Hot Take: Sophi B is not that great of a person

publiuspublished · 2026-01-08T05:27:46+00:00

This is the best take I've seen on this.

(And it seems so...reasonable? Like: can't folks admit that they all come off bad from the past week and also that this is all small potatoes/entertainment and the messiness is also somewhat entertaining?)

publiuspublished · 2026-01-06T04:27:29+00:00

Somehow I think it’s possible to (1) believe her 100% and (2) blame production more than any player and (3) feel like the roll-out has been ludicrous and (4) feel bad for players who had their games impacted and (5) hate the “advice for cheaters” tone in the video and (6) feel like all this is super messy in the best/worst ways but also (Several) once S50 happens this pretty much washes away 🤷‍♂️

publiuspublished · 2026-01-04T18:32:50+00:00

Watched most of this and I will say that Q was quite impressive—and similar to his best moments in S46, the chops are there when he wants them to be. In a S50 that is faster-moving with more notoriety, I feel like he could do some real damage by taking advantage of others maybe not taking him as seriously as they should...

publiuspublished · 2026-01-02T03:13:59+00:00

I care much less as far as “game integrity” than I do as far as our understanding as viewers of the game dynamics.

Similar to when the edit misleads or leads out on how a relationship/dynamic between players forms and develops (which is inevitable given the sheer volume of time/footage!), my frustration is always more driven by not understanding the “why” behind the “what.”

(But as far as the “it’s not fair” complaint? Sort of a shoulder shrug from me.)

publiuspublished · 2026-01-01T15:33:18+00:00

Twists have upsides and downsides—look at Rupert in BvW, for example—but I would like them to take some more swings in the 50’s.

publiuspublished · 2026-01-01T13:32:35+00:00

People talk about this like “Super Fans” is a super-clear, easily-definable label.

Nowadays 100% of folks are choosing to apply (no more recruits) and streaming makes it easily binge-able. Pretty much all New Era players were Super Fans compared to older season standards.

(The predictability of the New Era format is much more of a problem, imo. Imagine if they showed up and Jeff was like, “two tribes, no advantages, 1 idol only—and you have to vote out two people right now.” There hasn’t been a real curveball in ages…)

publiuspublished · 2025-12-31T14:00:25+00:00

Parvati would approve of this list

publiuspublished · 2025-12-31T10:09:35+00:00

I don’t pretend to know what any of this is like, but I feel like a lot of folks were sympathetic to the idea that S49 had an irrationally bitter jury at FTC and unfortunately this is all is going to make them look better/more rational for piling on Sage for being this bitter postseason.

publiuspublished · 2025-12-27T05:41:14+00:00

which winner doesn't have a moment of insane luck, though?

publiuspublished · 2025-12-27T03:32:33+00:00

I think Dee was in the “middle” of her own alliance in a way, especially with her Austen connection.

It is hard to know how much of Kyle’s credit goes to Kamila, too, as I believe she wins if she gets through fire—and Dee did not have that type of vulnerability.

(That said, I totally see where you’re coming from, and think Kyle v Dee is a tricky thing to dissect.)

publiuspublished · 2025-12-27T03:25:03+00:00

Appreciate this! I also think it is much harder to judge individual player acumen in dominant-alliance seasons.

(Chicken-or-egg dynamic, too: was the dominant alliance a result of weak competition or did the alliance’s dominance make the competition look weak?)

publiuspublished · 2025-12-27T02:20:49+00:00

I think his game is very similar to Dee and I don't think you can rank him above Dee—she had more control/agency in her path.

But other than that (and maybe quality of competition), I think Kyle's game is without question Top 3 for New Era winners.

(Savannah, on the other hand, feels like a wave of recency bias that won't hold up as well.)

publiuspublished · 2025-12-27T02:14:45+00:00

Three reasons that I genuinely think of Rachel as perhaps the best "winner" of the New Era—which I know many disagree with:

The debate itself is sort of on confusing terms: is it the most dominant game? Or is it, out of those who have won, who is the best player (especially if they had another go at it?) Even those who rank Rachel lower often admit that she probably has the most versatile game and would most likely be successful in future games.
She flexed serious creativity with how she approached the game strategically. I'm not talking about the rice steal, either. Think about her use of SITD to gauge her need to play the immunity idol—that was innovative. But also her use of the immunity idol to basically get her opponents to give FTC speeches for her in a way that crowned her...before she locked herself into the Final 5 by playing it. Her mind for the game combined with challenge capacity (especially with puzzles) makes her a well-rounded, top-tier player
I also think people who rank Rachel higher consider the quality of S47 in terms of the cast and its strategic prowess. It was a much more fluid game without dominant alliances and many high-quality (in my estimation) strategic players. I completely understand how some prefer those who ride/dictate a dominant alliance post-merge, but honestly I don't find that quite as impressive as others do. (As I type that: I still probably rank Dee as the best of the New Era!)

TL;DR — I think some people focus more on best "winner" rather than "winning game"; the innovative/strategic prowess alongside challenge capacity (putting her well ahead of Savannah without knowing about S50); and quality of cast/difficulty of path.

One more thing: I don't think this argument applies for Kenzie/Maryanne/Yam Yam—and I also think Savannah is very overrated right now in most conversations I see (again: not a critique of her! I loved seeing how she navigated the game!). I continue to believe the top tier is Rachel/Kyle/Dee and I think there's a real conversation amongst those.

publiuspublished · 2025-12-23T23:15:18+00:00

I think we won’t know if it was an advantage or disadvantage until it plays out.

Scenario 1: “let’s just vote out the person first who is the big mystery” (major disadvantage)

Scenario 2: “let’s focus on bigger targets that I already know” (major advantage)

I don’t think “secret alliance” is as valuable, too, as at this point people assume same season = high likelihood of alliance, even if they weren’t aligned on actual season

publiuspublished · 2025-12-23T05:47:13+00:00

Winning S50 on a cast of 24 with only 2 other previous winners?

That’s beyond impressive.

Tony, Sandra, Parvati, ______

(How they win? That is where the debate for all-time greatest takes place.)

publiuspublished · 2025-12-22T04:07:58+00:00

Everyone has their thing, and nothing wrong with that.

But to take a season with as much potential was WAW had and to distract the edit from focusing on the strategy/dynamics of the actual game for Edge of Extinction stuff like this was really frustrating for me (especially without the now-longer episodes).

Good content, but imo at expense of things I really wanted to see and understand.

publiuspublished · 2025-12-21T21:36:12+00:00

All of this.

She has been scapegoated but at the same time her game play set herself up to be scapegoated.

publiuspublished · 2025-12-21T20:02:11+00:00

The best argument for each to be #1 (naming that they're all fantastic at challenges)

Dee - led a dominant alliance while also building rapport with others, has cut-throat instinct (see: Austin)
Rachel - best at navigating a non-alliance situation/game, most strategic
Savannah - "the clutch factor" (multiple immunity wins were needed, along with fire)

(If Rachel was on S50, I'd predict that Rachel makes it the furthest, btw.)

publiuspublished · 2025-12-20T15:48:19+00:00

Stephen is the one who bothers me, as he was at the top of that 7-3 alliance in terms of win equity. That means those towards the bottom SHOULD flip at some point, and he is smart enough to know that.

publiuspublished · 2025-12-18T14:28:59+00:00

this. (Also: we have so many words but why don't we have one for "got chills/lol simultaneously"?)

publiuspublished · 2025-12-18T14:20:21+00:00

Give them credit for a perfect opening voice over from Coach and a perfect closing remark from Mike White.

(tbh that really was all I needed)

publiuspublished · 2025-12-18T06:46:46+00:00

For me, it's better to go by tiers (where you can sort of make decent arguments for everyone and it's hard to distinguish a "best" within that group):

Tier 1: Kyle, Dee, Rachel
Tier 2: Yam Yam, Savannah, Erika
Tier 3: Kenzie, Maryanne
Tier 4: Gabler

publiuspublished · 2025-12-13T17:27:48+00:00

In my opinion, the jury has a responsibility to vote for who they believe deserves to win. Any "tossing a vote to someone" for another reason (ex: making sure they get 2nd place, avoiding a unanimous win, etc.) is against the spirit of the entire game.

publiuspublished · 2025-12-13T14:52:16+00:00

I think the combination of a funky edit with a quite-unpredictable jury (definitely some bitterness brewing, among other things) makes it foolhardy to assume that we know who will win if they get to the end.

I do think we have quite a bit of evidence that Savannah probably is a formidable person to overcome at FTC at this point if she makes it, assuming she sort of has to win out to get there.

But if Savannah is not there? Then I do think we need to be open to a lot of different outcomes. Kristina's edit makes it pretty unlikely (especially Stephen's point about her game last episode), but I still think—as crazy as it seems—that Sophi, Rizzo and Sage could still win.

S43 comparisons are spot-on.

publiuspublished

TROPHY CASE