Is his much touted college paper full of logic holes and naivity? Did Cochran and Probst make a mountain out of a mole hill regarding his paper? Does it reflect instead a lack of understanding of Survivor? If his story one of growth in Survivor, why not release the paper to his fan base for open critique? He could say, "Look, I was a naive Harvard undergrad, but now I am an experienced Survivor who won the game. Probst over hyped the paper and I cited it at the time because my resume was weak. Here is the original, here is the grade I got, and here is what I now think about the paper topics"