Yeah, you're right. In S7 there was something with Luke that took up a couple of pages and you/me/Zach/Sarah fought for like 5 pages by ourselves, lol.
Ash sucks lol. What a bitter little bitch. People are so entitled. In Big Brother no one owes you anything. How would any of Craig, Rachelle, Shilpa targeting Dan/Ika/Ivette over Ash/Chris help their games? Ash had his chance to keep Drew too and he blew it.
I'm sorry but jury attitudes like Ash's really push my buttons. It's a nice thought to expect everyone to hold hands and let the most enthusiastic and active players advance, but in chess you don't waste your time going for pawns when you can go for the queen or the knight or the rook... ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY ARE YOUR PAWNS AND IT'S THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE BOARD'S QUEEN OR KNIGHT OR ROOK.
I understand from an entertainment aspect that it sucks that Dan is still here and that Ivette lasted longer than some more invested players, but in what world should someone actively sacrifice their own game and screw over lackluster allies so that stronger players and adversaries can advance and have a very good chance of taking them out?
It's like last season, Ryan didn't put up Victoria during his first singles HoH because yeah she was not invested, but so what, he won HoH fair and square and he had every right to take the chance to get out someone that was gonna be gunning for him.
at the end of the day you would've done similar nominations. Me and Rachelle or Shilpa instead of you, Chris, and Christine.
I'm gonna have to agree with Craig here. Ash proved that he was going down that same path when he evicted Drew. He had the opportunity to get rid of Ivette, but chose not to. How's that any different than them dragging her along? He's guilty of it too.
Even though Rachelle is a challenge beast, if I were her I dunno if I'd waste so much of my time going HAM in part 1 as there's at best like a 1% Dan or Ika would beat her in part 2. I guess I also can understand not wanting to take that risk after coming so far.