This is the best jury speech ever of its type. Unlike David Murphy and Spencer and even Jeremy, Erik isn't lecturing the jury. He's talking to the finalists while campaigning for one of them and against the other two. Note how at the end he simply says that Natalie has his vote and he hopes she gets four more. He isn't telling the other jurors that they have to vote for his preferred finalist.
You can tell how much it meant for Natalie to hear someone actually respect her as a competitor and as a player. Natalie had to endure 39 days of the elements of Samoa and Russell Hantz’s constant torment. She earned and was rightfully awarded the title by her jury
To this very day, never has any contestant before or since had to defend their victory to the inane degree that she was forced to. Nor has any contestant before or since had to play the type of game she was forced to. In fact, the way Russell acted was set up by Natalie on and since the very first day. Her getting past the first Tribal Council or the merge or the final immunity challenge were not random acts that came out of nowhere. Natalie didn't put her own flavor on anything or demonstrate any new way to play the game. What she did was obey the unwritten rules and laws to the letter. She listened when others talked, observed while others stood up, and pay attention when others spoke. There wasn't any luck involved in her win.
@@AllRequired Well every winner has some luck. Natalie just realized early on that her best chance of winning was against the biggest asshole in the game. Foa Foa would’ve been decimated had her move at the merge not worked out.
@@tokyotourist And especially if Russell Swan wasn't med evac'd, that same episode, BOTH tribes were going to tribal council, Foa Foa gets out Shanbo, who was the clear elimination, and it doesn't matter who Galu take out, they're down in numbers at the merge (Foa Foa was practically unbeatable, imagine with Russell), and no Shanbo to side with them which happened, it's funny to think how much that med evac changed the season
I absolutely love this jury speech. Definitely in my top ten of ever. And how can people call this jury "bitter" when Erik, who was blindsided by Natalie herself, is the reason Natalie won? I don't ~GET~ the immense Russell fan base. I DESPISE him.
@@darrylwolfe7359Uh no he didn’t, Natalie was the one who came up with the plan to blindside Erik, do you not remember Russell completely undermining her and saying she only “thinks” she did it because he’s an egotistical jarhead?
mikeytherealist Natalie May have played a better Social game but Russel played a way better game and should’ve easily deserved it. It was just a bitter ass jury
@@owennicholson8914 don’t get me wrong, I loved watching Russell as a fan. But he played one of the worst social games of all time, maybe the worst social game in history next to Philip Shepherd. He didn’t deserve to win. The game isn’t all about the moves, you have to maneuver in a way where the jury can respect you enough to appreciate your moves. If you’re a dick the whole time, that’s not playing an impressive game, that’s idiotic and short-term minded
i will always love this jury speech. it was powerful and persuasive, and it's almost definitely why natalie won. i think it articulated for all the jury members all the reasons they didn't instinctively want to vote for russell, but didnt know how to explain--even to themselves.
No they were gonna vote for Mick initially but flipped to Natalie since Mick’s FTC performance was ass and showed how little he was actually playing. Russell was never on the board.
Rachel K Ewing Nope, Natalie got Natalie her million. She worked Erik in such a way that he wouldn't be bitter toward her. This speech was simply an indicator of his awareness of his rights, his power, and the opportunity he had to exercise them. He was smart and wise enough not to be condescending toward his fellows.
I think you can argue that Russell got her the million. These people were so upset over the way that Russell played that they were ready to give anyone the title but him. At this point in the season, she was lucky to be aligned with him as I felt anyone in his alliance could have taken it due to this reasoning. It may be easy for me to say watching from home, but I think it's sad when people get so upset at someone playing such a manipulative game. They know what they signed up.
Alessandro Hutapea I think you mean the most exciting play. If it got her the big bucks, it's definitely the best play. Russell had to know exactly what he signed up for, but after his third try, it doesn't sound like it.
Natalie wasn't lucky to be aligned with him though, that was her strategy. The thing is, Russell didn't just play a strategic manipulative game. He was waaaaay too arrogant, too full of himself and looked down on everybody else. That's just terrible social game.
I don't know bout that especially in Samoa he wasn't arogant or unlikeable in front of the players everything he said/did he did it alone, with his alliance and during confessionals.... Probably only mistake he did was promising that kid final 3 in the end and voting him off and his FTC performance wasn't great
@@philipthomas8928 it was said alot that he didn't bad mouthed in other people's faces but I can imagine that attitude he showed in confessionals surely leaked out here and there in the 39 days they lived with him.
@@itwasagoal Exactly. People respected his strategic brilliance but found him to be a slimy and arrogant person. The jury wanted to actively punish Russell going into the FTC, he had no shot at winning because of how he acted for 39 days.
Spencer didn't get jack shit for Tony. Tony got those, or Woo lost those. Most, if not all, of the Galus, would corraborate that they were deciding between Mick and Natalie, leaning Mick. Then Natalie off-screen knocked it out of the park and Mick visibly fucked himself out of the running. When Erik made his speech for Natalie, that was the tipping point that got all of the Galus to send their votes to Natalie, no longer indecisive.
Spencer's speech would make me want to vote for Woo just to spite Spencer. His speech made me hurl...and I'm a Tony fan. This speech is fucking amazing. A perfect ending to the season.
This is a perfect example of how important jury management is on Survivor. Sure Russell played a great game to get to the end but he didn't care about the jury which cost him the million dollar. Natalie deserved.
@@bradrockl8330 But as Boston Rob said, getting to the end is one thing but winning it is another. Russell's arrogance cost him in the end, not his strategy.
If you are going to worry about jury management, how are you gonna make big moves? Reality is, big moves hurts people. It was either Russel was gonna play honarable and do no big moves or play cuttrought. And what is gonna win you the game? Play honorable or play strategic?
I didn’t notice it at first, but the audio editing actually heightens this speech so much at the end. As Erik closes his speech, the quiet background music stops, leaving a period of silence. Then, an uplifting tone puts a great emphasis on his final words to recap his big idea. Erik’s speech is strong, but together with the audio, it’s captivating and powerful - exactly what a speech is supposed to be.
Erik is a hypocrite, he targetted Russel just after merge and ranted at him all the times before merge. And now he is crying Russel didnt socialise with him.
I donno about that, I think the jury already made their decision before cause they hated how Russell put them in the jury even without the numbers, the problem with Russell was that he couldn't make them think otherwise or get their votes because he had a bad final tribal performance
To me it is the opposite. Worst speech ever. Eric is a bitter person like we've never seen before and that lacks emotional intelligence. Do you think tony wins if spencer doesn't advocate for tony in the jury. Russell paved the way for a better entertaining show and for games like tony to be praised at the end. Thank god players like eric stay on their couch nowadays !
I’m not necessarily a Russell fan, but I think Erik’s speech highlighted his attitude that I hated from him throughout this season and was part of the reason he was voted out at the merge
People are gonna say that Russel played the best game and he took Natalie to the top 3 as the goat. Yes, in most aspects Russell did everything in his power to get to the final 3. But that’s not where the game stops. He may have outwitted and outlasted the jury but the last part of the game is to make sure that in the end, you get majority of the jury votes to win. He played so dirty that instead of the jury respecting his gameplay they were disgusted by it. Sometimes you have to choose the lesser evil.
- there is no set definition of "best game" or "deserving". - there are no rules on how to play survivor or what voting criteria to have. - this is a social game. if you rubbed the jury the wrong way, they will not reward you. it's not a reflection of them, it's a reflection of your incompetence as a social player. - juries are comprised of human beings with values and emotions, not robots programmed to think a certain way.
Well said. If you can't master the social aspect of the game, and that includes jury management, then you really don't get it. Danielle said it best during HvV that it's clear that he was lacking skill in jury management. Russell should've known from knowing and understanding the game as well as he claims to but evidently he doesn't.
This is true, especially the last point. It's not completely the jury's fault if they felt hurt or betrayed by you, because they are capable of emotions. It's easy for us (viewers) to feel that the one who played aggressive should win because we are not in the jury's position at all. I wonder what would others be thinking if they were in that spot. I bet some will lose it too.
Erik, you sir gave a brilliant and heartfelt speech and one that hit the nail on the proverbial head! Everything you said was absolutely correct and I truly believe you helped sway some votes towards Natalie and away from Russell. And that sir, all by itself is priceless! Hats off and rock on, Erik and I personally want to say thank you!
Ell Ess Doubtful he actually swayed any votes, but he did demonstrate a full and total awareness of his rights, his power, and the opportunity he was granted to use both without any fear of repercussion. If you want the jury to vote for your guy and not the other person, this is how you do it.
That was a very good speech, and I think it won her the game. He opened people's eyes (including mine) and he gained a lot of respect from me by the way he delivered it.
I'll just say this, after so long. To those people who still think Russell deserved to win, look at the final 3. Russell, Mick, and Natalie. A complete parallel to Fiji's final 3. Dreamz - The earlier version of Russell, but was less cocky about his moves while backstabbing whoever he had to for his own goal of reaching the end while not thinking about how he pissed off so many people. Cassandra- The earlier version of Mick. Both of them were unprepared for the game, as Cassandra couldn't swim while Mick wasn't used to being a leader, and they both gave very poor answers at the Final Tribal Council. Earl- This guy is the most underrated winner ever, by far. Do you not notice how Natalie played a similar game to Earl? They both chose to align tightly with one person who got cocky with their moves (Russell and Yau-Man, respectively), and Natalie made many friendships and good bonds with people like how Earl had done in Fiji. Natalie never had to win a challenge, and let Russell get blood on his hands when the merge happened because he acted like a jerk to everybody. Earl never had to win a challenge, and he was smart enough to let everyone else make so many stupid mistakes that caused their downfalls. Natalie was a pretty nice girl who never got on anyone's bad side, and Earl was quite a nice guy who had many friendships with people on Ravu and Moto. Who says that all you have to do is make incredibly cocky and backstabbing moves like Russell and Dreamz to win a million dollars, when socially being stealthy and adaptable to people is also an ass-kicking strategy that earned a guy all nine votes from the jury and made a girl get seven votes while neither of them had to sacrifice any integrity? If you never noticed the "Earl-ish" game that Natalie was playing, then that's shocking.
+Mira Izuna On the other hand, Yau-Man wasn't an asswipe to his fellows, and Earl never made anyone feel used. Earl only got rid of Yau-Man because he considered him far too dangerous to face the jury with. Russell was an asswipe to most of his fellows (except the pair who voted for him to win) and made nigh everyone feel used. He never got rid of Natalie because he didn't consider her dangerous in the least to face the jury with. Just in case anyone thinks Natalie and Earl were just lucky.
"Don't get me wrong, I thing Natalie was smart to hang the dumbass (Hantz) out to dry, but don't think it was as magnificent as Heidek or Earl." But she clearly learned by them. Which is plenty magnificent on its own.
Natalie wasn't a great gameplayer, not a bad gameplayer but certainly not a great one. She was extremely lucky to be in the right position at the right time. Yes, Russell rubbed people the wrong way, but the name of the game is to manipulate people to get them to vote your way. Russell did many things that should of earned him the win, obviously finding 3 idols (2 without a clue) and winning the final individual immunity challenge to take out jury favorite Brett were huge, but the most impressive imo was going into the merge outnumbered 8-4, leading a small alliance to take out the other tribe. Not only did russell take himself to the end with his back against the wall, he took 2 people that he wanted to take to the end in Mick and Natalie. Sometimes the nice person deserves to win depending on their gameplay, but in this case Natalie was nice and lucky, and the lucky person doesn't deserve to win. Russell made all the major moves, and if wasn't for him his tribe would have been eliminated quickly.
Ryan Hardison Episode 8: Erik (the same guy that supported Natalie) was voted out. How? Did Mick and Jaison did something? Not (i mean, it's obvius that they did something, but producers didnt show that). Natalie? Yes, she was the person who convinced almost everyone to vote Erik out. But how? She used Her previus relationships with the Galu Women (specially, Laura) and the other Galu. THATS WHY SOCIAL GAME IS IMPORTANT, if it would had been, to say, Mick the person who had the idea, he would never have convinced them, because he didnt have a previus relationship. Anyways, ir was actually Natalie, the person who gave Foa Foa the numbers (knowing that Shamboo changed obviusly). She did the first hit. What did Russell do? He was shown cocky, he was shown scaring everyone. He Even didnt believe Natalie that she convinced the Galu to vote Erik.
0:27 'Nobody on that team had any guts' Foa Foa clearly had the guts to make it to the end while your entire tribe turned on each other and got sent to the jury lol
Yeah that part of his speech didn't make sense. Foa Foa dominated and were ruthless about taking out the other tribe. It kind of invalidates his speech because you can tell that he is full of bitterness.
lol. Sour grapes Hantz fans: too stupid to realize they're massive hypocrites themselves. Galu literally didn't have the numbers to get Hantz out, who was the greatest threat to Galu. Whenever they did try to get him out, Shambo ratted them out. Galu was only up 7-5 at the merge because Shambo betrayed them (regardless of her good reasons for doing so). 5-4-3 Foa Foa would win any vote if they tried to flush the idols. That was the best they could hope for because Shambo was a double agent. Once Foa Foa had the majority, they flushed Shambo. Foa Foa wisely (?) refused to work to get out Hantz. The "no guts" as I understood was a reference to their refusal to negotiate and make a move against Hantz and/or their pre-merge performance. Galu absolutely dominated pre-merge, only losing one immunity challenge. There's a reason Galu entered the merge with 8 and Foa Foa with 4. I don't think anyone liked Hantz at all besides Hantz and Shambo. And you losers, obviously, but you didn't get a vote.
@@encycl07pedia- There's more to having 'guts' than winning pre-merge challenges. Galu had a far more athletic tribe anyway. They had multiple opportunities to pull an Edgardo vote and weaken Foa Foa without even needing Shambo. They didn't at F12 because they were cocky, and again at F11 because they plain suck at the game.
@@MrBen51309 The Edgardo move wouldn't work because Shambo would've told Hantz. Hantz plays the idol on the target and a Galu goes home. If they sucked at the game, why were they up 8-4 or 7-5 at the merge? They were cocky because immunity idols had never been so overused before. Hantz excelled in that one aspect of the game: finding idols even without any clues. Nobody had done that before.
Honestly Natalie White is one of those winners that just kept growing more and more one me as the years passed. She is great, I love her. Such a nice person and didn’t play a bad game either, she knew exactly what she had to do to not get voted out by Russell and go to the end.
One of, if not THE, best FTC jury speech ever. He highlighted what everyone else did wrong and what Natalie did right. I still think it had a huge impact on her winning. Granted Everyone hated Russell, Eric highlighted what many would consider a "Goat" and made her look like a genius. Did she make good moves? Yes. Ironically her biggest move was getting Eric's tribe to vote him out. Did she play an OVERALL better game than Russell? Not even close, I'd go as far as to say Russell Hantz was/is in the top 5 of pure strategy of all Survivor players. I think he should've won, but after this speech and the highlight of her moves I can see why they picked her.
44 seasons and This is STILL the Best jury speech ever and also the best move a jury member has ever made. This speech is what gave Natalie the million dollars.
I'd say I've forgotten her name, but in World's Apart, the one who said she harbours no hard feelings towards the final 3, and spent her whole speech campaigning for the jury to vote for Mike, I'd say that, and his apology to Dan, won him the season
The Russell fanboys are still butthurt after like 6 years lmao. He lost and deserved. If you can't handle a jury, you will never win. Like certain people said here, alot of good players have lost (or won) the game due to the way they handle the jury. Parvati is my #1 player ever. Though I completly agree that she deserved to lost over queen sandra. Sandra masterminded the art of jury managing and she is the queen and goddess for that reason Twila/Chris is the perfect example. Go watch the Vanuatu season, worth it. the FTC is very good and lead a good example on how to handle a jury.
A lot of people say that this speech swayed the Jury, but can anyone actually *confirm* this? Has anyone mentioned in an interview: "Oh hey, I changed my vote because of Erik."
Erik was never a off-putting as Russell. Even f you find him to be a hypocrite, that's not an excuse. A hypocrite' vote is still a vote. "Laura was bitter beyond belief she even put up a vlog with her daughter trying to say things that Russell did to her that justified her vote" Lmfao, that wasn't a vlog, that was part of her and Ciera's Rhap appearance. That was after a time she voted for Tyson, someone who voted her out twice. Lol at you blaming her for not liking Russell. Just because they didn't *air* him going "yeah! yeah!" doesn't prove he never performed assholeries as such. So jurors have a time limit of ten days to dislike a finalist? Interesting. John and Shambo both hated heir tribe and were the only people on Galu that Russell maintained solid relationships with. So even though JT congratulated Russell, he didn't tae it like a man because he didn't vote for him? Is one's manhood defined by whether or not they cater to Russell Hantz? Monica knew she was a sitting duck so for shits and giggles she pushed Russell's buttons. She warned him that he needed to put people on the jury who want to support him, but didn't take heed to it. So even though Monica congratulated him at ftc, she didn't take it like a woman because she voted Natalie? Once again you're twisting Dave's thoughts and blaming Laura for Russell's shortcomings. Thanks for proving my point. Russell can claim all he wants to that his shit including fucking around with Brett was "strategic", but he forgot or refused to accept that it's a social game.
1. Too fucking bad, hypocritical jurors are part of the game. 2. From what I saw, Tony clapped when Sarah was blindsided, but LJ and Jefra went along with him. Are you saying Tyson isn't a beast :p? And lol at Russell being humble. Just no. Compare his ftc to Tony's. Now that's humble. 3. John and Shambo were able to appreciate Russell's game because Russell formed solid relationships with only them. He wasn't a raging dick to them but rather befriended them. Don't pretend that has no factor in their votes for Russell. 4. "The heroes voted for whoever was most heroic" haha what? If by their collective definition of herioc you mean the person who they liked most, then go Sandra! Keep Changa alive! 5. You keep mentioning an online version of survivor that, unless I'm mistaken, you created yourself? The real survivor is not like that. Monica simply fucked around with Russell while simultaneously warning him. She lost because she chose to fuck around with Russell (unlike Natalie), but she seemed okay with her fate. Speaking of Monica, she came off very classy in her ftc speech. You calling her a bitter juror too? 6. How do you know Dave had zero animosity towards him? You going to twist his words around again and blame Laura for ruining poor Russell's game? 7. The jury is always bitter, so technically, it's always social. See how that works?
2. tony's ftc was a mess? the jurors sure didn't think so. trish was bitter at Tony. don't you remember her speech? so is someone only bitter when they don't vote for who sakeshi likes? the jury is who needs to be convinced, not viewers. your opinion of Russell's speech holds no bearing on the jury's (people who were actually there with him) opinion of him. 3. John hated his tribe and he and Russell's relationship was based on the supposed stupidity of the Galu crew. 4. Good for Sandra for appealing to Rupert then eh? Imagine Russell sitting next to Candice instead of Sandra. 5. Once again, let's blame Laura for Russell's jury answer to Monica's question sucking. Laura didn't influence Monica. Laura and Kelly wouldn't say hello to Shambo. Monica, the classy woman she is, did say hi to Shambo. 6. Ah, that article by that deluded Russell fan who think's it's logistically possible to separate jurors. So because a fellow Russell fan claims Laura magically changed Dave's mind, it must be true? Bury your head in the sand and stay there. Speaking of Ozlets, check out Heather Smith's article: "how important is the survivor jury system?" I cannot wait to hear your rebuttal to that. 7. Yes, there is bitterness in every jury, but not the kind of bitterness you are thinking of (the kind used as a cop out to make your favorite losing finalist look like a victim and jurors who didn't cater to your fave a monster). All votes are justified.
1. best is subjective, and the jury has no obligation to "get over" anything. sometimes bitter jurors need to vent. 2. Monica was a bitter loser? 4. You say that as if Russell wasn't going to win no matter who was next to him, as he did all he could have done. Sorry, but no. 5. You don't even know why Eric was cheering. He expressed disrespect for Russell before he was blindsided. Kelly was shocked about being blindsided, but Russell forgot that the object of the game is to get the human beings you blindsided to vote for you. And his smug smile didn't help. Russell bonded with Laura for the sake of eventually crushing her in the same manner he did Kelly, but Laura escaped that round having immunity. He failed to form genuine relationships with people. John was one of two people Russell didn't condescend all game. Lol at Shambo being a good sport. She had it out for Laura all game and she and Russell bonded over their dislike for her. Have you ever bonded with someone over the dislike of a third person? As for Dave, you don't know he was "pro Russell". You don't know he respected him as a person. Monica was not bitter at all. Stop acting like she was just because she cast a vote for Natalie lol. Jaison was bitter, and rightfully so. Funny how at the reunion he expressed that he was pro Natalie. Brett- how do you know he was bitter at ponderosa? He seemed particularly happy at the ftc. Because he voted for his friend Natalie, he's a bitter sore loser? Stay deluded. 6. you not liking the jury system doesn't mean you are a victim when you don't manage the jury for what it is. 7. Every single jury has had it's bitterness. Every. Single. Season. The way casuals use the word "bitter" is used in a way as if the vote of someone, even if they were polite like Brett and Monica at ftc,is somehow unjustified because they didn't vote for who those as viewers wanted to see win.
It's ridiculous how Natalie gets absolutely no credit for her win when she did more than so many people think. Right from the beginning she formed an alliance with Russell and when she realized that he was unlikable, she remained loyal to him and convinced him to take her to the Final 3. And when she was doing all of that, she orchestrated the blindside of Erik by making connections with the Galu women and convincing them to go forward with it. This move was REALLY important and meant more than any of Russell's so-called "genius" moves since it led to the eventual crumble of the Galu Tribe where each of them would get voted off one-by-one. This move not only got her further into the game but made her earn the respect of most of the Galu Tribe which was 75% of the freaking jury. Maybe she didn't make as much moves as Russell, but constantly making big, flashy moves with really no purpose like Russell did doesn't guarantee a win. Natalie made long term plans and stuck with them and made the right moves at the right time in order to get further into the game. Is she my favorite or even the best winner? No. But she is definitely the most underrated winner and definitely did more than so many people make it out to be.
PrinceBags Russell formed the alliance. Go back and watch. Russell CHOSE to keep her in the game, not the other way around, he saw her as still useful. Also, its Outwit, Outplay, Outlast. That one move was all she had for Outwit. Russell still was far better strategically, and he performed way better in challenges and took out Brett by winning a challenge, not strategy, and he was the main socially controlled his alliance. He was more well rounded in all three forms of the game, where as Natalie wasn't.
ChristianChristianson "Offending Many Who Do Not Understand Survivor" and "The Fall of Russell Hantz," Part 1. When you get to part 2, Google "baby unicorn" and find that part.
AllRequired I watched that, already, Its funny how someone wasted god knows how much of their life to make not 1, not 2, not 3, but 4 videos to talk about him. It depends really on the perspective you look at the game.
As a Survivor fan, I appreciate the various types of characters and players. Each bring something unique to the game. Fiji was a vile season, but Earl winning was satisfying to see, just like Natalie winning is satisfying. She was smart, sweet, and honest at Final Tribal Council. Ultimately there is only one winner crowned, but that person can never get to the end without other people's cooperation. How you engage and disengage from them determines your fate. How you play the game is perhaps more important as what you do to get to the end, especially if you remove yourself from the accountability equation. I love Russell, Rob and Twila. But they didn't factor the one element into their endgame- people. Total agreeance about Mick. He was a non entity.
Erik didn't tell everyone to vote for Natalie because she "masterminded" his elimination. It's because he didn't like how Russell played the game. Sounds a little envious to me.
What I mean is that Erik voted for (and to some extent lobbied for) Natalie DESPITE THE FACT that Natalie was the main reason he got voted off (I didn't say he voted for Nat because of it). So I don't see him being bitter. If he were to be bitter, he would be bitter of Natalie.
The jury in samoa is bitter, because they vote against Russell and not for Natalie. However, a bitter jury is not a bad thing, you need subjectivity when you vote.
Yeah.. just because he want to vote againt russell. Not for natalie, everything he said about natalie just an excuse for his bitternes to russell. Even probts said that
Man, you guys need to learn how to respect free opinion. If you don't like the way Samoa turned out, get off your asses and apply for the show. Erik played the game how he wanted to, and no matter what you think should have happened, it happened anyway. Get some balls and stop bashing the people who make this game worthwhile.
Spencer's speech last night was the polar opposite of Erik's. Erik's logic was Russell's game was unethical, so he didn't deserve to win. Spencer argued Tony, no matter how much of a jerk he was, completely outplayed Woo. Spencer argued using logic. Erik was pure emotion.
Clifford Rosen Tony wasnt a Jerk. Everyone loved Tony. In the other SIDE, everyone HATED Russell. No matter what, they played 2 differents games. Tony had good social game
That isn't a fact, that is an opinion. What IS fact is that Russell got beaten in the final 2 twice, both times by a landslide, and the next time he played, when everyone KNEW about him, they voted him off FIRST. Oh yeah, he is a really good player.
Erik had a short memory. For him to go off on Russell for being arrogant after the way he made an ass out of himself before being blindsided and becoming the first member of the jury.
People bitter about Russel not winning should watch a different show where lying, manipulating, sabotage, and arrogance are guaranteed to be rewarded every time.
What a nice speech. I haven't watch the season yet but this makes me want to watch Survivor Samoa. Russel might be a good player but he is not one of the best. I think he is being over rated. He played the game to get to the top 3. But he never played the game to win it. I don't hate him or whatsoever. But it makes me wanna slap his face and shout that he is not the best palyer of the game. If Russel will play again and win the whole thing. I might change my mind and eat my words. ( I don't hate Russel. Its just an opinion.)
"He played the game to get to the top 3. But he never played the game to win it. I don't hate him or whatsoever. But it makes me wanna slap his face and shout that he is not the best palyer of the game." Doesn't sound to me like Jessie Ross is the one who "lacks a total understanding of Survivor."
Even though I think Russell played a more open, strategic, and controlling game (in my opinion), that's just good TV. The BEST player is the sole survivor whether it be by luck or by actually controlling and dominating the game. Spencer's jury speech about Tony was a speech that shed light to how most fans see Survivor (a strategic, unethical game of manipulation, lies, and entertainment). Erik's speech about Natalie & Russell shed's light to how a first time viewer would see Survivor (as manipulative and unethical). The difference between Erik's point of view and Spencer's point of view is that Erik's view comes from a "fan" who probably only watched Micronesia just like Russell. Spencer's point of view comes from a superfan who understands that this is a game and not reality. Even though I was not a huge fan of Spencer while he was in the game, I grew to like him outside of Survivor because he gives great insight and he really is one of those few superfans like Cochran and Richard Hatch who study the game on a daily basis.
You have it the opposite. Spencer's approach was that of casual sheeple who jump on gamebot bandwagons. Just because he calls himself a survivor "student" doesn't mean he fully gets it. That applies to Cochran as well. Those who understand survivor understand the psychology and human element of a survivor jury system. People who have a better understanding aren't players but include different "students" like Mario Lanza from the funny 115 and Heather Smith from survivoroz.
***** That's good insight, but can you explain what you mean by gamebot bandwagoners? I'm not saying you're wrong, I'd just like clarification so I can rebuttal it or agree with it.
TheBBallEnthusiast Sure. What I meant by "gamebot bandwagoners" (assuming you know what a gamebot is) is that is that some casual viewers tend to pretty much only like players who are flashy. Like, they base their opinion of a certain contestant as a person on how many idols they have, how much airtime they get, how many blindsides they are a part of. They root for whoever editing tells them to instead of forming their own opinions of contestants or liking them for their personalities and jump to cliché cards like "outwit outplay outlast", "the jury was bitter", "I don't like ___ because he/she isn't playing the game", "playing how you're supposed to", etc. Spencer strikes me as that very kind of fan, as does Cochran. It seems there are more of those people in the casual audience than those who stick to "omg! ___ doesn't deserve to win because they lied!" You might find a lot of both kinds of people on survivor's facebook page.
***** speaking of Big Brother, let's talk about Evel Dick. He had ZERO jury management. He bullied them, tortured them, and never shied away from telling the world what he thought of them. Now, BB is also a jury-based show, and Dick still won. Some will argue that they rigged the game for him, but conspiracy theories aside, how can Dick win a social game without ZERO social skills, yet Russell can't? Russell isn't nearly as abusive as Dick was. Can someone explain?
This is when Russell thinks to himself..oh, shit. I lost this game. To the Russell supporters, you can't consider him the best in any season when, ultimately, to win the game, you must get the majority of jury votes.
Lol at people still thinking Russell deserving to win this game. Uh no. This was why Rob lost in All-Stars, this is why Stephanie lost in Guatemala, and this is why Parvati lost in Heroes vs Villains. They were all arrogant while also making some stupid moves in the process and you need to impress the Jury to win, whether they're bitter or not. They all failed (especially Russell) and hence why I believed Russell deserved to lose Samoa and HvV.
i vehemetly disagree. Parvati deserved HvV and she was never arrogant once. The jury system needs to be completely overhauled. In my opinion, the winner of the Final Immunity Challenge should be able to nullify one of the jurors votes, thus removing them from the game completely.
Parvati wasn't arrogant that season? Seriously? Several players from that season have said that Parvati and Russell would often read JT's letter long after he was gone and just laugh at it. It cost her a lot of jury votes, cause it's a cuntish thing to do. Also, Parvati said regarding JT "I can't believe this kid won Survivor!" Which is arrogant as balls because 1) JT is only a year younger than Parv, 2) JT played the only perfect game in the show's history and 3) The only reason Parvati won was because the producers decided to make Micronesia a final 2 after three straight seasons of final 3, basically robbing Cirie of her million bucks. Stop complaining that game is flawed just beacuse you're fooled by the edit and your favourite player doesn't win.
Exactly what I was thinking. This guy is pathetic, Russell should've admitted that Natalie blindsinded Eric and this speech would turn into Eric saying Natalie is useless and Russell has his vote. People talk about oh Russell fans are butthurt and the jury wasn't bitter and all that but this jury was just terrible without being a Russell fan.
Erik actually admitted he should have voted for Russell, and that his at the moment anger led him to make the wrong choice. It wouldn't be enough for him to win, but it would have made it 6-3 at least
Morgan kingsley I would like the source, and also some people we just following others and not voting Russell because others weren’t. I think Erik could’ve swayed some
For all the Russell fanboys who think this was a bitter jury let me ask all of you, who was responsible for making them bitter? A good player is not someone who can vote people out and make to the end, they have to also do it in a way that people still want to vote for them. All season you can see Natalie making great relationships with the people she voted out. Russell lacks the most important trait for a winner which is a social game. Natalie early on said she would like to sit next to Russell because he rubbed people the wrong way. She got to the end with her goat, was responsible for the most important blindside of the season, and eliminated every single person she voted for. Sounds like a very deserving winner to me. Funny thing is Russell himself states the exact reason he is going to lose the episode before the merge. He says he is keeping Natalie because she is great at making relationships with others rather than Liz who can annoy people. Essentially he chooses a "goat" who is well liked by others over someone who annoys others. Look up the Funny 115 to see a great right up of Russel's downfall both times.
Natalie even said in one of her confessionals early in the season that her strategy was to let Russell be a douche so she can beat him in the end. I'm so happy she won :)
If you were going into that FTC planning to vote for Russell, then there's no way this contradictory and nonsensical speech would change your mind lol.
Such an amazing and complicated season. 1. Shame on you, jury, for not awarding the player who clearly played manipulated all of you and outplayed all of you. He overcame the massive 4-8 numbers disadvantage and used players as pieces, played idols, and beat Brett at the end to lead his alliance to victory, and yet you don't award that. What a lack of respect for the game. 2. Shame on you, Russell, for not reading the jury better. They weren't game bots like you were, they actually wanted to vote for someone whom they first and foremost liked and respected as a human being before considering gameplay. They weren't bitter that you beat them (you didn't even backstab most of them, as you were clearly against them; the two people you did backstab, John and Shambo, were even the ones that voted for you), they just saw you as a hateable asshole who didn't deserve the win. 3. Congratulations, Natalie. You deserved it because you were the only one to make it to the end AND know what the jury was looking for. You predicted correctly that Russell would make the flashy aggressive moves to take you to the end and make himself a douchebag in the eyes of the jury, so you stuck by him, making him believe you were the goat to drag to the end when the whole time you knew the jury would be on your side. Because you knew this jury was so petty, there was no reason for you to play a more aggressive game, so you played passively and walked away a million dollars richer.
How about that? Something for all sides to consider. Here's one more: A modicum of humility would have gone a long way in convincing the jury to put their emotions aside. In fact, he might even have been embraced with a fervor not seen since Carrie Underwood. Alas, Russell didn't stop to think that the back end of the truck exists.
#3 in this sums up why Natalie won. She wasn't passive, she was subtle, and because she read the room correctly, she knew Russell would fuck himself out of first place, which he did. In response to point #1, Natalie is the reason why Erik was blindsided, which led to Galu crumbling since they lost their voting integrity. I will give Russell credit that he dominated strategically, but he again fucked himself out of first place because he took the wrong people, and likability is important. He was an unlikable douchebag from the getgo. Jeff even polled the jury at the reunion who would win in a Russell-Shambo-Jaison final 3, and he would have won. So he took the wrong people, which was his fatal error.
It says nowhere in the rules of Survivor that you have to award your jury vote to the player who manipulated you. And the concept of outplaying someone is completely subjective. Russell doesn't get to define what outplay means, and you CERTAINLY don't deserve to define what outplays mean. The beauty of Survivor is that players can vote for a winner based on any criteria they so desire. The sheer irony that you don't get that while claiming the Samoa jury disrespected the game is mind-blowing. You don't understand the basic concept of Survivor.
@@Cynicayke Oops late response, but whatever. lol I'm a fan of the game and can have an opinion. Look at how this game has evolved, more and more players think like me. Survivor IS a beautiful game and as you said, it's all subjective. And I believe it's about controlling the votes, and the fact that you are acting condescending to me for having an opinion is the real irony. I never said the jury didn't have the right to vote they want to, they can do what they want. I just said they don't honor this game in my eyes.
Russell had a HORRIBLE social game, which is what Survivor is. Nobody, and I mean NOBODY, wants to give you a million dollars if you call them names after sending them out that door. Natalie knew she could win as Russell was carrying a social player to the end and she made it to day 39 doing just that.
I'm pretty sure Erik won her immunity with this speech. The jury was bitter; plain and simple. Survivor is not a a purely social game and you all know it. If it were, it would be some MTV show that dies out after the first season. Russell outplayed and outwitted everyone. Natalie just sat in the corner and smiled.
Too bad that don't have the jury go up one by one to ask the final 2 or 3 questions about their game. Thanks Jeff Probst for taking the fun out of the final tribal council!
+DekuSword Clinton leads by double digits and if somehow he wins New York it absolutely won't be a landslide because Clinton will still win delegates and she still leads in delegates and super delegates. Not to mention she only needs 600 more delegates to clenched the nomination. There's not enough kids in America to vote Sanders to the White House.
+DekuSword but what happens if no super delegates switch? Also it doesn't change the fact that Hillary is a huge favorite in New York. If Burnie can win in New York than Trump can win in Fla, Ohio and Pennsylvania by your logic.
I love Natalie's reaction. the relief and joy that somebody else understands and respects you
Yeah it’s really nice to see
She earned it.
I love her reaction too…glad she won.
even though she didn't deserve it. she played like a jew, just leeched off others and still won the money. one of the worst players of all time
The speech that won Natalie $1 million
Not really she was going to win anyway
she was going to win anyways
No it didn't
Why y’all salty in the replies 😂
Galu players all came to an agreement before this in ponderosa
This is the best jury speech ever of its type. Unlike David Murphy and Spencer and even Jeremy, Erik isn't lecturing the jury. He's talking to the finalists while campaigning for one of them and against the other two. Note how at the end he simply says that Natalie has his vote and he hopes she gets four more. He isn't telling the other jurors that they have to vote for his preferred finalist.
Sue had the best jury speech still. It was bitter and malevolent.
He's also made clear his awareness of his rights (as well as theirs) as a juror.
You can tell how much it meant for Natalie to hear someone actually respect her as a competitor and as a player. Natalie had to endure 39 days of the elements of Samoa and Russell Hantz’s constant torment. She earned and was rightfully awarded the title by her jury
Nah Erik just has the hots for her.
To this very day, never has any contestant before or since had to defend their victory to the inane degree that she was forced to. Nor has any contestant before or since had to play the type of game she was forced to.
In fact, the way Russell acted was set up by Natalie on and since the very first day. Her getting past the first Tribal Council or the merge or the final immunity challenge were not random acts that came out of nowhere. Natalie didn't put her own flavor on anything or demonstrate any new way to play the game. What she did was obey the unwritten rules and laws to the letter. She listened when others talked, observed while others stood up, and pay attention when others spoke. There wasn't any luck involved in her win.
@@AllRequired Well every winner has some luck. Natalie just realized early on that her best chance of winning was against the biggest asshole in the game. Foa Foa would’ve been decimated had her move at the merge not worked out.
@@tokyotourist In her win...
@@tokyotourist And especially if Russell Swan wasn't med evac'd, that same episode, BOTH tribes were going to tribal council, Foa Foa gets out Shanbo, who was the clear elimination, and it doesn't matter who Galu take out, they're down in numbers at the merge (Foa Foa was practically unbeatable, imagine with Russell), and no Shanbo to side with them which happened, it's funny to think how much that med evac changed the season
I absolutely love this jury speech. Definitely in my top ten of ever.
And how can people call this jury "bitter" when Erik, who was blindsided by Natalie herself, is the reason Natalie won?
I don't ~GET~ the immense Russell fan base. I DESPISE him.
I know it's been literal years at this point but Natalie W and Sandra live rent free in Russell's head and Erik comes to visit for sleepovers
But who orchestrated the blindside? Whos the puppetmaster? It was Russel.
@@darrylwolfe7359 Uh... you spelled "Natalie" wrong.
@@darrylwolfe7359Uh no he didn’t, Natalie was the one who came up with the plan to blindside Erik, do you not remember Russell completely undermining her and saying she only “thinks” she did it because he’s an egotistical jarhead?
The fact is, Natalie had better jury management because even if Erik knew whether she got him sent home or not, he still voted for her to win.
Erik's speech literally gives me goosebumps.
it gives me goosebumps too because he highlighted the most important part of the game that many people forget. excellent speech.
mikeytherealist Natalie May have played a better Social game but Russel played a way better game and should’ve easily deserved it. It was just a bitter ass jury
@@owennicholson8914 and who made the jury bitter?
@@bronteprestedge8195 the jurors personality’s and egos
@@owennicholson8914 don’t get me wrong, I loved watching Russell as a fan. But he played one of the worst social games of all time, maybe the worst social game in history next to Philip Shepherd. He didn’t deserve to win. The game isn’t all about the moves, you have to maneuver in a way where the jury can respect you enough to appreciate your moves. If you’re a dick the whole time, that’s not playing an impressive game, that’s idiotic and short-term minded
i will always love this jury speech. it was powerful and persuasive, and it's almost definitely why natalie won. i think it articulated for all the jury members all the reasons they didn't instinctively want to vote for russell, but didnt know how to explain--even to themselves.
No they were gonna vote for Mick initially but flipped to Natalie since Mick’s FTC performance was ass and showed how little he was actually playing. Russell was never on the board.
@@handsoaphandsoap i love how you responded to this person's comment 11 years later hahaha.
@@breathingbear Gotta set the facts straight lmao
@@handsoaphandsoap I don’t think the original commenter was saying Russell had a chance
@@handsoaphandsoap And yet, Russell got more votes than Mick.
I love that Erik did this. No speech has ever changed an outcome so much. Erik got Natalie her million.
Rachel K Ewing Nope, Natalie got Natalie her million. She worked Erik in such a way that he wouldn't be bitter toward her. This speech was simply an indicator of his awareness of his rights, his power, and the opportunity he had to exercise them.
He was smart and wise enough not to be condescending toward his fellows.
I think you can argue that Russell got her the million. These people were so upset over the way that Russell played that they were ready to give anyone the title but him. At this point in the season, she was lucky to be aligned with him as I felt anyone in his alliance could have taken it due to this reasoning. It may be easy for me to say watching from home, but I think it's sad when people get so upset at someone playing such a manipulative game. They know what they signed up.
+Rachel K Ewing Hell no. Natalie fought her way. It might not be the best play but she took the two most hated and she played a great social game.
Alessandro Hutapea I think you mean the most exciting play. If it got her the big bucks, it's definitely the best play. Russell had to know exactly what he signed up for, but after his third try, it doesn't sound like it.
Natalie wasn't lucky to be aligned with him though, that was her strategy. The thing is, Russell didn't just play a strategic manipulative game. He was waaaaay too arrogant, too full of himself and looked down on everybody else. That's just terrible social game.
Yeah Russell. Survivor is a social game. You were great in strategy but you were very bad with others contestants :(
I don't know bout that especially in Samoa he wasn't arogant or unlikeable in front of the players everything he said/did he did it alone, with his alliance and during confessionals.... Probably only mistake he did was promising that kid final 3 in the end and voting him off and his FTC performance wasn't great
Philip Thomas He had a HUGE ego and everyone saw it a mile away.
@@philipthomas8928 it was said alot that he didn't bad mouthed in other people's faces but I can imagine that attitude he showed in confessionals surely leaked out here and there in the 39 days they lived with him.
@@itwasagoal Exactly. People respected his strategic brilliance but found him to be a slimy and arrogant person. The jury wanted to actively punish Russell going into the FTC, he had no shot at winning because of how he acted for 39 days.
@@mrjollyguy25 Unless he took along any combination of Jaison, Liz, Mick, and Shambo.
Spencer, take notes: this is how you campaign for a finalist from the jury.
to be fair though, neither of them really changed anything.
*neither of them really changed anything?*
Spencer didn't get jack shit for Tony. Tony got those, or Woo lost those.
Most, if not all, of the Galus, would corraborate that they were deciding between Mick and Natalie, leaning Mick. Then Natalie off-screen knocked it out of the park and Mick visibly fucked himself out of the running. When Erik made his speech for Natalie, that was the tipping point that got all of the Galus to send their votes to Natalie, no longer indecisive.
MessengerOfDreams
I think it was more because Mick's answers were bad. He was the Albert of Samoa.
Spencer's speech would make me want to vote for Woo just to spite Spencer. His speech made me hurl...and I'm a Tony fan.
This speech is fucking amazing. A perfect ending to the season.
This is a perfect example of how important jury management is on Survivor. Sure Russell played a great game to get to the end but he didn't care about the jury which cost him the million dollar. Natalie deserved.
One will often meet their destiny on the path taken to avoid it.
Russell is the greatest player ever, because of him you the strategic game is. Thing in Survivor
@@bradrockl8330 But as Boston Rob said, getting to the end is one thing but winning it is another. Russell's arrogance cost him in the end, not his strategy.
@@bradrockl8330 the strategic game was invented by richard on season 1, try again
If you are going to worry about jury management, how are you gonna make big moves? Reality is, big moves hurts people. It was either Russel was gonna play honarable and do no big moves or play cuttrought. And what is gonna win you the game? Play honorable or play strategic?
After this awesome jury speech, am I the only one that wants to see this guy come back?
+ljnkrabby Same
+ljnkrabby me two that speech made her won
+Mohamdou Issa her win*
Mohamdou Issa grammar you is best good
ljnkrabby he won't, unluckily. He help Natalie to win, and as production hates Natalie...
I didn’t notice it at first, but the audio editing actually heightens this speech so much at the end. As Erik closes his speech, the quiet background music stops, leaving a period of silence. Then, an uplifting tone puts a great emphasis on his final words to recap his big idea. Erik’s speech is strong, but together with the audio, it’s captivating and powerful - exactly what a speech is supposed to be.
My family and I binged watched the first 19 seasons during the pandemic. This speech by Erik is, by far, the best speech by a juror we’ve ever seen!
Which TH-cam channel please
Erik is a hypocrite, he targetted Russel just after merge and ranted at him all the times before merge. And now he is crying Russel didnt socialise with him.
I agree with you.
That was hands down the best jury speech in the history of survivor. Erik single-handedly picked the winner of this season. Brilliant.
I donno about that, I think the jury already made their decision before cause they hated how Russell put them in the jury even without the numbers, the problem with Russell was that he couldn't make them think otherwise or get their votes because he had a bad final tribal performance
To me it is the opposite. Worst speech ever. Eric is a bitter person like we've never seen before and that lacks emotional intelligence. Do you think tony wins if spencer doesn't advocate for tony in the jury. Russell paved the way for a better entertaining show and for games like tony to be praised at the end. Thank god players like eric stay on their couch nowadays !
I made this comment 9 years ago, FYI my opinion has changed since then lol
@@Chrisanthimum fair enough haha
@@Chrisanthimum what is ur take now
I’m not necessarily a Russell fan, but I think Erik’s speech highlighted his attitude that I hated from him throughout this season and was part of the reason he was voted out at the merge
Based af
And he honored the person responsible for his exit. It wasn't Russel who did that.
People are gonna say that Russel played the best game and he took Natalie to the top 3 as the goat. Yes, in most aspects Russell did everything in his power to get to the final 3. But that’s not where the game stops.
He may have outwitted and outlasted the jury but the last part of the game is to make sure that in the end, you get majority of the jury votes to win. He played so dirty that instead of the jury respecting his gameplay they were disgusted by it.
Sometimes you have to choose the lesser evil.
Natalie used Russell as a SHIELD to take all the hits for her while she played through til the end. That is a perfectly respectable strategy
Tbh this is one of my favorite jury speeches of all time!
- there is no set definition of "best game" or "deserving".
- there are no rules on how to play survivor or what voting criteria to have.
- this is a social game. if you rubbed the jury the wrong way, they will not reward you. it's not a reflection of them, it's a reflection of your incompetence as a social player.
- juries are comprised of human beings with values and emotions, not robots programmed to think a certain way.
Well said. If you can't master the social aspect of the game, and that includes jury management, then you really don't get it. Danielle said it best during HvV that it's clear that he was lacking skill in jury management. Russell should've known from knowing and understanding the game as well as he claims to but evidently he doesn't.
This is true, especially the last point. It's not completely the jury's fault if they felt hurt or betrayed by you, because they are capable of emotions. It's easy for us (viewers) to feel that the one who played aggressive should win because we are not in the jury's position at all. I wonder what would others be thinking if they were in that spot. I bet some will lose it too.
Exactly!
Erik, you sir gave a brilliant and heartfelt speech and one that hit the nail on the proverbial head! Everything you said was absolutely correct and I truly believe you helped sway some votes towards Natalie and away from Russell. And that sir, all by itself is priceless! Hats off and rock on, Erik and I personally want to say thank you!
Ell Ess Doubtful he actually swayed any votes, but he did demonstrate a full and total awareness of his rights, his power, and the opportunity he was granted to use both without any fear of repercussion.
If you want the jury to vote for your guy and not the other person, this is how you do it.
He was a bitter bitch
McPepper The man was bitter and incorrect, as were the jury.
Remember what preceded Erik being voted off? Kind of hard to take him bitching about Russell being arrogant seriously after that.
Erik just needs to accept that he sucks at the game and not be a bitter punk.
1:46 the look on Mick's face is priceless 😂😂
Always a bit confusing to me the way that erik continuously cheered russel from the jury at tribals but then says this to him at final tribal..
It’s because he was pissed off at Galu
One word: AIRTIME
also he was drunk lol
My favorite Final Tribal Council speech of all time.
I don;t know why but this speech makes me teary
not me....he's annoying and emotional and salty
Probably cuz ur a little bitch
@@NightmareSWGOH there's no need to be like that
@@lafingscarecrow and so are you
@@NightmareSWGOH okay how's about you shut the fuck up cyberbully
That was a very good speech, and I think it won her the game. He opened people's eyes (including mine) and he gained a lot of respect from me by the way he delivered it.
I'll just say this, after so long. To those people who still think Russell deserved to win, look at the final 3. Russell, Mick, and Natalie. A complete parallel to Fiji's final 3.
Dreamz - The earlier version of Russell, but was less cocky about his moves while backstabbing whoever he had to for his own goal of reaching the end while not thinking about how he pissed off so many people.
Cassandra- The earlier version of Mick. Both of them were unprepared for the game, as Cassandra couldn't swim while Mick wasn't used to being a leader, and they both gave very poor answers at the Final Tribal Council.
Earl- This guy is the most underrated winner ever, by far. Do you not notice how Natalie played a similar game to Earl? They both chose to align tightly with one person who got cocky with their moves (Russell and Yau-Man, respectively), and Natalie made many friendships and good bonds with people like how Earl had done in Fiji. Natalie never had to win a challenge, and let Russell get blood on his hands when the merge happened because he acted like a jerk to everybody. Earl never had to win a challenge, and he was smart enough to let everyone else make so many stupid mistakes that caused their downfalls. Natalie was a pretty nice girl who never got on anyone's bad side, and Earl was quite a nice guy who had many friendships with people on Ravu and Moto.
Who says that all you have to do is make incredibly cocky and backstabbing moves like Russell and Dreamz to win a million dollars, when socially being stealthy and adaptable to people is also an ass-kicking strategy that earned a guy all nine votes from the jury and made a girl get seven votes while neither of them had to sacrifice any integrity? If you never noticed the "Earl-ish" game that Natalie was playing, then that's shocking.
+Mira Izuna On the other hand, Yau-Man wasn't an asswipe to his fellows, and Earl never made anyone feel used. Earl only got rid of Yau-Man because he considered him far too dangerous to face the jury with.
Russell was an asswipe to most of his fellows (except the pair who voted for him to win) and made nigh everyone feel used. He never got rid of Natalie because he didn't consider her dangerous in the least to face the jury with.
Just in case anyone thinks Natalie and Earl were just lucky.
"Don't get me wrong, I thing Natalie was smart to hang the dumbass (Hantz) out to dry, but don't think it was as magnificent as Heidek or Earl."
But she clearly learned by them. Which is plenty magnificent on its own.
Natalie wasn't a great gameplayer, not a bad gameplayer but certainly not a great one. She was extremely lucky to be in the right position at the right time. Yes, Russell rubbed people the wrong way, but the name of the game is to manipulate people to get them to vote your way. Russell did many things that should of earned him the win, obviously finding 3 idols (2 without a clue) and winning the final individual immunity challenge to take out jury favorite Brett were huge, but the most impressive imo was going into the merge outnumbered 8-4, leading a small alliance to take out the other tribe. Not only did russell take himself to the end with his back against the wall, he took 2 people that he wanted to take to the end in Mick and Natalie. Sometimes the nice person deserves to win depending on their gameplay, but in this case Natalie was nice and lucky, and the lucky person doesn't deserve to win. Russell made all the major moves, and if wasn't for him his tribe would have been eliminated quickly.
Ryan Hardison Episode 8: Erik (the same guy that supported Natalie) was voted out. How? Did Mick and Jaison did something? Not (i mean, it's obvius that they did something, but producers didnt show that). Natalie? Yes, she was the person who convinced almost everyone to vote Erik out. But how? She used Her previus relationships with the Galu Women (specially, Laura) and the other Galu. THATS WHY SOCIAL GAME IS IMPORTANT, if it would had been, to say, Mick the person who had the idea, he would never have convinced them, because he didnt have a previus relationship. Anyways, ir was actually Natalie, the person who gave Foa Foa the numbers (knowing that Shamboo changed obviusly). She did the first hit.
What did Russell do? He was shown cocky, he was shown scaring everyone. He Even didnt believe Natalie that she convinced the Galu to vote Erik.
Hahahaha! Ignorant the reason why this bitch is sooo hated is bec of this. She is a goat
A jury speech for the ages!
No. Not even close
Yep
@@NightmareSWGOH u are miserable
@@anthonyjunk2197 truth hurts?
Loving the last part of Erik's speech ..
Just watched this for the first time since it aired. Was worried that this speech wasn’t as great as I remembered but it really holds up well
lot of people say that natalie is russells goat. but for me i believe that russell is natalies goat
Braindead?
Jarin You? Agreed.
And that makes you a complete and total moron
best jury speech!... always teared me up
0:27 'Nobody on that team had any guts'
Foa Foa clearly had the guts to make it to the end while your entire tribe turned on each other and got sent to the jury lol
Yeah that part of his speech didn't make sense. Foa Foa dominated and were ruthless about taking out the other tribe.
It kind of invalidates his speech because you can tell that he is full of bitterness.
Jeff probst himself said this jury were sore losers and that's why Russell lost.
lol. Sour grapes Hantz fans: too stupid to realize they're massive hypocrites themselves.
Galu literally didn't have the numbers to get Hantz out, who was the greatest threat to Galu. Whenever they did try to get him out, Shambo ratted them out. Galu was only up 7-5 at the merge because Shambo betrayed them (regardless of her good reasons for doing so). 5-4-3 Foa Foa would win any vote if they tried to flush the idols. That was the best they could hope for because Shambo was a double agent. Once Foa Foa had the majority, they flushed Shambo. Foa Foa wisely (?) refused to work to get out Hantz.
The "no guts" as I understood was a reference to their refusal to negotiate and make a move against Hantz and/or their pre-merge performance. Galu absolutely dominated pre-merge, only losing one immunity challenge. There's a reason Galu entered the merge with 8 and Foa Foa with 4. I don't think anyone liked Hantz at all besides Hantz and Shambo. And you losers, obviously, but you didn't get a vote.
@@encycl07pedia- There's more to having 'guts' than winning pre-merge challenges. Galu had a far more athletic tribe anyway.
They had multiple opportunities to pull an Edgardo vote and weaken Foa Foa without even needing Shambo. They didn't at F12 because they were cocky, and again at F11 because they plain suck at the game.
@@MrBen51309 The Edgardo move wouldn't work because Shambo would've told Hantz. Hantz plays the idol on the target and a Galu goes home.
If they sucked at the game, why were they up 8-4 or 7-5 at the merge? They were cocky because immunity idols had never been so overused before. Hantz excelled in that one aspect of the game: finding idols even without any clues. Nobody had done that before.
Honestly Natalie White is one of those winners that just kept growing more and more one me as the years passed. She is great, I love her. Such a nice person and didn’t play a bad game either, she knew exactly what she had to do to not get voted out by Russell and go to the end.
One of, if not THE, best FTC jury speech ever.
He highlighted what everyone else did wrong and what Natalie did right.
I still think it had a huge impact on her winning. Granted Everyone hated Russell, Eric highlighted what many would consider a "Goat" and made her look like a genius.
Did she make good moves? Yes.
Ironically her biggest move was getting Eric's tribe to vote him out.
Did she play an OVERALL better game than Russell? Not even close, I'd go as far as to say Russell Hantz was/is in the top 5 of pure strategy of all Survivor players.
I think he should've won, but after this speech and the highlight of her moves I can see why they picked her.
She understood her assignment
44 seasons and This is STILL the Best jury speech ever and also the best move a jury member has ever made. This speech is what gave Natalie the million dollars.
Except for the last part. Natalie's relationship building skills is what gave Natalie the million dollars.
I'd say I've forgotten her name, but in World's Apart, the one who said she harbours no hard feelings towards the final 3, and spent her whole speech campaigning for the jury to vote for Mike, I'd say that, and his apology to Dan, won him the season
@varisrevolver4061 yes that was a good one her name is Sherine
If this was Colton at final three and he didn't win I really doubt anyone would be bitching about bitter jury
Or he will quit
exactly !!! The jury was bitter wether you are a russell fan or not. pathetic!
The Russell fanboys are still butthurt after like 6 years lmao. He lost and deserved.
If you can't handle a jury, you will never win. Like certain people said here, alot of good players have lost (or won) the game due to the way they handle the jury.
Parvati is my #1 player ever. Though I completly agree that she deserved to lost over queen sandra. Sandra masterminded the art of jury managing and she is the queen and goddess for that reason
Twila/Chris is the perfect example. Go watch the Vanuatu season, worth it. the FTC is very good and lead a good example on how to handle a jury.
Commenting Person could use your wisdom.
Russell should've won. The jury was bitter.
@@AllRequired AllRequired could use simple logic.
bitter jury members are so shitty
Twila was the best FTC loser until Russell. Her final speech is still my favorite.
Easily one of the best jury speeches of all time 😂
A lot of people say that this speech swayed the Jury, but can anyone actually *confirm* this? Has anyone mentioned in an interview: "Oh hey, I changed my vote because of Erik."
Russell fans seem to like pointing fingers at someone *other* than Russell himself for him losing. Erik and Laura in particular.
Erik was never a off-putting as Russell. Even f you find him to be a hypocrite, that's not an excuse. A hypocrite' vote is still a vote.
"Laura was bitter beyond belief she even put up a vlog with her daughter trying to say things that Russell did to her that justified her vote" Lmfao, that wasn't a vlog, that was part of her and Ciera's Rhap appearance. That was after a time she voted for Tyson, someone who voted her out twice. Lol at you blaming her for not liking Russell. Just because they didn't *air* him going "yeah! yeah!" doesn't prove he never performed assholeries as such.
So jurors have a time limit of ten days to dislike a finalist? Interesting.
John and Shambo both hated heir tribe and were the only people on Galu that Russell maintained solid relationships with. So even though JT congratulated Russell, he didn't tae it like a man because he didn't vote for him? Is one's manhood defined by whether or not they cater to Russell Hantz?
Monica knew she was a sitting duck so for shits and giggles she pushed Russell's buttons. She warned him that he needed to put people on the jury who want to support him, but didn't take heed to it. So even though Monica congratulated him at ftc, she didn't take it like a woman because she voted Natalie?
Once again you're twisting Dave's thoughts and blaming Laura for Russell's shortcomings. Thanks for proving my point.
Russell can claim all he wants to that his shit including fucking around with Brett was "strategic", but he forgot or refused to accept that it's a social game.
1. Too fucking bad, hypocritical jurors are part of the game.
2. From what I saw, Tony clapped when Sarah was blindsided, but LJ and Jefra went along with him. Are you saying Tyson isn't a beast :p? And lol at Russell being humble. Just no. Compare his ftc to Tony's. Now that's humble.
3. John and Shambo were able to appreciate Russell's game because Russell formed solid relationships with only them. He wasn't a raging dick to them but rather befriended them. Don't pretend that has no factor in their votes for Russell.
4. "The heroes voted for whoever was most heroic" haha what? If by their collective definition of herioc you mean the person who they liked most, then go Sandra! Keep Changa alive!
5. You keep mentioning an online version of survivor that, unless I'm mistaken, you created yourself? The real survivor is not like that. Monica simply fucked around with Russell while simultaneously warning him. She lost because she chose to fuck around with Russell (unlike Natalie), but she seemed okay with her fate. Speaking of Monica, she came off very classy in her ftc speech. You calling her a bitter juror too?
6. How do you know Dave had zero animosity towards him? You going to twist his words around again and blame Laura for ruining poor Russell's game?
7. The jury is always bitter, so technically, it's always social. See how that works?
2. tony's ftc was a mess? the jurors sure didn't think so. trish was bitter at Tony. don't you remember her speech? so is someone only bitter when they don't vote for who sakeshi likes? the jury is who needs to be convinced, not viewers. your opinion of Russell's speech holds no bearing on the jury's (people who were actually there with him) opinion of him.
3. John hated his tribe and he and Russell's relationship was based on the supposed stupidity of the Galu crew.
4. Good for Sandra for appealing to Rupert then eh? Imagine Russell sitting next to Candice instead of Sandra.
5. Once again, let's blame Laura for Russell's jury answer to Monica's question sucking. Laura didn't influence Monica. Laura and Kelly wouldn't say hello to Shambo. Monica, the classy woman she is, did say hi to Shambo.
6. Ah, that article by that deluded Russell fan who think's it's logistically possible to separate jurors. So because a fellow Russell fan claims Laura magically changed Dave's mind, it must be true? Bury your head in the sand and stay there. Speaking of Ozlets, check out Heather Smith's article: "how important is the survivor jury system?" I cannot wait to hear your rebuttal to that.
7. Yes, there is bitterness in every jury, but not the kind of bitterness you are thinking of (the kind used as a cop out to make your favorite losing finalist look like a victim and jurors who didn't cater to your fave a monster). All votes are justified.
1. best is subjective, and the jury has no obligation to "get over" anything. sometimes bitter jurors need to vent.
2. Monica was a bitter loser?
4. You say that as if Russell wasn't going to win no matter who was next to him, as he did all he could have done. Sorry, but no.
5. You don't even know why Eric was cheering. He expressed disrespect for Russell before he was blindsided. Kelly was shocked about being blindsided, but Russell forgot that the object of the game is to get the human beings you blindsided to vote for you. And his smug smile didn't help. Russell bonded with Laura for the sake of eventually crushing her in the same manner he did Kelly, but Laura escaped that round having immunity. He failed to form genuine relationships with people. John was one of two people Russell didn't condescend all game. Lol at Shambo being a good sport. She had it out for Laura all game and she and Russell bonded over their dislike for her. Have you ever bonded with someone over the dislike of a third person? As for Dave, you don't know he was "pro Russell". You don't know he respected him as a person. Monica was not bitter at all. Stop acting like she was just because she cast a vote for Natalie lol. Jaison was bitter, and rightfully so. Funny how at the reunion he expressed that he was pro Natalie. Brett- how do you know he was bitter at ponderosa? He seemed particularly happy at the ftc. Because he voted for his friend Natalie, he's a bitter sore loser? Stay deluded.
6. you not liking the jury system doesn't mean you are a victim when you don't manage the jury for what it is.
7. Every single jury has had it's bitterness. Every. Single. Season. The way casuals use the word "bitter" is used in a way as if the vote of someone, even if they were polite like Brett and Monica at ftc,is somehow unjustified because they didn't vote for who those as viewers wanted to see win.
It's ridiculous how Natalie gets absolutely no credit for her win when she did more than so many people think. Right from the beginning she formed an alliance with Russell and when she realized that he was unlikable, she remained loyal to him and convinced him to take her to the Final 3. And when she was doing all of that, she orchestrated the blindside of Erik by making connections with the Galu women and convincing them to go forward with it. This move was REALLY important and meant more than any of Russell's so-called "genius" moves since it led to the eventual crumble of the Galu Tribe where each of them would get voted off one-by-one. This move not only got her further into the game but made her earn the respect of most of the Galu Tribe which was 75% of the freaking jury. Maybe she didn't make as much moves as Russell, but constantly making big, flashy moves with really no purpose like Russell did doesn't guarantee a win. Natalie made long term plans and stuck with them and made the right moves at the right time in order to get further into the game. Is she my favorite or even the best winner? No. But she is definitely the most underrated winner and definitely did more than so many people make it out to be.
Music,
Lol the only aggressive woman was Laura tbh
Only one member of the jury wasn't Galu: Jaison. Everything else PrinceBags said is spot on.
PrinceBags Russell formed the alliance. Go back and watch. Russell CHOSE to keep her in the game, not the other way around, he saw her as still useful. Also, its Outwit, Outplay, Outlast. That one move was all she had for Outwit. Russell still was far better strategically, and he performed way better in challenges and took out Brett by winning a challenge, not strategy, and he was the main socially controlled his alliance. He was more well rounded in all three forms of the game, where as Natalie wasn't.
ChristianChristianson "Offending Many Who Do Not Understand Survivor" and "The Fall of Russell Hantz," Part 1. When you get to part 2, Google "baby unicorn" and find that part.
AllRequired I watched that, already, Its funny how someone wasted god knows how much of their life to make not 1, not 2, not 3, but 4 videos to talk about him. It depends really on the perspective you look at the game.
He truly changed everything with that speech!
Such an insanely good moment, the way the music changes at the end is too good
Russell we got nothing in common even though when you played a idol I loved it
As a Survivor fan, I appreciate the various types of characters and players. Each bring something unique to the game. Fiji was a vile season, but Earl winning was satisfying to see, just like Natalie winning is satisfying. She was smart, sweet, and honest at Final Tribal Council. Ultimately there is only one winner crowned, but that person can never get to the end without other people's cooperation. How you engage and disengage from them determines your fate. How you play the game is perhaps more important as what you do to get to the end, especially if you remove yourself from the accountability equation. I love Russell, Rob and Twila. But they didn't factor the one element into their endgame- people. Total agreeance about Mick. He was a non entity.
iconic
This speech was aesome, shows how deep and intelligent Erik is
This is my favorite Survivor speech ever!
Honestly my favorite jury moment
The best jury speech since Sue Hawk.
Imho this is a tie with Trish from Cagayan for second after Sue
Making the jurors respect you is a part of the game.
Mick was never entitled I don’t understand why erik disliked him so much lmao
Or did I miss something
He's one of the hottest Survivor men in history... and this speech makes him even sexier :D
I like how Russel fanboys said he's bitter when Natalie was actually the mastermind of the blindside of Erik.
Erik didn't tell everyone to vote for Natalie because she "masterminded" his elimination. It's because he didn't like how Russell played the game. Sounds a little envious to me.
What I mean is that Erik voted for (and to some extent lobbied for) Natalie DESPITE THE FACT that Natalie was the main reason he got voted off (I didn't say he voted for Nat because of it). So I don't see him being bitter. If he were to be bitter, he would be bitter of Natalie.
The jury in samoa is bitter, because they vote against Russell and not for Natalie. However, a bitter jury is not a bad thing, you need subjectivity when you vote.
Yeah.. just because he want to vote againt russell. Not for natalie, everything he said about natalie just an excuse for his bitternes to russell. Even probts said that
Hawkthehunter but if they were Bitter with Russell is for something lmao
Man, you guys need to learn how to respect free opinion. If you don't like the way Samoa turned out, get off your asses and apply for the show. Erik played the game how he wanted to, and no matter what you think should have happened, it happened anyway. Get some balls and stop bashing the people who make this game worthwhile.
Quoting Mario Lanza. You immediately went up five points in my book.
This speech 😭😭 love him he is so smart 🤟🏾 I'm glad she won!!! 🖤
You surely aren’t smart to say Russel didn’t deserve this win is fucking stupid
@@Crow-nc1oo Well you aren't very smart if you think russell did deserve the win lol. He has no social game which is a crucial part of survivor.
Spencer's speech last night was the polar opposite of Erik's. Erik's logic was Russell's game was unethical, so he didn't deserve to win. Spencer argued Tony, no matter how much of a jerk he was, completely outplayed Woo. Spencer argued using logic. Erik was pure emotion.
well sometimes emotions are just as important as logic
um, both of them used their own logics, emotions, and opinions.
Clifford Rosen Tony wasnt a Jerk. Everyone loved Tony. In the other SIDE, everyone HATED Russell. No matter what, they played 2 differents games. Tony had good social game
Erik is awesome, I wish he came back for another season
No
I honestly think this speech is only a cut bellow Susan Hawk's Jury speech in Borneo. One of the most memorable jury speeches in Survivor history.
That isn't a fact, that is an opinion. What IS fact is that Russell got beaten in the final 2 twice, both times by a landslide, and the next time he played, when everyone KNEW about him, they voted him off FIRST. Oh yeah, he is a really good player.
I love the look on Mick's face when he starts to talk to him.
Guy is like... "Oh god, not again."
This is up there with Sue and Trish as one of the best jury speeches ever. Absolutely iconic
I liked Spencer Bledsoe's from Cagayan
Reed's "wicked stepmother" speech in San Juan del Sur was a great one.
Yes my three favorites as well! Sue, Trish and Erik!
Trish's barely even said anything, she just wanted to yell at Tony.
Erik had a short memory. For him to go off on Russell for being arrogant after the way he made an ass out of himself before being blindsided and becoming the first member of the jury.
My favourite jury speech ever
People bitter about Russel not winning should watch a different show where lying, manipulating, sabotage, and arrogance are guaranteed to be rewarded every time.
What a nice speech. I haven't watch the season yet but this makes me want to watch Survivor Samoa. Russel might be a good player but he is not one of the best. I think he is being over rated. He played the game to get to the top 3. But he never played the game to win it. I don't hate him or whatsoever. But it makes me wanna slap his face and shout that he is not the best palyer of the game. If Russel will play again and win the whole thing. I might change my mind and eat my words. ( I don't hate Russel. Its just an opinion.)
"He played the game to get to the top 3. But he never played the game to win it. I don't hate him or whatsoever. But it makes me wanna slap his face and shout that he is not the best palyer of the game." Doesn't sound to me like Jessie Ross is the one who "lacks a total understanding of Survivor."
Even though I think Russell played a more open, strategic, and controlling game (in my opinion), that's just good TV. The BEST player is the sole survivor whether it be by luck or by actually controlling and dominating the game. Spencer's jury speech about Tony was a speech that shed light to how most fans see Survivor (a strategic, unethical game of manipulation, lies, and entertainment). Erik's speech about Natalie & Russell shed's light to how a first time viewer would see Survivor (as manipulative and unethical). The difference between Erik's point of view and Spencer's point of view is that Erik's view comes from a "fan" who probably only watched Micronesia just like Russell. Spencer's point of view comes from a superfan who understands that this is a game and not reality. Even though I was not a huge fan of Spencer while he was in the game, I grew to like him outside of Survivor because he gives great insight and he really is one of those few superfans like Cochran and Richard Hatch who study the game on a daily basis.
You have it the opposite. Spencer's approach was that of casual sheeple who jump on gamebot bandwagons. Just because he calls himself a survivor "student" doesn't mean he fully gets it. That applies to Cochran as well. Those who understand survivor understand the psychology and human element of a survivor jury system. People who have a better understanding aren't players but include different "students" like Mario Lanza from the funny 115 and Heather Smith from survivoroz.
***** That's good insight, but can you explain what you mean by gamebot bandwagoners? I'm not saying you're wrong, I'd just like clarification so I can rebuttal it or agree with it.
TheBBallEnthusiast Sure. What I meant by "gamebot bandwagoners" (assuming you know what a gamebot is) is that is that some casual viewers tend to pretty much only like players who are flashy. Like, they base their opinion of a certain contestant as a person on how many idols they have, how much airtime they get, how many blindsides they are a part of. They root for whoever editing tells them to instead of forming their own opinions of contestants or liking them for their personalities and jump to cliché cards like "outwit outplay outlast", "the jury was bitter", "I don't like ___ because he/she isn't playing the game", "playing how you're supposed to", etc. Spencer strikes me as that very kind of fan, as does Cochran. It seems there are more of those people in the casual audience than those who stick to "omg! ___ doesn't deserve to win because they lied!" You might find a lot of both kinds of people on survivor's facebook page.
***** Very well said for someone who still considers themself with a "casual" status :)
***** speaking of Big Brother, let's talk about Evel Dick. He had ZERO jury management. He bullied them, tortured them, and never shied away from telling the world what he thought of them. Now, BB is also a jury-based show, and Dick still won. Some will argue that they rigged the game for him, but conspiracy theories aside, how can Dick win a social game without ZERO social skills, yet Russell can't? Russell isn't nearly as abusive as Dick was. Can someone explain?
this made me love him
I always laugh when I see Mick's face when Erik says "delusional entitlement"
This is when Russell thinks to himself..oh, shit. I lost this game. To the Russell supporters, you can't consider him the best in any season when, ultimately, to win the game, you must get the majority of jury votes.
doesn't matter he still was amazing to watch
That is playing the best game.
@@ohchip favourite player ever
Lol at people still thinking Russell deserving to win this game. Uh no. This was why Rob lost in All-Stars, this is why Stephanie lost in Guatemala, and this is why Parvati lost in Heroes vs Villains. They were all arrogant while also making some stupid moves in the process and you need to impress the Jury to win, whether they're bitter or not. They all failed (especially Russell) and hence why I believed Russell deserved to lose Samoa and HvV.
Thank you for this comment.
i vehemetly disagree. Parvati deserved HvV and she was never arrogant once. The jury system needs to be completely overhauled. In my opinion, the winner of the Final Immunity Challenge should be able to nullify one of the jurors votes, thus removing them from the game completely.
Parvati wasn't arrogant that season? Seriously?
Several players from that season have said that Parvati and Russell would often read JT's letter long after he was gone and just laugh at it. It cost her a lot of jury votes, cause it's a cuntish thing to do.
Also, Parvati said regarding JT "I can't believe this kid won Survivor!" Which is arrogant as balls because 1) JT is only a year younger than Parv, 2) JT played the only perfect game in the show's history and 3) The only reason Parvati won was because the producers decided to make Micronesia a final 2 after three straight seasons of final 3, basically robbing Cirie of her million bucks.
Stop complaining that game is flawed just beacuse you're fooled by the edit and your favourite player doesn't win.
Hate these bitter juries, Rob shoulda won Allstars, and Parvati should have been the one to win 2 seasons and the queen, not damn Sandra
Steven Sosa try reading shadowknight's comment again. you got this. you can learn.
The way she was the one leading their tribe to blindside him and didn't feel bad about natalie
What a great speech.
When Russel played the idol you were rooting for him, what happened?
Exactly what I was thinking. This guy is pathetic, Russell should've admitted that Natalie blindsinded Eric and this speech would turn into Eric saying Natalie is useless and Russell has his vote.
People talk about oh Russell fans are butthurt and the jury wasn't bitter and all that but this jury was just terrible without being a Russell fan.
Erik actually admitted he should have voted for Russell, and that his at the moment anger led him to make the wrong choice. It wouldn't be enough for him to win, but it would have made it 6-3 at least
Morgan kingsley I would like the source, and also some people we just following others and not voting Russell because others weren’t. I think Erik could’ve swayed some
For all the Russell fanboys who think this was a bitter jury let me ask all of you, who was responsible for making them bitter? A good player is not someone who can vote people out and make to the end, they have to also do it in a way that people still want to vote for them. All season you can see Natalie making great relationships with the people she voted out. Russell lacks the most important trait for a winner which is a social game.
Natalie early on said she would like to sit next to Russell because he rubbed people the wrong way. She got to the end with her goat, was responsible for the most important blindside of the season, and eliminated every single person she voted for. Sounds like a very deserving winner to me.
Funny thing is Russell himself states the exact reason he is going to lose the episode before the merge. He says he is keeping Natalie because she is great at making relationships with others rather than Liz who can annoy people. Essentially he chooses a "goat" who is well liked by others over someone who annoys others. Look up the Funny 115 to see a great right up of Russel's downfall both times.
That would be Version 2.0, #50.
THE JURY NEEDS TO GROW UP!! ITS A GAME SOMEBODY HAS TO GET VOTED OUT JEEZ
The jury was delusional and incorrect, actually. Natalie Do Nothing is the second worst winner ever, right above Failure-Twine.
@@commentingperson9554 lol calm down russ
@@jacobwright5589 Lol?
Natalie even said in one of her confessionals early in the season that her strategy was to let Russell be a douche so she can beat him in the end. I'm so happy she won :)
Brandon Tredway
It wasn't early it was late in game they just edited that way
You can see the look of defeat in Russel ‘s eyes at the end.
this was one of the best seasons of survivor ever! except for heroes vs villains!
Erik should have had a second chance by now due to this jury speech alone.
Absolutely not
You adapt, you survive; that's what Natalie did. And she won.
Glad to see good traits win over bad ones. Congrats Natalie.
Wow. Very moving speech. Erik deserves a second chance!
No
Hell no
This made me cry so hard. If I was there I would I have changed my vote to her
If you were going into that FTC planning to vote for Russell, then there's no way this contradictory and nonsensical speech would change your mind lol.
LOVE THIS SPEECH
erik just handed natalie a million dollars in this, his speech was well put
Such an amazing and complicated season.
1. Shame on you, jury, for not awarding the player who clearly played manipulated all of you and outplayed all of you. He overcame the massive 4-8 numbers disadvantage and used players as pieces, played idols, and beat Brett at the end to lead his alliance to victory, and yet you don't award that. What a lack of respect for the game.
2. Shame on you, Russell, for not reading the jury better. They weren't game bots like you were, they actually wanted to vote for someone whom they first and foremost liked and respected as a human being before considering gameplay. They weren't bitter that you beat them (you didn't even backstab most of them, as you were clearly against them; the two people you did backstab, John and Shambo, were even the ones that voted for you), they just saw you as a hateable asshole who didn't deserve the win.
3. Congratulations, Natalie. You deserved it because you were the only one to make it to the end AND know what the jury was looking for. You predicted correctly that Russell would make the flashy aggressive moves to take you to the end and make himself a douchebag in the eyes of the jury, so you stuck by him, making him believe you were the goat to drag to the end when the whole time you knew the jury would be on your side. Because you knew this jury was so petty, there was no reason for you to play a more aggressive game, so you played passively and walked away a million dollars richer.
How about that? Something for all sides to consider.
Here's one more: A modicum of humility would have gone a long way in convincing the jury to put their emotions aside. In fact, he might even have been embraced with a fervor not seen since Carrie Underwood. Alas, Russell didn't stop to think that the back end of the truck exists.
#3 in this sums up why Natalie won. She wasn't passive, she was subtle, and because she read the room correctly, she knew Russell would fuck himself out of first place, which he did. In response to point #1, Natalie is the reason why Erik was blindsided, which led to Galu crumbling since they lost their voting integrity. I will give Russell credit that he dominated strategically, but he again fucked himself out of first place because he took the wrong people, and likability is important. He was an unlikable douchebag from the getgo. Jeff even polled the jury at the reunion who would win in a Russell-Shambo-Jaison final 3, and he would have won. So he took the wrong people, which was his fatal error.
You forgot yo Say that Natalie is hot, and o obviusly would hace votes for Her no matter what's
It says nowhere in the rules of Survivor that you have to award your jury vote to the player who manipulated you. And the concept of outplaying someone is completely subjective. Russell doesn't get to define what outplay means, and you CERTAINLY don't deserve to define what outplays mean.
The beauty of Survivor is that players can vote for a winner based on any criteria they so desire. The sheer irony that you don't get that while claiming the Samoa jury disrespected the game is mind-blowing. You don't understand the basic concept of Survivor.
@@Cynicayke Oops late response, but whatever. lol I'm a fan of the game and can have an opinion. Look at how this game has evolved, more and more players think like me. Survivor IS a beautiful game and as you said, it's all subjective. And I believe it's about controlling the votes, and the fact that you are acting condescending to me for having an opinion is the real irony. I never said the jury didn't have the right to vote they want to, they can do what they want. I just said they don't honor this game in my eyes.
natalie totally deserves to win love her
Not at all.
If you can tolerate a stinky-ass troll like Russell for 39 straight nights without any loss of composure, you definitely deserve to win.
I love you Erik ❤❤
"Reality is Reality"
WE LIVE IN A SOCYTY omggg!!
What a cry baby.
Look at micks when erik sais accuses him of delusional entitlement. I would laugh to. He has no idea what hes talking about
Very true
Eric would of done the exact same thing Russell did had he of made it that far. He was just butt hurt that Foa Foa (Russell)kick the asses.
Russell had a HORRIBLE social game, which is what Survivor is. Nobody, and I mean NOBODY, wants to give you a million dollars if you call them names after sending them out that door. Natalie knew she could win as Russell was carrying a social player to the end and she made it to day 39 doing just that.
How is mick entitled he’s the chillest survivor
the best jury speech ever
Natalie > Russell. Natalie deserved the win. She owned up her game
Agreed.
imactheatre agreed one of the most underrated player of all time
And she is hot
Natalie was garbadge. Second worst winner ever.
Andrew Smith complete garbage
Best. Jury Speech. Ever. Period.
I'm pretty sure Erik won her immunity with this speech. The jury was bitter; plain and simple. Survivor is not a a purely social game and you all know it. If it were, it would be some MTV show that dies out after the first season. Russell outplayed and outwitted everyone. Natalie just sat in the corner and smiled.
Too bad that don't have the jury go up one by one to ask the final 2 or 3 questions about their game. Thanks Jeff Probst for taking the fun out of the final tribal council!
Nat
Imagine Russel as Donald Trump, Mick as Hillary Clinton, and Natalie as Burnie Sanders lol
Burnie Sanders isn't winning though.
Bdg1991 If he wins New York he might
+DekuSword Clinton leads by double digits and if somehow he wins New York it absolutely won't be a landslide because Clinton will still win delegates and she still leads in delegates and super delegates. Not to mention she only needs 600 more delegates to clenched the nomination. There's not enough kids in America to vote Sanders to the White House.
Bdg1991 Well if he wins New York alot of superdelegates will switch over, cause if he can win in new york he can win anywhere.
+DekuSword but what happens if no super delegates switch? Also it doesn't change the fact that Hillary is a huge favorite in New York. If Burnie can win in New York than Trump can win in Fla, Ohio and Pennsylvania by your logic.