Russell fans blame the jury. Everyone else blames Russell. The jury is never wrong; they can't be. They can do what they want in terms of who they vote for. Russell had to win them over, and he had 39 days to do so. He didn't, and so he lost. "But it's not his fault."
Russell actively ruined his chances of getting votes. He was completely played by his entire alliance (sans Shambo), who knew he was an obnoxious presence, and knew that he was the perfect shield and goat. Nobody from his alliance removed him because they couldn't lose to him. He was a sure a bet as can come in Survivor.
Good Survivor players are able to balance the social, numbers, and physical games. Russell's approach was completely one-dimensional and not suitable to win Survivor. Russell's gameplay in Samoa could never win Survivor, as not a single jury would ever give him the win, despite what many odds some would wager against. He had the chance to bring people like Shambo to the end, but that would've never enter his thought process, even after losing the game handily.
Sabotaging your own tribe early on? Bad gameplay. Voting out strong members over obvious weaker ones early on? Bad gameplay. Showing people hidden immunity idols again and again? Bad gameplay. Revealing you have lots of money at home? Bad gameplay. Playing in a way that people you can beat get voted out? Bad gameplay. Making superfluous alliances that backfire and cause them to hate you? Bad gameplay. Playing a one demensional game? Bad gameplay.
He did it wrong quite often.
--
ziggie ziggie wop wop