But the jury was bitter because Paul was an #######.
No matter how bad of players many were, no matter how much Paul dominated, he had without question the worst jury management I've ever seen on the show.
All votes for Josh were really just votes against Paul. I don't think he beats anyone, not a single person on that jury head to head. Ok maybe Maven.
There's no respecting your game if you're an obnoxious ahole. To double down on finale night and refuse to own up to it just sealed his fate.
What Josh did or didn't do is irrelevant. It's all about Paul, just like the rest of the season.
It's a frequent pattern in BB. We've seen lots of "underserving" winners who made no real power moves and weren't comp beasts. They survive to the end and win because their opponent was even more useless or unlikeable than they were or they had a better social game.
Also have to remember BB has a whole ton of luck involved. Many comps are a crapshoot, including the final HOH. This isn't an objective based sport where most comps or points or goals wins the prize.
Josh was an "underserving" winner in that he rode Paul's coat tails to the end. But so did every person save Cody and his social game might be the worst ever. I don't see Paul as any more deserving though. He gets full marks for eviction and control strategy but gets an F for social game because he made everyone hate him. That's not the jury's fault. That's Paul's fault.
He gives honest goodbye messages to the evictees and answers the questions honestly and owns his ruthless play and I think he wins about 7-2. I see only Alex and Cody being stubborn enough not to respect Paul's game moves. But to lie to them on finale night after they know the truth? He deserved to lose.
|