who voted to replace George as lead Guitar?!
seriously though, I had to vote for nothing because even what may be seen as 'imperfections' or 'places to improve' all contribute to what they were- and I think any band needs that to make them more interesting or perhaps even to make them 'better'. The Beatles somehow made something really unique and appropriate, and, well, necessary which everone held on to in the early 60s- hence Beatlemania. I mean, beatlemania was a crazy outburst of energy and hysteria which the Beatles somehow created or caused and it seems to me, the conditions for that to happen needed to be very very precise. We don't know what you could take away or replace which could have somehow made them a less or more powerful formula at the time. But what they were worked, and I kind of think it needed to be exactly what it was for it all to work. I don't even know if I am making sense. Like the way the Big Bang theory says the Big Bang had to have loads of things exactly right for it to happen, and if even one tiny element of it was a bit off it may never have happened. I see it to be a bit like that with the Beatles though obviously Beatlemania was not by any means such an unlikely event as the big bang theory! I reckon something huge was bound to happen at that crucial time because it needed to- the whole post-war thing and there needed to be some sort of big change or shift be it revolution or something else. Anyway, Beatlemania fulfilled this need for something big happening (along with the whole young hippie generation) and I think everything about the Beatles played an important role in the way it all happened. So to me, the answer is 'nothing'
Though perhaps another manager after Epstein to take over well and sort out the chaos
No but even that needed to happen really
Maybe this is just be being unimaginative and unable to imagine the Beatles being any other way!
Ugh sorry for my bad post- I can never be concise! I apologise
