all of this presumes there is one "ideal" game - but everyone has to play the game best suited to them. the fact is that tyler is the biggest overt threat in the game once mike and joe are gone. think about it. there are too many smart players in the game to not realise that. its in his best interest to play both…

1. you're underestimating tyler as a challenge threat in an alliance consisting of carolyn, will, tyler, rodney, sierra, and dan when it gets to the end of the game.
2. carolyn has rodney and will maybe (if hali is to be believed), but tyler's close to sierra and based on what we've heard in exit interviews - people…

you're an idiot and tyler made the right call because his options were: go with a (presumably girls + joe) alliance with a tight 3 (joe has no incentive to flip on the girls, he would win a jury vote against anyone) or a blue collar alliance with so many cracks its surprising everyone that its still holding together…

yes. your comment makes sense if you're the sort of person that hates good tv. or the sort of Survivor "fan" that thinks certain winners "aren't deserving". or a sash apologist, in which case i will leave you with your irrational love for the empty-eyed strategist who couldn't even manage to come across as sincere…

fabio's stoner antics, all-time-great Survivor character naonka, naonka's inexplicable hatred v fabio's bewildered indignance, naonka v. kelly b, holly's psychotic break, dan's shoes, knees and son, jimmy johnson, jimmy t's delusions of grandeur, strategist marty, helen/deena-esque dr. jill, the rise and fall of…

it's no monkey island!

anyone else LITERALLY get annoyed with the constant use of the word "literally"? in other news, i'm happy this show might get better because i literally would have watched it just for john cho. literally.