LAST EDITED ON 04-28-08 AT 04:17 PM (EST)

Seems like this jury voted for the winner for all the wrong reasons.

First off, what are you going to do with the money was a rotten question. I am disappointed in Matty for asking that question. The winner should be picked on gameplay not how they decided to spend their winnings. Who has the right to determine how a winner uses their prize winnings? They won and what are they supposed to do? Give it all away? I don't think any of these people were rich going into the house. James said it best, I hope the winner just parties away the money...because no loser should decide how the prize money is spent.

Secondly, if I were voting I would give a little credit to the one who won the last two HOH's. Adam was there because Ryan brought him along.

There were no questions like, why do you think you deserve to be the winner over the other person. Maybe Ryan was just really bad in his jury appearance. But he could've said that it was a decision both Ryan and Adam made to get Nat out and that Adam tried to make himself look good by saying he voted to keep Natalie.

It just seemed to me that the jury voted on who screwed ME the least. Adam played the game to try to be the niciest. He bubbled around until there were only 5 people in the house. He made some bad decision's like trying to vote James back in. He also made a bad decision not to nominate James instead of Sheila.

The jury did not care about any of that because they simply voted who screwed ME the least. Honestly, neither Ryan or Adam did anything wrong to any members of the jury. These two probably played the cleanest game out of the final two ever.

What was the deal with Chelsea? That woman has issues.

On another point, glad anyone but Sheila won the %25,000. Big Brother had the vote set upt for Sheila. The fact James won was pure luck if you ask me, because anyone of the 6 other than Sheila were on even footing.