Thread:BarBar/@comment-1734566-20150409013113/@comment-2091662-20150413191202

I don't think her winning challenges make her a good player, but people need to give her credit for winning key immunities (She beated Ozzy - the biggest jury threat, and Whitney -- where she was the last Savaii standing.)

And lol at saying she wasn't responsible for Cochran's flipping when SHE WAS. COCHRAN ADMITTED IN INTERVIEWS AND TO MANY FREAKIN PEOPLE THAT SHE WAS JUST AS INTEGRAL AS MAKING HIM FLIP. That's just adds to what I've told you, we don't see everything and we don't know what each player did. And even if she didn't make him flip -- why the fu** does it matter? Did Tony made Kass flip? No, and he even he knows that, but does it matter? Of course not.

Her gameplay was solid beacuse she enterd a five-person alliance that never once broke until the finale five. Albert and Coach wanted to keep Cochran out of pity in his own boot, but Sophie knew it was a bad idea so SHE WAS THE ONE TO STOP THEM. Same thing with Edna. One her finale five plan got to the end she knew which two goats she needed to keep. Again, I'm not saying this as a fan of Sophie, and even though she has flaws in her game she is definitely a solid player.

AND WTF DOES IT MATTER IF YOU "WIN BY DEFAULT"? All winners got "default" votes, and many winners considered to be "winners by the default" -- Parvati, possibly HvV Sandra, Sophie, and hell, even Richard got some votes because he was the lesser of two evils.

The entire problem with these silly little arguments is that you are misunderstanding the point of the game.