|
||||||||
Did the Baggs factor mean Edward had to go early |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 56,294
|
Did the Baggs factor mean Edward had to go early
Just wondered that, he probably would have been good tv, but LAS mistake in keeping Baggs meant he may take a harder attitude to so called entertainers this year
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 11,478
|
Not sure Sugar could reasonably have fired anyone else at this stage. The only other 'mistake' seemed to be Leon burning out the juicers - but as was mentioned on You're fired it was Edward who made Leon force the oranges into them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 28,896
|
I think it would have been deeply unfair for Leon to have been sent home just because the juicers packed up. There was no option BUT to fire Edward. And I'm glad because I usually find the so-called "entertainers" very prattish and annoying.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 16,500
|
Thing is, Baggs never really deserved to be fired until pretty late on. He should really have gone the week before he did, but by that stage Sugar had probably virtually decided on Stella anyway and could afford to keep him on a little as an entertainer.
There was no way anyone but Edward could have gone this week. |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,035
|
Agree, no choice but to fire Edward. He was amusing enough in just one episode, that's enough entertaining me thinks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Up the creak without a paddle
Posts: 5,542
|
Quote:
Thing is, Baggs never really deserved to be fired until pretty late on. He should really have gone the week before he did, but by that stage Sugar had probably virtually decided on Stella anyway and could afford to keep him on a little as an entertainer.
There was no way anyone but Edward could have gone this week. Baggs, it was only near the end that he deserved to get fired & should have gone before he did. |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,192
|
Right man went tonight. You could tell 30 minutes in that he was going to be toast if the boys lost. To me, it drew a lot of similarities with the first episode of Series 6 - another bolshy, arrogant team leader who went on the first hurdle.
He had to know he was going down when he was in the boardroom. |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 4,559
|
Edward had to go.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Central London
Posts: 8,287
|
Quote:
Edward had to go.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Bracknell
Posts: 2,269
|
Quote:
Yes, he just had to go. I didn't take to him much on Your Fired either. Usually it is then that we see the really good side of the dismissed candidate but Edward seemed pretty humourless to me. Is Your Fired edited?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Central London
Posts: 8,287
|
Quote:
Disagree, thought he was entertaining on Your fired.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Stalking David and Neal
Posts: 38,045
|
Quote:
Yes, he just had to go. I didn't take to him much on Your Fired either. Usually it is then that we see the really good side of the dismissed candidate but Edward seemed pretty humourless to me. Is Your Fired edited?
There really was noone else but Edward to go last night, potential comedy goldmine that he was, never mind Vincent and inventor bloke look potentially as entertaining
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 276
|
Stuart's merits grew on me over time. Maybe Edward's would have as well, but thankfully we won't have the chance to find out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Greenock
Posts: 6,055
|
there was no other option but to sack edward as soon as he bought the oranges i knew he was a goner.
dont think it has anything to do with "the brand" as baggs was entertaining this guy was not |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 10,991
|
As annoying as Baggs was he did show some skill and ability, especially on that selling DVD task (I think it was that). So he deserved the ability to at least content and stand up for those things in the boardroom.
Edward had no chance. None of the other men had made a howler, and so on the first week, chances are its the project manager going. |
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 4,320
|
Quote:
Right man went tonight. You could tell 30 minutes in that he was going to be toast if the boys lost. To me, it drew a lot of similarities with the first episode of Series 6 - another bolshy, arrogant team leader who went on the first hurdle.
He had to know he was going down when he was in the boardroom. |
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 11,478
|
Quote:
Thank you, you jogged my memory. That guy last year was probably worse (in that first task) as Edward was in his first task as PM but, yeah, similar approaches = not a good result.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,839
|
Quote:
At least Edward didn't slouch in his chair
![]() ![]() Ed was a gonner as soon as he bought those oranges. Mildly entertaining but not in the league of Stubaggs. |
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: A true B Blocker!
Posts: 4,990
|
Quote:
Thank you, you jogged my memory. That guy last year was probably worse (in that first task) as Edward was in his first task as PM but, yeah, similar approaches = not a good result.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: East Anglia
Posts: 2,973
|
Although Baggs was full of s**t and was never going to win, the producers could at least justify keeping him in on the basis that he had some amount of entrepreneurial potential, however small. With Edward there was absolutely no chance; they would have looked stupid if he hadn't been fired since it would be obvious it was down to his entertainment value alone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,089
|
Quote:
Thank you, you jogged my memory. That guy last year was probably worse (in that first task)
|
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Nottingham, UK
Posts: 11,878
|
Quote:
Perharps it's an indication of the type of character that wants to put himself forward for the very first task -it's a pretty bold move. It seems highly likely that the loosing PM is going to get fired, from watching previous years, so most of them tactically shy away from it but there's always one that seems to want to make an big impression week1 through being PM- unfortuntly it tends to be the wrong sort of impression.
People who lead in the first week are more likely to reach the final four or better. For example, in the first series, the first two team leaders went on to become the two finalists. In series 4, they both reached the final four. The idea that it's a poisoned chalice is a myth. |
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: A true B Blocker!
Posts: 4,990
|
Quote:
Historically, only half the losing team leaders got fired in the first tasks, which is about the same proportional for any task, so it's not any more risky in the first week.
People who lead in the first week are more likely to reach the final four or better. For example, in the first series, the first two team leaders went on to become the two finalists. In series 4, they both reached the final four. The idea that it's a poisoned chalice is a myth. |
|
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 28,296
|
No not because of Baggs, because the PM is the one Sugar often sacks the most these days which I don't agree with a lot of the times.
I think he was more like James, was he on the series before last? In any case, looks like we've lost this years funnyman and that isn't good! |
|
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Nottingham, UK
Posts: 11,878
|
Quote:
Ive also been watching some of the US version and although loosing PMs havent always got fired, week1 - just seemed to get it spectacully wrong and not give a good first impression at all.
It's my belief that Sugar rarely fires the team leader if he has any choice, but a lot of the time the leader gets it so very wrong that he has to. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 00:24.


