with Figgy at tribal but voted Mari is this: Their spat spooked Michelle, causing her to recruit Hannah on the spot as the new 6th vote. This in turn spooked Michaela into voting Mari for the Prisoner’s Dilemma reason I mentioned.

    Is it against the rules to just blurt out “Hey guys, are we still voting for X?” at tribal? I think it might be, otherwise you’d see it happen occasionally (just like I think it must be a rule that you have to stay seated except to vote, because it was so unprecedented when Jenny stood up).

    1. I find when it comes to a lot of rules, it’s against the rules until it isn’t. You can’t stuff that genie back into the bottle once it’s out. It’s not like Probst would kick Hannah out of the show for breaking protocol.

      But maybe he’d stop TC right there and prevent anyone from responding. That said, I don’t think it is against the rules, completely. We’ve had people stop TC and ask “are you still voting the way you said you would vote”. So if there’s a line, it’s a fine one.

    2. I don’t think there would be any rules against it, particularly since it would probably make tribal council more entertaining if that happened (like when Caleb announced his vote at tribal in Blood vs Water).

  4. We are big enough fans of hockey in Vermont that people bequeath season tickets to UVM hockey to their children in their wills.

  5. I didn’t really get the Mari love, but I suppose to some people, Mari is to them what Jimmy Johnson is to me (except there hopefully are fewer awful people this season), so even if I don’t specifically get the Mari love, I get the feeling behind it.

    That said, if Ken had for some reason gone home, I’d have been so upset. Like, approaching Borneo-level Colleen boot upset.

    1. I’m fine with Ken being voted off ONLY if it leads to a hackneyed sitcom (possibly on TV Land) where he and David are best friends and roommates.

      1. Ken: These washboard abs keep inadvertently knocking things off tables as I walk by. Just today I spilled a glass of water.

        David: Water?!? You know I’m scared of wet tile!
        Ken: Aw you, come here. *goes in for hug*
        David: Aaaaaa! You know I’m scared of hugs!
        Audience: *APPLAUSE*

    2. I think part of it is that even from the pre-game you know that Mari has a good head on her shoulders and is very likable, while some of the other contestants are big question marks. She was never gonna be an outright dud (even as a second boot), whereas someone like Jay or Michelle could have gone either way.

  6. In re: careers that make you suitable for Survivor – there’s a reason two flight attendants have won. It’s a job that where you’re paid to be friendly and make people comfortable in a situation where they’re cut off from most of the things they’re used to having on demand.

          1. I have a random mailbag question. If you could see any Troy McClure movie, which would it be and why?

      1. Supposedly, T-Bird was originally gonna be on Boran, but when they realized what a tire fire Samburu was gonna be they moved her over there to minimize the possibility of a chipper Southern flight attendant being the winner twice in a row.

  7. Michelle did some good work last episode. As I quoted before, “Baby, you are so talented, and they are so dumb.”

    Ken and David are the only ones on Takali that matter. The rest may as well not exist (and we’re pretty sure one actually doesn’t).

    Should this be the three tribe twist, I wonder if they’ll split the tribes such that each tribe will have 3 original Takali and 3 original Vanua. That might be interesting. Especially since that will guarantee the splitting up of Taylor, Figgy, Jay, and Michelle in some way. We also might start caring about people on Takali other than the power couple of Ken and David (but really, why would we?).

    While I can understand choosing to eliminate Thailand, I’d still choose Redemption Island. Thailand had a lot of ugliness, and everyone hates the cast, but I think there were more memorable people on Thailand than on Redemption Island–also, of the people on Redemption Island that I do remember, most of them I never really liked (I do like Andrea, though). I’d rather keep Brian’s win and Shii Ann (and maybe Robb (two B’s!)) than Boston Rob’s win and Phillip. If we got rid of Redemption Island, does that mean the namesake twist would not exist as well? If so, I’ll live with that.

    Yes, the Oilers have not been good for a really long time. But…yeah, I got nothing (and neither do they). You’d think that that many No. 1 draft picks would help in some capacity, but you’d be wrong. The last time they made the playoffs was 10 years ago, when they nearly won the Stanley Cup and lost to the Carolina Hurricanes. They haven’t made the playoffs since. Not exactly coincidentally, that’s about the time I stopped caring about watching the NHL.

    1. I was in Europe for most of that Stanley Cup run, since who could’ve anticipated such a thing happening? It was odd to have random Europeans notice my cap and ask me how they were doing (news I’d have to wake up to find out).

    2. I’d still choose RI too just to get rid of Phillip and his underwear. I liked Shii Ann and Helen.

      1. I know, right? The way everyone talks, you’d think the tribe names were actually ‘Millennials’ and ‘Gen X’, like Heroes vs. Villains. If you didn’t see last week, I declared that I was going to use their actual tribe names because I thought calling the tribes ‘Millennials’ and ‘Gen X’ meant buying into the theme, and this theme is stupid, so fuck that.

  8. When Andy said “google hunter mascot oilers” I dutifully paused the audio and did so, while thinking, hey, it can’t be that bad. I seriously did a spit-take and now need to clean my monitor.

    Michaela seems like one of those people that relates to others by busting balls (or busting ovaries in this case), so I think her beef with Figgy is a lot more light-hearted on her end, although certainly not on Figgy’s end. (And this isn’t me being an astute observer of human nature or anything, there’s an extra scene where she says as much.) She’s probably a lot more willing to work with Figgy than it would seem from the narrative that we’ve been shown. And Figgy’s got to be seen as an easy future boot that’s never going deep (phrasing) because of how oblivious she is to how other people view her coupledom. Mari in comparison might have seemed like a reasonable boot if there was indeed some combination of not forming bonds and giving off competence rays.

    And Will? I think he was captivated by beautiful people asking him to do something.

    I wonder who is truly in the alpha male alliance on the Gen X tribe. Seems certain that it’s Chris/Bret/Paul on one side, and David/Ken/CeCe on the other. That leaves Jessica, Sunday, and Lucy floating somewhere in the middle. Whoever can pick up two of those three has the numbers. Naturally, this analysis will be rendered completely irrelevant by any kind of mixup/swap, so I don’t really know why I bothered.

    As to which season I’d flush? Well of course I don’t have any great feelings towards Thailand. I have seen every season, but mostly when they aired, and I can’t remember much about it so I wouldn’t miss it. But honestly, with the exception of losing Cydney I’d be fine flushing away Kaoh Rong. Terrible ending, awful winner, garbage people galore (lets never forget what assholes Jason and Scot were in the beginning and middle, even if they might have leveled out as time went on.) I’m probably not being entirely fair here, as having another shot at Aubry wouldn’t be too bad, nor Caleb. I suppose even Debbie would be amusing as a returning player. So obviously I’m full of it and you can’t flush Kaoh Rong, but I guess I just need to vent because despite giving us some great personalities it had such tremendous amounts of cringe and suck.

  9. And now, because we all love goofy lists, I’ve gone through all the winners and sorted them by profession to see what the winningest jobs are.

    Shiftless 20-something with time to go on a reality show (Ethan, Jenna, Parvati, Fabio)


    office manager/admin (Vecepia, Sandra, Sandra again)

    nebulous business-type guy (Hatch, Earl)
    flight attendant (Tina, Todd)
    firefighter (Tom Westman, Jeremy)

    puppy killer (Heidik)
    I don’t know, probably a server at Chili’s (Amber)
    road worker (Chris)
    sports talking person (Danni)
    lawyer (Yul)
    high school teacher/fisherman (Bob)
    pretty blonde girl (Natalie W.)
    Survivor contestant (Boston Rob)
    responsible 20-something who made time to go on a reality show (Sophie)
    retail (Kim)
    sex therapist (Denise)
    character from a Woody Allen movie (Cochran)
    hipster (Tyson)
    cop (Tony)
    crossfit trainer (Natalie A.)
    oil driller (Mike)
    pretty brunette girl (Michele)

      1. You would think so, but it lost to “shiftless 20-something” a group that would also have included Amber and Michele if the jokes weren’t too tempting.

    1. Heidik used care salesman (he was top 5 in the country and the puppy he shot with an arrow lived he thought it was a fox/wolfO
      Amber was an Administrative Assistant until she was on Survivor then she was part of some shows and stuff.
      Earl is an advertising executive
      Richard was a corporate trainer
      Natalie W. was pharmaceutical sales
      Michele was actually a travel agent though they billed her as bartender from a prior job.
      Tyson was a bike (bicycle) shop manager when he won

      1. Natalie W. and Heidik should definitely be lumped into sales. Apparently, so should Michele (which I didn’t know), but I’m trying to forget she ever existed. Anyway, I would think the umbrella group ‘sales’ would be a pretty strong group.

        1. As for Michele. No. If you’re a bartender at 30 it’s because you like tending bar. If you’re a bartender at 22 it’s because you haven’t accepted that college is over.

      2. And wasn’t Sophie a med student and Cochrane a law student as well as being a character from a Woody Allen movie?
        Kim as in retain but she actually owned the place too.

    2. Jobs that least prepare you for Survivor:

      Shiftless 20-something (Ryan Aiken, Nicole Delma, Brook Geraghty, Jonathan Libby, Jessica deBen, Michelle Chase, Carolina Eastwood, Marisa Calihan, Semhar Tadesse)

      Returnee / Loved one (Tina, Fairplay, Sugar, Francesca, Rupert, Nadiya, So, Vytas)

      Musician (Sonja, Sekou)
      Mail carrier (Diane, Darnell)
      Farmer (Chicken, Wendy)
      Lawyer (Francesca, Jolanda)
      Vehicle repair (Kourtney, Zane)

      Prison guard (Debb)
      Bowling alley owner (Peter Harkey)
      Pastor (John Raymond)
      English teacher (Wanda)
      Fireman (Jim Lynch)
      Lumberjill (Tina Scheer)
      Cop (Nina Acosta)
      President of bad MLB team (David Samson)
      Recruiting director (Rachel Ako)

      1. David Sampson’s should read “Incompetent President of an MLB team, that lets the Tigers take the people who made them successful”.

      2. I will maintain that “spoken word poet” is a separate category that is worse than “shiftless 20-something” because spoken word poetry is the worst.

      1. I’m fine with Thailand or Redemption Island disappearing. But I’m not fine with losing some of my favorite players, which is why I never even considered Worlds Apart. SJDS sucks too, but I’m fine with Jeremy, Kelley, Natalie, and Keith.

  10. Thailand isn’t a great season but it’s still almost immeasurably better than RI. There were interesting parts of Thailand. There is nothing good about RI. You lose Andrea which meh. You lose Philip which is a huge plus and vastly counter any positives you lose by losing Andrea. Sure Rob doesn’t win but meh. This was his least interesting incarnation.

    Good point about leveraging the idol to get Paul out rather than playing it. I might be overly into this question because I want to see Ken/David move on and would enjoy Paul going home.

    I totally understand your hockey fandom Andy. I’m a baseball fan when the Phillies are not terrible. So I haven’t cared about baseball in a few years. I blame the 1994 Phillies for this. The only team (so far as I know) to go from worst to first to worst and also a strike. So that crush point in my childhood made me only care about winning. Also your answer about my hockey questions made me happy I asked it. the Oilers are terrible. As big a hockey fan as I am I had to look this up but the captain of the Panthers team that went to the finals was Brian Skrudland who was not very good. The Panthers of today actually have a pretty good team with some strong young talent and an all time great in his twilight years in Jagr. The Oilers did stumble into McDavid so maybe through his shear force of will can force the Oilers into not being the worst.

    I also hope the twist is three tribes with one mixed tribe and the remains of the other two. I think it would be an interesting shake up in-general as well as seeing how this plays out in an all new player season vs returnee season.

    1. Remember also that production had a boner to pit Russell against Boston Rob after the HvV reunion. So men-in-blacking Redemption Island means that those two are on South Pacific instead of Ozzie and Coach. I’m not sure whether that improves South Pacific or not, but it probably does mean no Brandon Hantz.

      1. I think it depends if Sophie can still pull out the win. Coach losing South Pacific is a large part of why it’s such an improvement over Redemption Island.

      2. No Brandon Hantz is an improvement in itself. I’m sure Michaela (?) from that season would agree.

  11. Maybe this is the New York Giants fan in me thinking this, or common sense, but the worst franchise in sports has to be the Washington football team. Years of incompetentance in the Dan Snyder era of mostly signing past their prime free agents mixed with mediocre draft picks. Also they have a fucking racial slur as their name. God, they’re the worst.

    1. Okay here are the contenders for worst run teams (North American Sports only, because I can imagine there are some terribly run soccer teams in Europe) at this exact moment:
      Edmonton Oilers – really the only contender for hockey
      Cleveland Browns
      Washington Professional Football Team
      Brooklyn Nets
      LA Lakers (since Jerry Buss died)

      Baseball doesn’t really have a contender, though I would say the worst is probably the Arizona Diamondbacks.

      I really only think Brooklyn presents a challenge, but Brooklyn’s mess is caused by being run horribly in the past and now have completely tied hands. So yes, the Oilers it is.

      1. The Lakers aren’t bad enough to contend for the crown. They’ve been bad in understandable ways (like hanging on to their aging superstar while they tanked).

        You’re right that the Nets’ problems all stem from really stupid decisions made over the course of one year several years ago. But those stupid decisions have completely screwed them.

        1. The Lakers won an NBA Championship THIS decade. They aren’t even close to belonging in this discussion. A lot of their moves may look bad by their standards, but as you suggest, it’s really just a common sports problem: their team and stars got old following a period of sustained success. Everything else is just distractions.

          Distractions from the fact that the Warriors blew a 3-1 lead in the Finals.

          1. I’m not taking history into my calculations much, yes the Lakers won 6 years ago, but since then? They’ve been run horribly.

            They hired Byron Scott and kept him for another year for goodness sakes!

          2. And got two #2 overall picks for their troubles. I’m convinced that Byron Scott did the job they hired him to do.

        2. Remember when the Lakers and Kings were the best of the California basketball teams and the Clippers and Warriors were the jokes, instead of the other way around?

          1. The Clippers will never cease to be a joke!

            (I hope. But as long as Doc Rivers is Coach/GM, I think we’re good.)

      2. This is a bad moment in time to say this, but for sustained incompetence, inability to stick to a strategy for more than five minutes, loathsome upper management, and a boondoggle stadium, the Marlins are easily the worst MLB team. Even so, they’re not in the same league as the Cleveland Browns or Washington Breadsticks.

        1. I have to really disagree with the Marlins. In a way, they are one of the most successful teams in the MLB, in terms of achieving what they set out to do.

          They have won two World Series. They have had many iconic players play for them (Miggy, Stanton, Fernandez). They are just interesting just occasionally enough to not completely alienate their (small group of) fans.

          The owner is a cheap living parody of a rich asshole. But his whole goal is to get good teams, win in the short term for attention, and then to dismantle the team in order to save money. It’s kind of disgusting, but it works.

          1. Well, yeah I guess if what you set out to do is threaten to move, then put your fan base on the hook for billions over 40 years (don’t get me started on compound interest again) to get your incredibly tacky stadium built, then they achieve what they set out to do.

            They do have the two championships, and flags fly forever. However, present management wasn’t responsible for the first and mostly not for the second. Anyway, as @otherscott:disqus said, we have to decide whether terribly run means wins/losses or more something on a moral level. Of course, it can be two things, like the Donald Sterling Clippers.

        2. The most inept MLB team might be the Mariners. They’ve made the playoffs 4 times in 40 years and have never made the World Series. Besides a small stretch in the early 2000s they have been completely irrelevant. That’s some Lions level terribleness.

          1. Can you really call the team that holds the record for most wins in a season the most inept?

            Besides I think we’re talking about on an organizational level, not just historical success. Like the Oilers were fine (other than one trade) basically until the mid 2000s and then since then everything has been a disaster.

          2. I was kinda hoping no one would remember the Mariners. Just missed the playoffs for the 15th straight season.

        3. Hmmm…I think the Marlins are bad in the same way the Washington Professional Football team is bad, they disgust on a moral level. Actual team running though, I mean, while not good, there’s worse. Also, 2 world series in the past 20 years.

      3. The Detroit Lions have to be on the list of worst run football franchises ever. One of the greatest running backs of all time decided he would rather retire early, than continue to make millions of dollars playing for that tire fire of a team.

        1. You mention Barry Sanders without mentioning Calvin Johnson? Arguably the best RB and best WR retired early rather than play for the Lions anymore.

          They also have only won ONE playoff game in the Super Bowl era. That’s incredible

        2. Maybe on like a longer running basis, but Detroit has been reasonably run the last few years and I don’t think you can really count them anymore.

        1. (This is for KB’s benefit, I’m assuming North American American football fans know all this). While “Browns” is in fact an apt description of the team’s fortunes, they were named after their first coach, Paul Brown. To his credit, he absolutely didn’t want the team named after him, but the team couldn’t get their preferred names for reasons that aren’t that interesting.

          The stranger-than-fiction part is this: In 1996, the Browns moved to Baltimore, rebranded themselves the Baltimore Ravens, won the Super Bowl a few years later, and have been consistently good/great ever since. Meanwhile, in 1999 Cleveland was awarded an expansion team that took the Browns name, colors and logo (actually, they don’t have a logo, but that’s a different story). This version of the Browns, which is in some philosophical sense a team of impostors, has only had a winning record once or twice in 17 years.

        2. The Browns are a good punchline, but as I’ve pointed out elsewhere the Lions are secretly more inept.

      4. The Sacramento Kings are the worst organization in the NBA. The Washington Football Team, while putrid and an embarrassment on all levels, won their division last year. That alone takes them out of the running. We also shouldn’t forget the Bills.

        Still, Edmonton. I mean, look at that mascot.

        1. Oh gosh I forgot Sacremento. What a disaster.

          They might actually be worse than Edmonton, Andy.

        2. Agreed on the Kings. The 2002 team is still my all time favorite and it’s sad to see how they have fallen.

    2. I’m a Deadskins fan, and you are correct.

      Although there was a really robust poll done recently where Native Americans of all types were asked about the name, and it was a resounding response (like 90%) was that no they didn’t care at all.

  12. This season has not don’t much for the statistics of women of colour being the first two boots. A second week where the votes were split between two women of colour.

  13. Mari was my winner pick because I thought she might be able to connect with both the nerdy and cool kid elements of her tribe. She seemed likable and not terribly threatening in her video, and I thought being an older millennial and a dancer could both serve her well later in the game, so I thought, why not?

    When a lot of people pick someone as the winner it looks like we feel really strongly about her, but I don’t think it actually means that.

  14. I figured Thailand would be the easy choice for the Guatemala factor as well as its awful people being awful. All the choices John and Andy mentioned were on my radar, but I have one more contender season and one wild card season.

    Contender= Worlds Apart. Yes, you lose Max, Shirin, and Jenn, but you also lose Dan and Will. It’s a willing sacrifice.

    Wild Card= Samoa. Yes, we take out Russell, but we also take out the idea of bitter juries, purple edits, and overreliance on idols from modern Survivor. How different does the future of Survivor look without Samoa? I admit that removing this particular season would have the wildest butterfly effect of all of the other seasons (except for maybe HvV, but who would remove that?), but it is just intriguing to think about.

    1. I thought about disappearing Samoa too, for the same reasons, but it actually has the most dramatic butterfly effect of all, by removing Russell from HvV. You’re the Survivor gossip queen, but according to Wikipedia, both Shane Powers and Penner claim they were cut from HvV in favor of Russell. It impossible to say how HvV would have changed with either of those two instead of Russell, but it would almost certainly be for the worse, simply because HvV couldn’t have been much better.

      I think you have to try and fix the season 21-24 slump. Nicaragua is already ineligible according to the rules, and while 22-24 have problems as individual seasons, what makes it worse is that they’re 2.9 consecutive seasons of one person completely dominating the game.

      However, removing any of those seasons creates an immediate problem. Get rid of Redemption Island and you’ve just delayed the Russell-Boston Rob grudge match by a season, and if Coach can create a cult, just imagine what Boston Rob does with the South Pacific cast. Get rid of South Pacific, and neither Sophie or Cochran win Survivor, which means that to this day a nerd has never won. Unacceptable. Get rid of One World and you lose Kim, but you also lose Colton, Alecia, Troyzan, and Tarzan. As great as Kim is, that’s a worthwhile trade-off. However, without Kat, Colton, and Monica, there’s probably no Blood vs. Water, and therefore no San Juan del Sur, and Cambodia loses its two biggest characters.

      1. There is no trade off that makes getting rid of the Khaleesi worthwhile. I’d get rid of All-Stars if that in itself wouldn’t ruin HvV. I’d probably choose Guatamala just as it is not a great season and has no returnees.

          1. That is the biggest downside man, of removing damn Guatamala. Only scumbags would remove Guatamala man.

    2. I would definitely go with South Pacific. Ozzy vs. Coach never deserved to be a thing. Brandon. Redemption Island. Too much Jesus. It was really one of the worst seasons. As much as I like Cochran and Sophie, they are not enough.

      I would never eliminate Samoa. First of all, I actually liked Samoa. Second of all, I like the Russell butterfly effect. Hard, balls to the wall play, and tireless idol-hunting is fun. Third, I thought Russell was also good in HvV, which is one of the best seasons of all time. Russell was the ultimate villain, on a tribe of villains, and then he got an epic comeuppance, getting no votes, while the person he dismissed so casually crushed his dreams. It was a perfect storyline, for a nearly perfect season.

        1. I don’t think any of the people who don’t like Survivor these days are regulars on this site though.

    3. I’d consider losing Max and Shirin a bonus actually but Jenn would definitely be a blow, and I think Mike had some delightful moments that season as well. Strong contender though.

    4. Worlds Apart – you also lose 2 female players that changed the game that are playing in 34 (kidding) and Rodney which I’d be ok with. But I like the winner so I’m ok with that one staying.

      I like the RI one being taken out. Philip and the pink/purple underwear gone is fine with me.

    5. I’d be fine with no Worlds Apart. I really disliked huge swaths of that cast. I’d also be fine with Thailand going away, as I particularly could never stand Shii Ann. She was incredibly high on herself, underestimated everyone else, and then did exactly the same thing on All Stars! She was not very good at Survivor.

      I’d put All Stars up for consideration, but then immediately rescind that due to the fact that removing it would get rid of Rob and Amber’s four daughters and that would be a very sad turn of events. Also that Amazing Race season they did was a lot of fun. But mostly because I don’t want to wipe four kids from existence.

      1. I thought of the four kids thing too. It’s basically the worst real life consequence of the action: you’d be eliminating actual human beings from existence.

        Plus, they needed to learn how to do a returnee season.

        Agree on their TAR run.

    6. I think if we get rid of Samoa, there’s argument to be made that you’re getting rid of Survivor. I honestly believe that Russell gave the series a shot in the arm that’s kept it vibrant in this past third of the series.

      But, honestly, Thailand does no damage. They’ve basically excised it from the records already. No one from that season is ever even rumoured to come back. No one from that season appears on podcasts. I don’t even think anyone tweets. If Thailand disappeared tomorrow, no one would even notice.

      1. Brian’s name is only occasionally mentioned as a great winner, but not as often as Boston Rob or Kim. So, I get it.

        For me, getting rid of Samoa would be an interesting “what if?” experiment, but it easily means that the show is over because there is a strong possibility that the Heroes win Heroes vs. Villains. I cannot abide a world where that happens (despite my love for Colby).

    1. We call it Hockeytown for a reason.

      One time, when my dad and I were in Toronto on vacation, we got into a taxi with a hockey obsessed driver. The cabbie was going on about hockey and asked us if we were fans of Maple Leafs. We said no, and he said “Ah, Canadiens fans.” My dad then replied that we were fans of the Red Wings, and the driver said nothing for the rest of the drive.

    2. As a Chicago Blackhawks fan, I must remark that fans of my team have multiplied exponentially over the past 6 years or so.

    3. I get the impression that DC has a fairly healthy hockey following. I don’t care even a little bit about hockey but I think I’m unusual as a DC sports fan who doesn’t pay attention to the Capitals.

    4. As a hockey market, the Bay Area will never compare to, say, Toronto or Vancouver, but for such a young franchise the Sharks have a surprisingly large, dedicated, and tortured fan base.

    1. So I wasn’t active in this community while Cambodia was on, so I’m curious about what things do you not like about that season? I have it as my 6th ranked season but I do acknowledge there are flaws.

      1. I am known around these parts for being the Cambodia contrarian because I am not in love with the season. I think it is a solid “B” season, but I’m not as gaga about it as others. I just play up that role . I think the post-merge portion drags just a bit too long, especially when there are several underdeveloped characters that go the distance (Keith, Kimmi, Tasha). I also think the post-merge challenges ranged from meh to very boring (the exceptions to that are Folklore and the two challenges that required medical attention, but for different reasons). The pre-merge is pretty excellent though. However, the storytelling this season is sorta all over the place (Andy’s example of Stephen vs. Savage not coming to fruition is a good one. I also think Tasha vs. Abi is another one).

        1. I think Kimmi’s (lack of) edit especially weakens the season. I get why they edited her that way, considering how silly her exit seems from a game point of view, but it still sucks the tension out of the finale and makes the rest of the season less interesting. I don’t hate the Stephen/Savage thing though, because at least it gives us some of the dynamics of the majority alliance, which is another thing the season doesn’t explain well. I don’t know, I still need time to sort out my opinions on it and there’s a lot of great stuff there but there’s so much that I think they dropped the ball on too.

          1. You are exactly right about the finale having very little tension, especially when Kimmi got a lot of the screentime in the first part of the finale. I just wanted to see some more confessionals about how Kimmi was adjusting to new school Survivor since she was the last pre HvV person standing. If she was such a threat on the island, I need to see more of that.

            I don’t mind Stephen/Savage, but it just feels weird to have that as a running story when it is only relevant for three out of the four episodes that they were together. I do wish that they would have done more with the Bayon Alliance, but that would break up their idea of the voting bloc strategy being so revolutionary.

  15. Inside Survivor’s Week 2 edgic post is guest-written by Shirin. This is @purplerockjohn:disqus’s Kobayashi Maru.

    1. Nah. Inside Survivor’s edgic stuff is more about story analysis and what the editors are trying to tell us than “OMG WINNAR’S EDIT!!!!” I don’t think they’re even doing winner predictions with their edgic posts.

Comments are closed.