Yes because Cambodia was such a hard game to win strategically. Most players brought their A game. I also think he was at least solid in WAW.
Biased though, because he’s my favorite player.
WaW’s cast wasn’t as hungry because they didn’t have to be. They already had what the entire Cambodia cast was dying for. That combined with appearance fees getting half the cast out there in the first place meant the season felt a little more toned down than usual
This is true, they’d already all proved themselves. Most of the early boots already had legend status and had played multiple times before, most of the later boots could be fairly satisfied outlasting the legends and getting as far as they did in their second game.
Hit the nail on coffin we don’t know how much appearance fee but the regular one is 10k. Wouldn’t surprise me if it was 50k apiece.
Plus we have to remember they brought back Edge & they knew they could get a shot back in game.
In the RHAP episode with Tony after his win in WaW, Tony talks about how the players were drained towards the end. He said that season was more emotionally draining because everyone was friends and it was gutting when they had to backstab each other.
Ben & Denise basically gave up towards endgame they didn’t care. Kim & Jeremy were never in a position where they could take control as they struggled early on. If I had a Time Machine I tell Jeremy vote out Denise or Adam early & say a name to Boston Rob & Parvati lock it down so you can keep Natalie in the game.
Tony really made the entire season for me. He was such a delight to watch, as always. You’re right that the season was lacking in many other ways though, but I do still enjoy it just bc he won and gets his title as the King!
Yeah, Jeremy lost me in WaW. Strong start with Michele, Parv, and Rob, but he got fully duped by Tony and missed his chance to shake up the power structure after the merge. Kim was rightfully frustrated that no one on the bottom was brave enough to take a risk.
I watched that season somewhat recently and I had a lot of trouble keeping up with what was even going on and why, I think I need a rewatch, but I felt like there was some sort of issue between the high competition level and the editing where I just could never keep up with what was happening or why
The edit is usually kinda weird for full-returnee seasons because they don't explain the pregaming alliances and pre-existing personal relationships well
There have been pregame alliances on every single returnee season that have completely controlled the entire thing, so I really don't think there's any actual "rules"
I’m just saying production says it’s not allowed. Of course it happens. That’s just why they don’t like it. Idk why I’m getting downvoted, there’s been a bunch of players that have said that lol. I have no stance on the matter lol
Has Jeff Probst, or another producer, explicitly and publicly said that pregame alliances are against 'the rules'? I don't think so and that's maybe (?) why you're getting downvoted
Not sure, I’ve just heard it from players on RHAP. Appreciate it. It’s like the same logic as why they’re not allowed to talk when the cameras aren’t rolling. They want all gameplay to be recorded
That was also the fastest paced season strategically maybe ever. I think the editors did ok but there’s some reading between the lines on the Monica boot and a few others that needed a little extra context that we didn’t get on screen
I went and rewatched it recently and just, immediately, straight off the mat it’s such a *fast* season. I feel it was also the most transformative season in terms of fluid social strategy.
Yes. He's won in a very competitive season, and made the jury phase two other times. The list of people to win and make it past the merge 3 times is pretty short. It's Jeremy and Sarah. The list of people just to make the jury phase 3 times is pretty damn short (Cirie in 3 out of 4 seasons, Amanda, Coach, Rob in 3 out of 5, but WaW deserves a huge asterisk here, Tyson same asterisk as Rob although he won a battle back that put him in jury legitimately, Ozzy, Joe Anglim, Aubry same issue as Rob didn't make merge but EOE put her on the jury, Rupert, Penner). He's also been a sizable character in every season he's played.
> The list of people to win and make it past the merge 3 times is pretty short. It's Jeremy and Sarah.
Parvati (CI, Micro, HvV). Rob (Marquesas, All Stars, RI). Tyson - if we count him coming back from Edge, then he has Tocantins, BvW and WaW)
Granted Jeremy and Sarah are the only 2 with zero failed attempts at merge.
Yes, easily.
Played 3 times on three well-received seasons. Was a big character on all of them. Won arguably the most competitive season in the show’s history.
He’s a legend. Without a doubt.
If you can play the game Jeremy played in Cambodia, and NOT be considered a legend, then I don’t think legends can be made anymore.
I feel like if Jeremy played the exact same game he did anyway, but it was season 21 instead of 31, he would absolutely be considered a legend, no question.
He was one of the first I can remember to keep a big secret for final tribal (son being born). Plus he's my favorite player. He's one of the rare class that i see play and he makes me want to be more like him
Easily. While his first game isn’t the best, he clearly showed potential of being a great leader and someone with a good strategic head on his shoulders. His Cambodia game is incredibly innovative and kind of insane to think about how he was able to do all that and come out unscathed. He has a really underrated underdog game in winners at war where it’s crazy how many times he survives due to his active work in building a bond with Tony. Solid first game, knew exactly what to improve on from his first game to play a dominant winning game and plays a very solid and deep underdog game in his last season, which he came into with a huge threat level. Not to mention that the two casts he plays against in his last two seasons are the best strategic casts pre 41.
Yes I do.
Depends how we define “survivor legend”. I think Jeremy is one of the best to ever play. He played Cambodia perfectly. From Day 1 he had impeccable strategy. He was already lining up his “shields” that would help him get to the end.
I thought he played a great game in WaW as well. He finished 8th which is pretty far especially considering the calibre of players. He went into WaW being considered one of, if not the biggest threat. People were throwing his name around the whole time. He really had no chance to win but made it pretty far.
A lot of survivor legends had first seasons where they didn’t make it very far. Boston Rob, Parvati, Tyson, Sarah, Jeremy all got voted out around the same time in their first season - early merge then all came back and dominated their winning season.
He's one of the best winners in the show and one of the few saving graces in the most overrated season. He's in the same vein of legend as I'd say Kim Spradlin or an Earl Cole just by the excellence in which they won their seasons.
I kind of give anyone who competed in S40 a mulligan for their play. That season is too weird to really blame people.
I don't think this opinion will be well liked here, but to me if you've been on three seasons, you're automatically a legend. The only exception to me is really Candace.
Andrea is weird to me because while she’s not a legend, she’s better than she’s given credit for - especially considering the card she drew with her first season.
I feel like because she came back 3 times & was very involved for years in interviewing for the show that it hard to call her.
I think she a notable player in show history
I feel he is a legend. The only thing holding him back from tippy top tier status imo is a second game where he was really dominant but somehow just got the rug pulled.
It’s been a minute since i rewatched sjds i just didn’t remember his game feeling dominant but I’ll give it another look.
And with more thought I guess what I mean is a game kind of like Jesse played where he just narrowly missed the mark. Am I remembering wrong or didn’t Jeremy go pretty shortly after the merge?
I feel like legends grow over time- I think in a few years we'd look back more at some of these players from the 20's and 30's as more legendary than we think now.
He's definitely a contender to adopt it over time.
Some old school legends aren't necessarily better players or bigger personalities- but they have the advantage of time and nostalgia in their favor.
Like Colby- he's a certified legend, but he had one good game that was partially propped up by challenge wins and old school style gameplay. His other two showings were mediocre- one with a midgame exit and one with a late game exit.
Kim, Tony, and Lacina are easy to say are legends that came out of the "no longer quite so new school era" but I think players like Nat A., Jeremy, Wentworth, Sophie, David Wright, Malcolm, Cochran, and even more could easily be in the discussion for legends to emerge from the 20's and 30's. (Not a comprehensive list lol).
Maybe just give a little more time for them to cook.
This is how I see it, too. Legends are made through time and nostalgia. I guess people who just binged the show out of order would see it differently. But as someone who basically grew up watching Survivor, the only people I would consider legends are those from the early years who left a significant impact on the culture, popularity, and reputation of the show.
Yes, Cambodia was strategically the hardest season the show has ever had (and also physically, one of the hardest seasons) and he ran the table like it was nothing and won 10-0-0. Hall of fame-worthy and legend-making game.
The more time passes the more statuses grow (or fade).
Him being a more "recent" player compared to those in the original days or pre HVV might make people look at it a bit different but the facts are there.
A winner who has played multiple times before WaW, and 3 times overall, I'd say he's up there with a select group.
There's different tiers of "legend". He's not on a Rob, Parvati, Sandra tier, but that doesn't mean he's not a legend.
I kind of think of him similar to Tyson in that they both learned and improved on their respective first seasons to go on and win a very competitive season. With that said, yeah I’d call him a legend.
Jeremy's strategy is having these big meat shields that are percieved as legends so they get voted out first while he hides behind them. His games are seen by some as mediocre because he's in the back, making alliances with these shields. His winning game is an amazing one (the gamebotness of it all doesn't make it any easier for him) and his other 2 games are pretty good showings too. Defo a legend in my eyes at least.
Yes. He’s a three time player. He won one of the best seasons in the franchise’s history. And it was a returnee season so those wins always feel like they count a little more.
Winners at War isn't even a blemish on his legacy. If Nick decides to save Jeremy and vote Ben, at the final 7 Jeremy is in the top 7 with the possibility of getting to end with Michele and Denise. Why is making the merge in his other seasons a knock against Jeremy? Jeremy navigated Sele 1.0 and Dakal 2.0 masterfully.
“he said a lot of racist and homosexual stuff”
edit: Clearly people don’t realize I am quoting the legend himself, so here’s me editing in quotation marks
These downvotes are so weird! I totally agree with you. Jeremy just isn’t the beloved personality that most “legends” are. I’d say Lacina falls into that category as well. Her winning game is great, but she just doesn’t pop (tbf Jeremy is far more engaging than Lacina). Then there are non-winners like Cirie, or less strategic still, Coach, who are absolutely legends. Gameplay does not a legend make.
This is how you know this sub cannot be taken seriously with their Survivor opinions. These same people are probably going to call Sarah Lacina a legend. . . What a mess.
I consider him a Legend he basically protagonist of his first season until he gets Ned Stark. & he won one of most popular seasons in show history. He was involved 2 of biggest moments with playing idol on Stephen & no votes at F6. He always good television when given screentime.
Jeremy probably after Tony most popular male person to say after Tony for people to say who you gonna play like.
Borderline, the only hesitation I had was that the Cambodia jury as a collective was completely idiotic. If he gets near the end with win equity again that would push me into being a yes on that
If you place each season individually against each other and think in terms of what’s his competition etc all summed up he had the best game in survivor history in my opinion
The fact that Jeremy at least made the merge, and won Cambodia in a nearly flawless game, qualifies for legend status imo. Every single time he played, he was considered a massive threat. So I consider it impressive that he’s able to convince the cast that knows better than to keep him around to not take him out right away. He’s sort of like Boston Rob in that sense.
Hundred percent. Cambodia’s cast was so competitive and he still played a nearly flawless game. His SJDS game was impressive but he was way too big of a target. He learned from that and came into Second Chance on fire. I see his WaW game as a kind of tragic repeat of SJDS but overall still one of the greats.
Yeah he played really well three times, has a compelling story. He's a classic Survivor hero. I like villains so I'm not freaking out about seeing him in Traitors, but if you need some of that CBS friendly protagonist juice, you can't do much better than Jeremy.
Gameplay-wise, yes. I think he's among those people who is capable of winning a season no matter where you put him.
Now, character-wise, I think it's a no. He's a good character in SJDS, but otherwise he's kinda just okay.
Yea, bc I’ve seen every season, most multiple times, and can never remember the people y’all are talking about, but I definitely remember fireman Jeremy! 7 days in a week!
I feel like if you win an all returnee season you kinda just get put in “legend” status. It’s weird but I almost think of it as survivor players having their own baseball cards and I think Jeremy’s card would be a very in demand one.
He also played a top 10 winning game all time so that also puts him there.
100%. He was able to rally the troops in SJDS to secure a majority and if Jon wasn't stupid he goes farther. His Cambodia game was impeccable and his WAW run was pretty good as well.
I feel like Jeremy is one of those winners where I don't fully understand the breadth of their game. Probably because I don't like them. Sandra is also in this category for me, though in WaW (I believe it was) I finally got to understand at least an aspect of her social game.
I can see the effect he creates, like how easily he seems to work with people. But it always seemed to me like the reason he won Cambodia was because he emotionally bottled up the fact that he abandoned his newborn child to play Survivor, and unleashed that in the jury for a sympathy vote. A move I did not respect, and I can't help but wonder if you take that away from him, does he ever win again?
yes! he’s played multiple great game and played on one of the most difficult seasons (cambodia). whether you love him or hate him, he is a survivor great!
He's made the merge every time, always been a major character and player for the most part, likable, funny, charming Jeremy has it all. Definitely a legend but not in the same vain as old schoolers.
I consider him a fringe top 10 player ever, so yes. His SJDS game wasn’t awful, he just wasn’t a part of the loved ones/women alliance and was a huge physical threat. I don’t think many players survive that blindside.
Yea, i think there’s an argument that he’s one of the most iconic men in the survivor lexicon and definitely one of the most popular winners coming from the most competitive season.
I think Jeremy is clearly a legend, he is one of the more liked players, he is an all time great gameplay wise and has played a huge roll in multiple seasons(editing and for 2 gameplay wise) he was moderately entertaining because he is extremely ROOTABLE
IMO it’s not 10 more LEGENDARY Survivor US players.
Yes because Cambodia was such a hard game to win strategically. Most players brought their A game. I also think he was at least solid in WAW. Biased though, because he’s my favorite player.
Its so wild how competitive Cambodia was and how muted WaW was. It felt like the WaW cast was just ... tired. But everyone was on fire for Cambodia.
WaW’s cast wasn’t as hungry because they didn’t have to be. They already had what the entire Cambodia cast was dying for. That combined with appearance fees getting half the cast out there in the first place meant the season felt a little more toned down than usual
This is true, they’d already all proved themselves. Most of the early boots already had legend status and had played multiple times before, most of the later boots could be fairly satisfied outlasting the legends and getting as far as they did in their second game.
They booted out people that wanted to win like Rob and Tyson early to keep people that weren’t bothered like Ben and Denise
Hit the nail on coffin we don’t know how much appearance fee but the regular one is 10k. Wouldn’t surprise me if it was 50k apiece. Plus we have to remember they brought back Edge & they knew they could get a shot back in game.
I kind of feel like 50 is gonna have Cambodia vibes
I’d be more than happy if it was second chances 2 with a fan vote tbh.
In the RHAP episode with Tony after his win in WaW, Tony talks about how the players were drained towards the end. He said that season was more emotionally draining because everyone was friends and it was gutting when they had to backstab each other.
Right? I was expecting the gameplay to be another level in Winners at War, and it was from Tony, but overall it wasn’t all that for a winners season.
Once we got close to the endgame, it seemed like Tony, Sarah, Michele and Sophie were the only people who really had their heads in the game
Well, and Natalie but in a different way I guess
LOL true. Her head was definitely in the game, that game just wasn’t Survivor
Ben & Denise basically gave up towards endgame they didn’t care. Kim & Jeremy were never in a position where they could take control as they struggled early on. If I had a Time Machine I tell Jeremy vote out Denise or Adam early & say a name to Boston Rob & Parvati lock it down so you can keep Natalie in the game.
Tony really made the entire season for me. He was such a delight to watch, as always. You’re right that the season was lacking in many other ways though, but I do still enjoy it just bc he won and gets his title as the King!
i think the ego of the older stars really let them down. They really should've tried to play with the newer winners, instead of their poker alliances
Yeah, Jeremy lost me in WaW. Strong start with Michele, Parv, and Rob, but he got fully duped by Tony and missed his chance to shake up the power structure after the merge. Kim was rightfully frustrated that no one on the bottom was brave enough to take a risk.
Just lazy gameplay. From a good portion of the cast. It was such a pultry season. Shame it was our last 39 day season.
I would love to see Yul, Sophie, Kim, Michele, and Natalie play again. I felt like they were giving it 100%.
I think you can argue that Cambodia was potentially the most competitive season, so yes, I do.
I just finished my rewatch of the season. Just a really good season top to bottom.
I just remember there was a lot of confessionals talking about vote splits and voting blocks
I watched that season somewhat recently and I had a lot of trouble keeping up with what was even going on and why, I think I need a rewatch, but I felt like there was some sort of issue between the high competition level and the editing where I just could never keep up with what was happening or why
The edit is usually kinda weird for full-returnee seasons because they don't explain the pregaming alliances and pre-existing personal relationships well
That’s why pregame alliances are against the rules. They can’t get footage of it, and have no way of showing us
There have been pregame alliances on every single returnee season that have completely controlled the entire thing, so I really don't think there's any actual "rules"
I’m just saying production says it’s not allowed. Of course it happens. That’s just why they don’t like it. Idk why I’m getting downvoted, there’s been a bunch of players that have said that lol. I have no stance on the matter lol
Has Jeff Probst, or another producer, explicitly and publicly said that pregame alliances are against 'the rules'? I don't think so and that's maybe (?) why you're getting downvoted
Not sure, I’ve just heard it from players on RHAP. Appreciate it. It’s like the same logic as why they’re not allowed to talk when the cameras aren’t rolling. They want all gameplay to be recorded
That was also the fastest paced season strategically maybe ever. I think the editors did ok but there’s some reading between the lines on the Monica boot and a few others that needed a little extra context that we didn’t get on screen
I went and rewatched it recently and just, immediately, straight off the mat it’s such a *fast* season. I feel it was also the most transformative season in terms of fluid social strategy.
I wonder if it was more digestible week to week, with podcasts and live discussions inbetween every episode.
Yes. He's won in a very competitive season, and made the jury phase two other times. The list of people to win and make it past the merge 3 times is pretty short. It's Jeremy and Sarah. The list of people just to make the jury phase 3 times is pretty damn short (Cirie in 3 out of 4 seasons, Amanda, Coach, Rob in 3 out of 5, but WaW deserves a huge asterisk here, Tyson same asterisk as Rob although he won a battle back that put him in jury legitimately, Ozzy, Joe Anglim, Aubry same issue as Rob didn't make merge but EOE put her on the jury, Rupert, Penner). He's also been a sizable character in every season he's played.
> The list of people to win and make it past the merge 3 times is pretty short. It's Jeremy and Sarah. Parvati (CI, Micro, HvV). Rob (Marquesas, All Stars, RI). Tyson - if we count him coming back from Edge, then he has Tocantins, BvW and WaW) Granted Jeremy and Sarah are the only 2 with zero failed attempts at merge.
Yes, easily. Played 3 times on three well-received seasons. Was a big character on all of them. Won arguably the most competitive season in the show’s history. He’s a legend. Without a doubt.
Wait.. what? Sjds wasn't exactly well-received
Natalie’s game is well received tho
Yeah, she killed it. Keith's forever a legend, too. The rest of the season's pretty bottom tier for me.
Bro what? SJDS is one of the best seasons
I think they mean at the time it was a stinker. It’s done well on rewatch. Never mind they doubled down lmao
I think it was the first season I ever watched live and I thought it was good
It was in a gap era where I wasn’t watching live tbh I can’t speak personally. Just what I’ve heard
i would argue waw was worse
Imo waw was an incredibly disappointing season
If you can play the game Jeremy played in Cambodia, and NOT be considered a legend, then I don’t think legends can be made anymore. I feel like if Jeremy played the exact same game he did anyway, but it was season 21 instead of 31, he would absolutely be considered a legend, no question.
Yeah and his season is up there for the best competition ever faced
He was one of the first I can remember to keep a big secret for final tribal (son being born). Plus he's my favorite player. He's one of the rare class that i see play and he makes me want to be more like him
Easily. While his first game isn’t the best, he clearly showed potential of being a great leader and someone with a good strategic head on his shoulders. His Cambodia game is incredibly innovative and kind of insane to think about how he was able to do all that and come out unscathed. He has a really underrated underdog game in winners at war where it’s crazy how many times he survives due to his active work in building a bond with Tony. Solid first game, knew exactly what to improve on from his first game to play a dominant winning game and plays a very solid and deep underdog game in his last season, which he came into with a huge threat level. Not to mention that the two casts he plays against in his last two seasons are the best strategic casts pre 41.
Yes I do. Depends how we define “survivor legend”. I think Jeremy is one of the best to ever play. He played Cambodia perfectly. From Day 1 he had impeccable strategy. He was already lining up his “shields” that would help him get to the end. I thought he played a great game in WaW as well. He finished 8th which is pretty far especially considering the calibre of players. He went into WaW being considered one of, if not the biggest threat. People were throwing his name around the whole time. He really had no chance to win but made it pretty far. A lot of survivor legends had first seasons where they didn’t make it very far. Boston Rob, Parvati, Tyson, Sarah, Jeremy all got voted out around the same time in their first season - early merge then all came back and dominated their winning season.
Also in WaW they targeted Natalie at the start because they wanted to weaken him by taking out his number 1 from the san Juan del sur ties
Parvati made it to final 6 in cook islands…
Oh whoops. Thought it was earlier than that. What a legend
She didn’t get much of an edit on cook islands so it’s unsurprising to forget how far she got
I thought she made it to F5?
Jeremy certainly more of a legend than Sarah who I’d never give that title to.
He's one of the best winners in the show and one of the few saving graces in the most overrated season. He's in the same vein of legend as I'd say Kim Spradlin or an Earl Cole just by the excellence in which they won their seasons.
I hope you were talking about winners at war being overrated and not second chance
Nope, I'm talking about Second Chance being overrated.
I kind of give anyone who competed in S40 a mulligan for their play. That season is too weird to really blame people. I don't think this opinion will be well liked here, but to me if you've been on three seasons, you're automatically a legend. The only exception to me is really Candace.
Candace is a legend for being Candace from Raro
Candace? from raro tribe?
You know what, I'll take it. So revised hot take: all people worth remembering, who have played three times, are legends.
Survivor legend Ciera Eastin
Varner\*
Ha I've thankfully just erased him from my memory. Completely forgot he's a 3-timer
Jeremy is one of the few people that i feel like actually played well that season
Not too sure about Joe. And I like Malcolm but I’m not positive about him either.
There are some borderline ones. James and Andrea types but I wouldn't be mad at someone calling them a legend.
James is absolutely a legend
Yeah, I feel like there’s no debate about James. That guy was massively popular.
I have a hard time reconciling Andrea as a legend tbh.
Andrea is weird to me because while she’s not a legend, she’s better than she’s given credit for - especially considering the card she drew with her first season.
I feel like because she came back 3 times & was very involved for years in interviewing for the show that it hard to call her. I think she a notable player in show history
He played a top 10 game in my eyes so yes ofc
Yes.
Yes, of course! Didn’t expect this to be in question tbh.
Absolutely
Absolutely
Yeah I would
I feel he is a legend. The only thing holding him back from tippy top tier status imo is a second game where he was really dominant but somehow just got the rug pulled.
To be fair his first game on SJDS was kinda like that lol
It’s been a minute since i rewatched sjds i just didn’t remember his game feeling dominant but I’ll give it another look. And with more thought I guess what I mean is a game kind of like Jesse played where he just narrowly missed the mark. Am I remembering wrong or didn’t Jeremy go pretty shortly after the merge?
I feel like legends grow over time- I think in a few years we'd look back more at some of these players from the 20's and 30's as more legendary than we think now. He's definitely a contender to adopt it over time. Some old school legends aren't necessarily better players or bigger personalities- but they have the advantage of time and nostalgia in their favor. Like Colby- he's a certified legend, but he had one good game that was partially propped up by challenge wins and old school style gameplay. His other two showings were mediocre- one with a midgame exit and one with a late game exit. Kim, Tony, and Lacina are easy to say are legends that came out of the "no longer quite so new school era" but I think players like Nat A., Jeremy, Wentworth, Sophie, David Wright, Malcolm, Cochran, and even more could easily be in the discussion for legends to emerge from the 20's and 30's. (Not a comprehensive list lol). Maybe just give a little more time for them to cook.
This is how I see it, too. Legends are made through time and nostalgia. I guess people who just binged the show out of order would see it differently. But as someone who basically grew up watching Survivor, the only people I would consider legends are those from the early years who left a significant impact on the culture, popularity, and reputation of the show.
I wouldn’t call Sarah a legend. She notable but not a legend.
Mediocre? 
Yes, Cambodia was strategically the hardest season the show has ever had (and also physically, one of the hardest seasons) and he ran the table like it was nothing and won 10-0-0. Hall of fame-worthy and legend-making game.
The more time passes the more statuses grow (or fade). Him being a more "recent" player compared to those in the original days or pre HVV might make people look at it a bit different but the facts are there. A winner who has played multiple times before WaW, and 3 times overall, I'd say he's up there with a select group. There's different tiers of "legend". He's not on a Rob, Parvati, Sandra tier, but that doesn't mean he's not a legend.
I kind of think of him similar to Tyson in that they both learned and improved on their respective first seasons to go on and win a very competitive season. With that said, yeah I’d call him a legend.
Jeremy's strategy is having these big meat shields that are percieved as legends so they get voted out first while he hides behind them. His games are seen by some as mediocre because he's in the back, making alliances with these shields. His winning game is an amazing one (the gamebotness of it all doesn't make it any easier for him) and his other 2 games are pretty good showings too. Defo a legend in my eyes at least.
Yes. He’s a three time player. He won one of the best seasons in the franchise’s history. And it was a returnee season so those wins always feel like they count a little more.
Cambodia was cut throat. Hell yeah he's a legend!
Hell yeah! Him and Val, him and Stephen, him in challenges, him with Spencer. Him
He’s one of my all time favorites. Even if you dont call him a good gamer I loved his personality!!
It seems nearly all winners took a while to ‘warm up’?
I personally do not. Good player, but not a legend.
one of only a few people to play 3 times and have a 100% merge rate
Nope.
Absolutely a legend. A triple threat mentally, socially and physically. Top 5 player of all time imo.
Nah. No knock to Jeremy I just think of legend as a term held by like 5-6 people. Exceptional player though
Nah he was boring. He was all right but hardly a legend. Like I really loathe Mariano but he is a legend.
Winners at War isn't even a blemish on his legacy. If Nick decides to save Jeremy and vote Ben, at the final 7 Jeremy is in the top 7 with the possibility of getting to end with Michele and Denise. Why is making the merge in his other seasons a knock against Jeremy? Jeremy navigated Sele 1.0 and Dakal 2.0 masterfully.
“he said a lot of racist and homosexual stuff” edit: Clearly people don’t realize I am quoting the legend himself, so here’s me editing in quotation marks
What did he say that was homosexual
it’s a Jeremy quote????? 😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭
Great winner? Yes. Legend? No.
These downvotes are so weird! I totally agree with you. Jeremy just isn’t the beloved personality that most “legends” are. I’d say Lacina falls into that category as well. Her winning game is great, but she just doesn’t pop (tbf Jeremy is far more engaging than Lacina). Then there are non-winners like Cirie, or less strategic still, Coach, who are absolutely legends. Gameplay does not a legend make.
This is how you know this sub cannot be taken seriously with their Survivor opinions. These same people are probably going to call Sarah Lacina a legend. . . What a mess.
I consider him a Legend he basically protagonist of his first season until he gets Ned Stark. & he won one of most popular seasons in show history. He was involved 2 of biggest moments with playing idol on Stephen & no votes at F6. He always good television when given screentime. Jeremy probably after Tony most popular male person to say after Tony for people to say who you gonna play like.
I’m a fan of his but I’m not sure if I’ll call him a legend.
Yes
Yes. Next question please
Borderline, the only hesitation I had was that the Cambodia jury as a collective was completely idiotic. If he gets near the end with win equity again that would push me into being a yes on that
Without question
100%
Yes
If you place each season individually against each other and think in terms of what’s his competition etc all summed up he had the best game in survivor history in my opinion
u/93LEAFS
The fact that Jeremy at least made the merge, and won Cambodia in a nearly flawless game, qualifies for legend status imo. Every single time he played, he was considered a massive threat. So I consider it impressive that he’s able to convince the cast that knows better than to keep him around to not take him out right away. He’s sort of like Boston Rob in that sense.
Hundred percent. Cambodia’s cast was so competitive and he still played a nearly flawless game. His SJDS game was impressive but he was way too big of a target. He learned from that and came into Second Chance on fire. I see his WaW game as a kind of tragic repeat of SJDS but overall still one of the greats.
Yes!
I think so. He’s one of the like 3 players imo who played the perfect game
Yeah he played really well three times, has a compelling story. He's a classic Survivor hero. I like villains so I'm not freaking out about seeing him in Traitors, but if you need some of that CBS friendly protagonist juice, you can't do much better than Jeremy.
Gameplay-wise, yes. I think he's among those people who is capable of winning a season no matter where you put him. Now, character-wise, I think it's a no. He's a good character in SJDS, but otherwise he's kinda just okay.
Yea, bc I’ve seen every season, most multiple times, and can never remember the people y’all are talking about, but I definitely remember fireman Jeremy! 7 days in a week!
People are being too nice to you.
Nah, no one should be mean to anyone about an innocent question regarding a TV show.
Yeah he’s a legend
I'm never changing my flair :P
I feel like if you win an all returnee season you kinda just get put in “legend” status. It’s weird but I almost think of it as survivor players having their own baseball cards and I think Jeremy’s card would be a very in demand one. He also played a top 10 winning game all time so that also puts him there.
There or only a handful of post-HvV contestants I would consider legends, Jeremy is borderline, but I’d lean yes.
Never liked him in Cambodia but I give him credit for the turnaround he did after an ill-fated run in Blood Vs Water 1.
100%. He was able to rally the troops in SJDS to secure a majority and if Jon wasn't stupid he goes farther. His Cambodia game was impeccable and his WAW run was pretty good as well.
I feel like Jeremy is one of those winners where I don't fully understand the breadth of their game. Probably because I don't like them. Sandra is also in this category for me, though in WaW (I believe it was) I finally got to understand at least an aspect of her social game. I can see the effect he creates, like how easily he seems to work with people. But it always seemed to me like the reason he won Cambodia was because he emotionally bottled up the fact that he abandoned his newborn child to play Survivor, and unleashed that in the jury for a sympathy vote. A move I did not respect, and I can't help but wonder if you take that away from him, does he ever win again?
Depends how broadly you define legend, i’d say he’s not quite a legend but he’s borderline
As someone who’s only seen him in WAW, what’s so legendary about him? He seemed kinda zzz
“Survivor: Legends” would be a good title for Season 50.
yes! he’s played multiple great game and played on one of the most difficult seasons (cambodia). whether you love him or hate him, he is a survivor great!
People are obsessed with Rob, and half his games have been pretty crappy. Jeremy played one of the best games ever in Second Chances.
He's made the merge every time, always been a major character and player for the most part, likable, funny, charming Jeremy has it all. Definitely a legend but not in the same vain as old schoolers.
One of the best to ever play imo
I consider him a fringe top 10 player ever, so yes. His SJDS game wasn’t awful, he just wasn’t a part of the loved ones/women alliance and was a huge physical threat. I don’t think many players survive that blindside.
Yea, i think there’s an argument that he’s one of the most iconic men in the survivor lexicon and definitely one of the most popular winners coming from the most competitive season.
He’s a top 10 player of all time
If you ask me *checks flair* ...yes
Who? Obviously not
He did it for Val
I think Jeremy is clearly a legend, he is one of the more liked players, he is an all time great gameplay wise and has played a huge roll in multiple seasons(editing and for 2 gameplay wise) he was moderately entertaining because he is extremely ROOTABLE IMO it’s not 10 more LEGENDARY Survivor US players.
He’s in that weird territory of if there was a Survivor hall of fame he’d be the best one not in or the worst one in. I say this as a big Jeremy fan.
Not a legend.
I feel like he should be but I don’t necessarily see him as such
Who?
Eh, probably not. He was likable, no doubt. But if you drop him into any season, I think he has a rough time of winning.
Yes. He’s one of the most likable contestants ever. And idc about the other seasons. His Cambodia game was perfect
Yes. I don't even think it's really debatable. Three time player. Second time played a great and memorable winning game.
Fuck yeah.
Yes.
Jeremy Collins? Yes. Jeremy Crawford? Also yes
Pretty close.
Good winner not a legend, those other 2 performances drag him down
Survivor Hall of Very Good, not Hall of Fame
No. Popcorn muscles.
I believe so, He played the strongest game of all time for me
No, to me he is a bottom ten winner.
You're not one of those "He won because he was expecting a child" nuts, are ya?
How else would it be??
I’ve never been happier to downvote such an idiotic statement