Jeff Probst open to a Survivor: The Next Generation season
The host has discussed a season featuring the offspring of former players. And there’s a role for the parents, too.

Survivor has been on TV for a loooooooooong time — 23 years, in fact. Players from early seasons have grown up, gotten married, and had children, and those with kids who watched them on TV as toddlers have seen their little ones grow into young adults.

Over the years, we've seen two of those Survivor children make it onto the show to play alongside their parents. Survivor: The Australian Outback winner Tina Wesson returned with daughter Katie Collins for the Survivor: Blood vs. Water season, which also featured Survivor: One World's Laura Morett and her daughter, Ciera Eastin. (In a definitive win for Water, Eastin actually helped vote her mother out of the game.)

In addition, two-time American champion Sandra Diaz-Twine played on the Australian Survivor: Blood vs. Water season with her daughter, Nina. Nina then returned for the current Australian Survivor: Heroes v. Villains, being voted out in fifth place.

So what about a season filled only with the offspring of famous Survivor players? That question was posed to host Jeff Probst on the latest episode of his On Fire with Jeff Probst podcast. During the episode, producer Jay Wolff asked a mailbag question from a fan: "Many of the original notable Survivor players now have kids that are old enough to play. While a few of these kids have shown up in Blood vs. Water, would you like to see a full Survivor: The Next Generation at some point?"

After being interrupted by his dog, Stevie, Prost revealed that this is actually a concept that has been discussed amongst the show's creative team. "Believe it or not, we have talked to a lot of former players about their children being on the show," said Probst. "We actually kind of looked into it at one point, but we didn't really have enough."

It's not just a mere issue of numbers, though. The host also says that, while the hook of a second-generation season is undeniable, you still have to make sure the cast members can shine on their own as individuals beyond the affiliation to their famous mom or dad.

"You'd still have to do the same process.," says Probst. "You still have to invest in them, they have to go through the same casting process. You want compelling people. They have to go through psychology and all of that."

If it sounds like Probst is a bit skeptical of the idea, perhaps because there are simply not enough compelling offspring personalities to choose from, that is certainly a situation that could change with time. "I would say if we are on long enough that is something that would be really fun," says the host. "And then you find a way to incorporate their parents who played the game in some sort of mentor role, or something like that. A loved one! A reverse loved one!" (Hope they have room on Island of the Idols for a few more statues.)

To hear tons more behind-the-scenes intel, including the entire process of creating a Survivor challenge, check out On Fire with Jeff Probst.

Source: https://ew.com/tv/survivor-jeff-probst-next-generation-season/

--
Brian

On Wednesday, March 22, 2023 at 8:15:05 PM UTC-7, Brian Smith wrote:

> Jeff Probst open to a Survivor: The Next Generation season

> "And then you find a way to incorporate their parents who played the game in some sort of mentor role, or something like that. A loved one! A reverse loved one!" (Hope they have room >on Island of the Idols for a few more statues.)

God no!

zeppo wrote:

>> "And then you find a way to incorporate their parents who
>> played the game in some sort of mentor role, or something
>> like that. A loved one! A reverse loved one!" (Hope they
>> have room >on Island of the Idols for a few more statues.)
>
> God no!

Sounds like yet another meta-Survivor season which has not
been that interesting in the past, but I'll watch it, for
sure ...

This season BTW, it doesn't have a name or title?
Just Survivor 44? If there is no new idea to it, I guess it's
just as good not to call it anything in particular. "Survivor
forty-four" has a nice ring to it, as well.

--
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

On Thursday, March 23, 2023 at 2:50:08 PM UTC-6, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> zeppo wrote:
>
> >> "And then you find a way to incorporate their parents who
> >> played the game in some sort of mentor role, or something
> >> like that. A loved one! A reverse loved one!" (Hope they
> >> have room >on Island of the Idols for a few more statues.)
> >
> > God no!
> Sounds like yet another meta-Survivor season which has not
> been that interesting in the past, but I'll watch it, for
> sure ...
>
> This season BTW, it doesn't have a name or title?
> Just Survivor 44? If there is no new idea to it, I guess it's
> just as good not to call it anything in particular. "Survivor
> forty-four" has a nice ring to it, as well.
>
> --
> underground experts united
> https://dataswamp.org/~incal

New Survivor only uses numbers to identify a season. That's why S41 onward haven't had names. BB does the same thing but with live feeds it's much easier to identify seasons.

--
Brian

On Thursday, March 23, 2023 at 12:48:05 PM UTC-6, zeppo wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 22, 2023 at 8:15:05 PM UTC-7, Brian Smith wrote:
>
> > Jeff Probst open to a Survivor: The Next Generation season
> > "And then you find a way to incorporate their parents who played the game in some sort of mentor role, or something like that. A loved one! A reverse loved one!" (Hope they have room >on Island of the Idols for a few more statues.)
> God no!

Hey, Boston Rob has been training the girls to play Survivor for years. That alone will convince Jeff to do such a season.

--
Brian

On Thursday, March 23, 2023 at 3:54:52 PM UTC-7, Brian Smith wrote:

> Hey, Boston Rob has been training the girls to play Survivor for years. That alone will convince Jeff to do such a season.

So that gives Probst four players for his "next generation" season. He just needs 14 more. :-)

On Thursday, March 23, 2023 at 5:20:23 PM UTC-6, zeppo wrote:
> On Thursday, March 23, 2023 at 3:54:52 PM UTC-7, Brian Smith wrote:
>
> > Hey, Boston Rob has been training the girls to play Survivor for years. That alone will convince Jeff to do such a season.
> So that gives Probst four players for his "next generation" season. He just needs 14 more. :-)

If they include parents as players and his favorite three tribe crap, they would only need eight more kids. IIRC, Ciera has a number of siblings. I wouldn't mind seeing Laura play again.

--
Brian

Brian Smith wrote:

> If they include parents as players and his favorite three
> tribe crap, they would only need eight more kids. IIRC,
> Ciera has a number of siblings. I wouldn't mind seeing Laura
> play again.

Wait, how many people played US Survivor in 44 seasons?

Surely, they have enough kids to fill a season with kids only?

--
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

On Thursday, March 23, 2023 at 5:39:41 PM UTC-6, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> Brian Smith wrote:
>
> > If they include parents as players and his favorite three
> > tribe crap, they would only need eight more kids. IIRC,
> > Ciera has a number of siblings. I wouldn't mind seeing Laura
> > play again.
> Wait, how many people played US Survivor in 44 seasons?
>
> Surely, they have enough kids to fill a season with kids only?
> --
> underground experts united
> https://dataswamp.org/~incal

I'm sure they do but as Jeff said, they need kids who want to play and who will make good TV.

--
Brian

>> If they include parents as players and his favorite three
>> tribe crap, they would only need eight more kids. IIRC,
>> Ciera has a number of siblings. I wouldn't mind seeing
>> Laura play again.
>
> Wait, how many people played US Survivor in 44 seasons?

662

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Survivor_(American_TV_series)_contestants

--
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Brian Smith wrote:

>> Wait, how many people played US Survivor in 44 seasons?
>>
>> Surely, they have enough kids to fill a season with kids only?
>
> I'm sure they do but as Jeff said, they need kids who want
> to play and who will make good TV.

Can't they have a "Survivor: Production only" with Jeff taking
on the producer taking on the camera dude and boat guy ...

--
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

>>> Wait, how many people played US Survivor in 44 seasons?
>>>
>>> Surely, they have enough kids to fill a season with kids only?
>>
>> I'm sure they do but as Jeff said, they need kids who want
>> to play and who will make good TV.
>
> Can't they have a "Survivor: Production only" with Jeff taking
> on the producer taking on the camera dude and boat guy ...

And the carpenters/construction guys for the challenges - and
Dr Joe!

--
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

On Thursday, March 23, 2023 at 6:00:04 PM UTC-6, zeppo wrote:
> > On Thursday, March 23, 2023 at 5:39:41 PM UTC-6, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> > > Brian Smith wrote:
>
> > > Wait, how many people played US Survivor in 44 seasons?
> > >
> > > Surely, they have enough kids to fill a season with kids only?
> > > --
> > I'm sure they do but as Jeff said, they need kids who want to play and who will make good TV.
> >
> Also, a lot of these kids are still too young to play eg. the offspring of Jamie Dugan, Tyson Apostle, Candice Woodcock, Parvati Shallow etc.

Sadly. Kim's kids, especially Auggie, would make for great TV.

--
Brian

>>>> Wait, how many people played US Survivor in 44 seasons?
>>>>
>>>> Surely, they have enough kids to fill a season with
>>>> kids only?
>>>
>>> I'm sure they do but as Jeff said, they need kids who want
>>> to play and who will make good TV.
>>
>> Can't they have a "Survivor: Production only" with Jeff
>> taking on the producer taking on the camera dude and boat
>> guy ...
>
> And the carpenters/construction guys for the challenges -
> and Dr Joe!

Or: "Survivor: Uncharted Territory" consisting of people who
never saw the show.

No history - no tradition!

--
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

zeppo wrote:

>> I'm sure they do but as Jeff said, they need kids who want
>> to play and who will make good TV.
>
> Also, a lot of these kids are still too young to play eg.
> the offspring of Jamie Dugan, Tyson Apostle, Candice
> Woodcock, Parvati Shallow etc.

Sure, but should still be plenty enough ...

--
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

> On Thursday, March 23, 2023 at 5:39:41 PM UTC-6, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> > Brian Smith wrote:
> > Wait, how many people played US Survivor in 44 seasons?
> >
> > Surely, they have enough kids to fill a season with kids only?
> > --

> I'm sure they do but as Jeff said, they need kids who want to play and who will make good TV.
>
Also, a lot of these kids are still too young to play eg. the offspring of Jamie Dugan, Tyson Apostle, Candice Woodcock, Parvati Shallow etc.

On Thursday, March 23, 2023 at 5:07:40 PM UTC-7, Brian Smith wrote:

> Sadly. Kim's kids, especially Auggie, would make for great TV.

I had forgotten that Kim had three babies in quick succession between One World and WAW.
However, by my calculations, the eldest would still be in elementary school..

>> Sadly. Kim's kids, especially Auggie, would make for
>> great TV.
>
> I had forgotten that Kim had three babies in quick
> succession between One World and WAW. However, by my
> calculations, the eldest would still be in
> elementary school.

Eh, "sadly"? Hey, it's great to be a kid and if it isn't, it
don't last forever :)

But yeah, I know what you meant ...

If they do a kid season I think they should ask all the kids
of those 662 guys, those above 18 or whatever the legal age
is anyway, if they want to play.

And if there are many more than to fill the season why not
have a little pre-Survivor, trials if you will, to determine
who plays. It can be a fun PR-stunt as well and be put on
a special initial episode or episode zero, or just be
posted online to boost interest for the regular season.

--
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

On Thursday, March 23, 2023 at 6:36:53 PM UTC-6, zeppo wrote:
> On Thursday, March 23, 2023 at 5:07:40 PM UTC-7, Brian Smith wrote:
>
> > Sadly. Kim's kids, especially Auggie, would make for great TV.
> I had forgotten that Kim had three babies in quick succession between One World and WAW.
> However, by my calculations, the eldest would still be in elementary school.

For sure. I think Auggie's nearly 8 which would make her brothers about 9 and 7. With Kim's coaching I think they might be able to out smart Boston Rob's girls.

--
Brian

On Thursday, March 23, 2023 at 6:48:41 PM UTC-6, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> >> Sadly. Kim's kids, especially Auggie, would make for
> >> great TV.
> >
> > I had forgotten that Kim had three babies in quick
> > succession between One World and WAW. However, by my
> > calculations, the eldest would still be in
> > elementary school.
> Eh, "sadly"? Hey, it's great to be a kid and if it isn't, it
> don't last forever :)
>
> But yeah, I know what you meant ...
>
> If they do a kid season I think they should ask all the kids
> of those 662 guys, those above 18 or whatever the legal age
> is anyway, if they want to play.
>
> And if there are many more than to fill the season why not
> have a little pre-Survivor, trials if you will, to determine
> who plays. It can be a fun PR-stunt as well and be put on
> a special initial episode or episode zero, or just be
> posted online to boost interest for the regular season.
> --
> underground experts united
> https://dataswamp.org/~incal

I wish CBS would bring back "Kid Nation." I loved that show!

--
Brian

On Fri, 24 Mar 2023 00:57:55 +0100, Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org>
wrote:

>>>>> Wait, how many people played US Survivor in 44 seasons?
>>>>>
>>>>> Surely, they have enough kids to fill a season with
>>>>> kids only?
>>>>
>>>> I'm sure they do but as Jeff said, they need kids who want
>>>> to play and who will make good TV.
>>>
>>> Can't they have a "Survivor: Production only" with Jeff
>>> taking on the producer taking on the camera dude and boat
>>> guy ...
>>
>> And the carpenters/construction guys for the challenges -
>> and Dr Joe!
>
>Or: "Survivor: Uncharted Territory" consisting of people who
>never saw the show.
>
>No history - no tradition!

I'd be fine with that if it meant they did it just like they did
season 1 without any idols or any of that stuff.

And picked up all kinds of stuff on audio from the players trying to
second guess what "the twist" was - the twist of course being that
there wasn't one.

The Horny Goat wrote:

>>>>>> Wait, how many people played US Survivor in 44 seasons?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Surely, they have enough kids to fill a season with
>>>>>> kids only?
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm sure they do but as Jeff said, they need kids who want
>>>>> to play and who will make good TV.
>>>>
>>>> Can't they have a "Survivor: Production only" with Jeff
>>>> taking on the producer taking on the camera dude and boat
>>>> guy ...
>>>
>>> And the carpenters/construction guys for the challenges -
>>> and Dr Joe!
>>
>> Or: "Survivor: Uncharted Territory" consisting of people
>> who never saw the show.
>>
>> No history - no tradition!
>
> I'd be fine with that if it meant they did it just like they
> did season 1 without any idols or any of that stuff.
>
> And picked up all kinds of stuff on audio from the players
> trying to second guess what "the twist" was - the twist of
> course being that there wasn't one.

People would maybe take it much more personal again if they
were not exposed to and realized "it's a game" as much as
today's players ...

But it's always gonna be personal, it's in the nature of it.

--
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal