Would "Sgt. Pepper's" be a better album if.....

There is an avid following of Beatles fans on the Hoffman board who are constantly raising similar questions about track arrangements and perfect sequencing for the songs within the various albums. I've never been a huge fan of Sgt. Pepper's, and the hype surrounding it from day one only pushed me further away. There are a few tracks on it that I like and I rely on the recent Mono Box. 
I'm not a Beatles hater- far from it-- the early videotape of their performance at the Washington Coliseum in 1964 continues to astound me- playing without stage monitors on a dinky stage in a crowded basketball arena- these guys were close to note perfect in their harmonies. They were, at that time, playing old style rock and roll and doing it as well as anybody. Yes, some of the Lennon/McCartney song writing that followed is brilliant, but if I had to pick a late album, it would probably be side two of Abbey Road, for both content and sequence.
Love that Squeeze track- Tempted by the Fruit of Another. 

Agree with ASVJERRY, if you don't like it make your own playlist.

btw, William Safire wrote that line for Spiro Agnew.

At the time the album was great. But things should be taken in a certain perspective. The album was released 50 years. Hel-loo! It should be compared with other music of the time. Every thug is relative.

@geoffkait said: "Every thug is relative."
Especially true in the old days of the New York Families. 

there's at least six beatles albums i'd take over sp, with only the title track, "fixing a hole" and the incredible "day in the life" really matching their lofty standard (tho i do admire "lucy in the sky" from a distance). the penny lane/strawberry field single, however, is among their very best work and would have markedly improved the album.