Jeremy Collins on ‘The Traitors’ Season 3, His Meat Shield Strategy, ‘Survivor’s’ Unspoken Pact, and Whether He’d Play Again

Firefighter Jeremy Collins has cemented his place as one of the greats in Survivor history. With a victory under his belt and an impressive 100 days played across multiple seasons, Jeremy has showcased his strategic brilliance, unwavering loyalty, and mastery of the game. Few players have matched his level of success, making him a true legend of the franchise.

Now, Jeremy has taken his competitive spirit and strategic prowess to another level by joining The Traitors, the Emmy-winning series where treachery and deceit reign supreme. Set in a dramatic ancient castle nestled in the Scottish Highlands and hosted by award-winning actor Alan Cumming, The Traitors brings together reality TV’s most formidable competitors and famous faces for the ultimate psychological adventure. Contestants must work together to complete thrilling missions and build a prize fund worth up to $250,000—while secretly navigating the hidden threat of Traitors lurking in their midst. For Jeremy, it’s a new challenge that pushes his strategic and social skills to the limit.

Pop Culturalist was lucky enough to speak with Jeremy about his experience on The Traitors and how he adapted his gameplay to this high-stakes murder mystery. Known for his “meat shield” strategy on Survivor, Jeremy shared how he navigated the show’s unique dynamics, built alliances, and tackled the constant threat of treachery. In our conversation, he reflects on the psychological complexity of the game, the challenges of competing against both gamers and non-gamers, and whether he’d step into the castle again for another season.

PC: I’m super excited to chat with you, although I wish it were under different circumstances. As one of the Survivor greats, you knew going into this game that you’d have a big target on your back. What was your initial game plan for The Traitors to minimize your threat level? How much of that was influenced by the fact that you were playing with both non-gamers and gamers?
Jeremy: Going in, just like on Survivor, I tried to use meat shields. I knew everyone would be targeting Survivors and gamers, so I wanted to approach them and say, “Listen, I’m not Jeremy from Survivor; I’m Jeremy, the firefighter. I’m Jeremy, the dad. Love me. Talk to me.” I wanted to gather all the information they had while sharing mine to gain their trust and build connections. That’s how I planned to move through the game. If I ended up being a Traitor, that trust would have been key to my strategy. But knowing it was a gamers-versus-non-gamers situation, I tried to align myself with the gamers as much as possible.

PC: As you were saying, you’ve been incorporating shields into your strategy since your days on Survivor. In one of the first twists of the season, Alan [Cumming] presented the opportunity to let Boston Rob into the game. Was there ever a moment when you considered shaking Alan’s hand?
Jeremy. No, never. I needed everyone’s trust. How could I bring Boston Rob into the game and get rid of someone I didn’t even know yet? It was too much to handle. If you went up there, there would immediately be a target on your back. The only way I would’ve considered it is if there were someone out there I absolutely couldn’t play with, someone I had the worst relationship with, and they had the potential to go up there, shake his hand, and get me out first. In that case, maybe I’d do it. But realistically, I didn’t see that happening. It would’ve been too risky and painted too big of a target on you.

PC: If the roles were reversed and Tony [Vlachos] was the reveal while Boston Rob was in the original cast, would that have changed anything?
Jeremy: No, it wouldn’t have. I know how they both play. Rob is all about himself and self-preservation—he’ll take out anyone to save himself. Tony, on the other hand, is different. Tony would lose the game if he were playing with people he really trusts because he wouldn’t turn his back on them. I trust Tony. We have a good relationship. He’s my guy, and I’d never betray him.

PC: You actually answered my next question. In some of Tony’s exit interviews, he mentioned that he would have put his game on the line for you, Boston Rob, and Carolyn [Wiger] because of an unspoken rule among Survivor players to have each other’s backs. We saw you defend Tony during his banishment and not cast a vote for him. Where would you have drawn the line, especially considering two of you were Traitors?
Jeremy: It’s tough because if I had made it to the next round and saw Bob the Drag Queen and Rob going at it, I would’ve taken Bob the Drag Queen’s side. I felt Rob was doing too much, especially since he had just gotten into the game. That’s where I would’ve drawn the line. I didn’t think either of them were Traitors, and I would’ve tried to bring them together, saying, “Let’s all work together. We don’t need this.” At some point, though, you’d have to go after Rob, but who knows. It really would’ve depended on how the game played out.

PC: There’s been a lot of discussion online about bringing Boston Rob, Wes [Bergmann], and Derrick [Levasseur] into the game and how, in many ways, they represent the same archetype of a player. Before they were revealed, was there someone you were hoping would be under the cloak? From a player’s perspective, what’s your take on their addition to the game?
Jeremy: I wasn’t really hoping for anyone specific. I actually thought [Johnny] Bananas might be under there. It all happened so fast that I didn’t have much time to think about who else it could be. Everyone seemed to think it’d be Rob, though.

As for them coming into the game, I didn’t mind at all. Now I had more meat shields. You’ve got these three gigantic T-bone steaks up there, and I could use them to hide behind. I welcomed them into the game—it’s fine by me. I’m a gamer, and the more the merrier. I would’ve taken out other people long before them. My meat shield strategy would’ve been in full effect.

PC: Speaking of taking out players, no disrespect to the Housewives franchise, but as the Traitors were murdering the non-gamers, did that bring any weight for you as a game player? Did it give you a sense of hope that they were targeting non-gamers?
Jeremy: I didn’t think of it that way. I figured the Traitors would make different moves, so I didn’t want to feel any sense of relaxation or complacency. Sure, they took out a couple of Housewives, but they could’ve taken me out next. I had two shields, so they couldn’t get me then, but who knows if I didn’t have a shield—they might have targeted me. I tried not to let myself get complacent like that.

On my first season of Survivor, the day I went home, I actually said, “I won this game.” I knew I still had work to do, but I felt confident. My allies didn’t know what they were doing, and we had just taken out Josh [Canfield] on the other side, who was the only one there who knew what he was doing. I thought, “I’m good.” Then they blindsided me. That experience taught me to never underestimate anyone, and I carry that mindset into every show and competition I do.

PC: One of your greatest strengths as a competitor is that you contribute to adding money to the pot. But we’ve seen early on this season that players are willing to jeopardize adding money in favor of shields. How did that change your pitch for what you brought to the game?
Jeremy: It didn’t really change my pitch. In that rowing competition, when we had the option to go to the next buoy to get the last $20,000 or whatever it was, it was just too far. My arms were cramping, and I wasn’t sure we’d be able to get back in time. I felt like we made the right decision not to move forward.

Looking back, if they had said Wells [Adam] and Ciara [Miller] were going to get off because they weren’t rowing, it might’ve been different—but we still would’ve had to row all the way back. To me, it wasn’t a big deal that we jeopardized the money in that moment.

PC: There are so many layers to the game. You had a great read early on, correctly identifying Bob the Drag Queen and Danielle [Reyes] as Traitors. But it almost doesn’t benefit the Faithfuls to get Traitors out this early because it increases your threat level. Was there ever a part of you that considered deflecting and potentially putting suspicion on players you knew weren’t Traitors?
Jeremy: From the start, I wanted to solidify myself as a Faithful by going after Traitors. If we got Danielle out, then we could’ve played the game more. Some of the Faithfuls could’ve been eliminated after that or whatever needed to happen.

I know Wes is big into the idea of “trimming the fat” before targeting Traitors. He’s always like, “We need to get rid of weaker players first.” But my thought was, “You can do that, but let’s get a Traitor out first. Let’s really start the game.” I feel like the game doesn’t fully start until a Traitor is gone. After that, you can deal with the added confusion from things like recruitment and shifting dynamics. To me, the right move was to take out a Traitor as soon as possible and then let the real gameplay begin.

PC: When you found out you were shortlisted to be in that coffin, you threw a Hail Mary. It was unexpected for anyone familiar with your game, as you’re known for being a man of your word and loyal to the end. Would you have kept that promise if you hadn’t been eliminated? Why do you think that last-ditch effort didn’t resonate with Boston Rob or Carolyn?
Jeremy: I don’t know. I’m not sure how I could’ve genuinely helped the Traitors. I think I would’ve turned my back on them and stuck with the Faithfuls, but I know I’d have had a lot of damage control to do. People would’ve been like, “You said you were going to help them. How can we trust you?” I knew there’d be a lot of work if I made it back, but I felt like I could rebuild that trust.

I believed I’d gained enough goodwill with most of the people there to make it possible. At that point, I had to do whatever I could to stay in the game. I would’ve just said, “Give me a break!” and tried to move forward from there.

PC: Outside of your wife, who’s also a Survivor alum, who from your franchise would you like to see on the next season of the show and why?
Jeremy: [Kelley] Wentworth would be great. [Stephen] Fishbach really wants to get on—it’s like his dream, he loves it. But the person I think should be on it the most is Abi-Maria [Gomes]. You put her in that castle, and she’d burn it down. It would be chaos. I don’t think she could be a Traitor or pull off what Carolyn is doing, but as a Faithful? She’d think everyone is a Traitor and go after everybody. It would be beautiful, beautiful television. Honestly, a lot of Survivors are wild and would do really well on this show. Tyson [Apostol] would absolutely love it out there.

PC: This is a game that’s going to continue to evolve. What’s one thing you’d love to see changed in future seasons?
Jeremy: Tony mentioned something I thought was a great idea—that there should be consequences if you don’t get it right when guessing a Traitor. I like the idea of adding that layer to the game.

That said, I think it’s good the way it is right now. It’s still new, and we’re only on Season 3. Let it marinate a bit. Let’s leave it alone for now, keep playing, and see how things naturally develop. But I do like Tony’s suggestion—it could add an interesting dynamic down the line.

PC: I agree. I know it takes a lot of convincing to get you on these shows because it’s time away from your family. We know Survivor 50 is going to be a season of alumni. Would you consider playing again? And would you consider playing Traitors again?
Jeremy: I’m done with Survivor. I told [Jeff] Probst that. Survivor was wonderful—I loved it and I appreciate it. I’ve spent 100 days playing that game, and that’s a nice, round number. I think I’m good.

But Traitors? I’d do that again. I had such a great time. I’ve been called for other shows here and there, and I always say, “No, thank you. I’m at the fire station tomorrow, leave me alone.” But I was in bed watching Traitors Season 2, and I told my wife, Val, “I would do this.” She was like, “Really?” And I said, “I would. This looks super fun.

The next day, I got the call. I thought it was a great experience, even though my time was cut short. So, I’d absolutely play Traitors again, but as for anything else? I’m at the fire station.

PC: You’re known for making the most of second chances. If you came back for another season, what would you change about your game style?
Jeremy: I think I talked a little too much to some people, but not enough to others. I was just in a tough spot. I had Bob the Drag Queen’s back, Rob’s back, and Carolyn’s back—which meant I had the Traitors’ backs. Maybe if I had worked with them a little more, they might have saved me, and I could’ve positioned myself better in the game.

I don’t think I played hard enough this time, but if I got another chance, I’d definitely play harder.

To keep up with Jeremy, follow him on X and Instagram. New episodes of The Traitors drops every Thursday at 9/8c on Peacock.

Photo Credit: Peacock