Although both played tragically undeserving games. And Vanessa deserved it overall.
Liz, even though it wasn't strategic and was just alliances maintaining majority, made it to top 6 with her sister and showmance, and even if that was just luck/social skills, is still impressive.
Steve was non existent until like jury, and then didn't even make any moves just did THE PAINFULLY OBVIOUS THINGS TO DO. Like vote Vanessa out top 3 or break up JuLizTin. It's not even impressive, just logic.
I'm still bitter. To this day, Steve is one of the worst winners in BB history.
It would take me a couple minutes but I could probably come up with some arguments as to why Steve was a deserving winner over Liz in particular, although neither of them would have been (or were in Steve's case) a spectacular winner.
memphis_grizzlies
Taking Vanessa out, although an arguable great move, was just logic really.
If he didn't, he'd be an even worse winner. That's all he's got for him.
Taking out Julia/Austin, I don't remember, was also just logic.
He made the most obvious moves ever, it's stupid he gets credit for them.
If he didn't make those "moves" he would be an even worse winner/ridiculous winner/not a winner.
patrick319
I can't think of any tbqh, but... If you analyzed everything in the game, you could argue him playing an epic floater game and taking out the actual threats when they became unbeneficial to him.
