Sentences with phrase «if nothing changes then»

If nothing changes then get ready for a very bumpy & painful ride through the hard times for Arsenal FC.

Not exact matches

If you realize within the first few years of your business that there's a more optimal name based on how consumers view you, then there's nothing wrong with making a change.

If the original tax base is $ 263 billion and if nothing else changes — the assumption you have to make in assessing the effects of a policy — then this information is enough to put some numbers on the sort of revenues you can expect to generate by an increase in corporate tax revenueIf the original tax base is $ 263 billion and if nothing else changes — the assumption you have to make in assessing the effects of a policy — then this information is enough to put some numbers on the sort of revenues you can expect to generate by an increase in corporate tax revenueif nothing else changes — the assumption you have to make in assessing the effects of a policy — then this information is enough to put some numbers on the sort of revenues you can expect to generate by an increase in corporate tax revenues.

@prayer changes nothing: if prayer works then you should be able to pray everyone to stop telling you praying doesn't work... if not your a troll

There is nothing stopping these groups from keeping their policies but if they want to continue getting funding from the university then they need to change, its that simple.

If you have already rejected the mountains of circu.mstantial evidence then nothing I can write will change your heart and mind.

Speaking in abstract terms about blank, amorphous «innocent lives» keeps us from confronting the reality that if most of these children are born at or near the poverty line, then the lives we are saving are more likely to be troubled ones, and if nothing changes, those lives will get caught in vicious cycles powered by poverty and systemic racism.

Nothing should ever change God's Holy word, how you live your faith, or separate your faith from your daily life, if it does, then your faith is not strong and rooted in the Word.

Well then, if we contend against the state or social injustice only on the human level, we shall, of course, bring about some apparent changes, but the basis will remain untouched and nothing decisive for humanity will be gained.

If you are unwilling or unable to have the conversations, then nothing will change.

If it is true that absolutely nothing can change, then we better all learn Greek.

Haugen says if you truly seek God, ask the right questions and partner with the right people, then there will nothing stopping you from literally changing the world.

If one accepts Whitehead's definition of time as «the conformation of state to state, the later to the earlier,» and if one assumes that the past really changes, then we would have no conception of time because there would be nothing definite or determinate for the present to conform to.12 The distinction between the past and the future seems to be at least partly defined in terms of determinateness and indeterminatenesIf one accepts Whitehead's definition of time as «the conformation of state to state, the later to the earlier,» and if one assumes that the past really changes, then we would have no conception of time because there would be nothing definite or determinate for the present to conform to.12 The distinction between the past and the future seems to be at least partly defined in terms of determinateness and indeterminatenesif one assumes that the past really changes, then we would have no conception of time because there would be nothing definite or determinate for the present to conform to.12 The distinction between the past and the future seems to be at least partly defined in terms of determinateness and indeterminateness.

Furthermore, if we consider the teachings of «original» Buddhism to be identical with the nucleus of the older sources of the Himayana scriptures, then we must immediately admit that these teachings, as well as the whole «religion of Buddha,» underwent a marked change in their later development; and we can readily understand how, from the standpoint of the «classical ideal» this development might be viewed as nothing but deprivation and decline.

The preacher is right everyone should be who they are... but then again the Bible does state that it is an abomination to God... But get this... before God can judge you Jesus has to judge you... the BIble says NO MAN COME TO THE FATHER BUT BY ME... we have no room to judge others or talk about them because no sin is big or small they are all the same... the only big sin is not being saved and believing in God... if we are saved and if we believe we have nothing to worry about... but again we have no room to say who is right and who is wrong because it's not our place all that we can do is pray and prayer can change things...

If nothing means nothing anymore in America, and all religions are really the same, then how will a little a little pigs blood added to the foundation cement of the mosque, change the scenario?

If they are not relevant, then mere behavior, as causally conditioned spatio - temporal changes and nothing more, is the only universal principle, and what we learn by studying animals adds nothing (beyond unusual complexity or subtlety) to our concept of reality in general.

If you aren't and really believe what you are saying then nothing I can say will change your mind because it's obvious you are in complete denial.

But if He is blessing our labors by changing our students» lives, then nothing can overcome that either.

Even Ian Wright made a statement today about how Wenger doesn't say a word during the first ten minutes in the dressing room at half - time... It seems as if nothing has changed since then.

If we start this season with those two in our starting 11 it will be a clear sign from this organization that nothing has changed and that we will never get it right until both Kroenke and Wenger are gone... neither one of these players should still be with our club at this point because they represent the settling half - measures that have plagued this team for a number of years... this is what I call the «no man's land» of the soccer world, where teams don't have enough talented young players, unlike a Monaco or Dortmund, because they have lost the plot from an organizational standpoint... they are so reliant on one individual to run the whole operation that their once relevant scouting department has become so antiquated that it can no longer find those hidden gems it once had... furthermore, when you leave all decision - making to a manager who despises any dissenting opinions, your management team becomes little more than a stagnant group of «yes men» and no new ideas emerge... so instead of developing a team with the qualities necessary to excel in a particular system, you continually make half - brain purchases year after year to stifle dissent from the ticket - buying public, then try desperately to finagle together a lineup regardless of what would make positional sense... have you ever heard of a team who plays players out of position so often... of course not because that manager would likely be fired and never work for a team of any consequence ever again

If Arsenal are really going for Arda Turan then i know nothing has changed, a cheap 30 year old that has no EPL experience, smh.

«If nothing changes - if there is no cost cap and the costs stay the same - then we can not go back because it's impossible to race against the big teamIf nothing changes - if there is no cost cap and the costs stay the same - then we can not go back because it's impossible to race against the big teamif there is no cost cap and the costs stay the same - then we can not go back because it's impossible to race against the big teams.

If Wenger does decide to leave and our board stays as is then nothing has really changed.

The only one that can prove WENGER wrong is WENGER himself, if after 12 years and counting he still does not get it that times changed, despite after every season anyone can clearly pinpoint our deficiencies and yet nothing is done, then there is really no hope that WENGER will change his approach.

So if the manager is not going to change, something else has to, and if this latest season of extreme disappointment and record breaking defeats does not convince Wenger and the Arsenal board that the current system is not working then nothing will.

this season was supposed to be about the epl not fourth place.just seeing how empty the Emirates was yesterday I expect it to be even worse in the upcoming games.wenger blew it in the transfer market, I think that in itself shows how we lacked ambition and we settled for a top four from the beginning and if by a chance we managed to win epl then thats it.lossing some games, crucial points and the feedback we got back was just covering the real goals of the club top four.soton home (a team challenging has to win this game), Crystal palace, swansea, just add those points and see where we could and should hve been.everyone here is a die hard arsenal fan whether an akb or aob but fact remains we love the club, we want the club to move forward, we want the club to be a superhouse, its got nothing to do with wengers last year or his last chance of epl.this sort of thinking is running our beloved club to the ground.whether u like it or not a change is needed and a serious one.at the moment we hve so many bogey teams do u think arsene will beat them nxt season!!!

This is an incredibly difficult question to answer for a variety of reasons, most importantly because over the years our once vaunted «beautiful» style of play has become a shadow of it's former self, only to be replaced by a less than stellar «plug and play» mentality where players play out of position and adjustments / substitutions are rarely forthcoming before the 75th minute... if you look at our current players, very few would make sense in the traditional Wengerian system... at present, we don't have the personnel to move the ball quickly from deep - lying position, efficient one touch midfielders that can make the necessary through balls or the disciplined and pacey forwards to stretch defences into wide positions, without the aid of the backs coming up into the final 3rd, so that we can attack the defensive lanes in the same clinical fashion we did years ago... on this current squad, we have only 1 central defender on staf, Mustafi, who seems to have any prowess in the offensive zone or who can even pass two zones through so that we can advance play quickly out of our own end (I have seen some inklings that suggest Holding might have some offensive qualities but too early to tell)... unfortunately Mustafi has a tendency to get himself in trouble when he gets overly aggressive on the ball... from our backs out wide, we've seen pace from the likes of Bellerin and Gibbs and the spirited albeit offensively stunted play of Monreal, but none of these players possess the skill - set required in the offensive zone for the new Wenger scheme which requires deft touches, timely runs to the baseline and consistent crossing, especially when Giroud was playing and his ratio of scored goals per clear chances was relatively low (better last year though)... obviously I like Bellerin's future prospects, as you can't teach pace, but I do worry that he regressed last season, which was obvious to Wenger because there was no way he would have used Ox as the right side wing - back so often knowing that Barcelona could come calling in the off - season, if he thought otherwise... as for our midfielders, not a single one, minus the more confident Xhaka I watched played for the Swiss national team a couple years ago, who truly makes sense under the traditional Wenger model... Ramsey holds onto the ball too long, gives the ball away cheaply far too often and abandons his defensive responsibilities on a regular basis (doesn't score enough recently to justify): that being said, I've always thought he does possess a little something special, unfortunately he thinks so too... Xhaka is a little too slow to ever boss the midfield and he tends to telegraph his one true strength, his long ball play: although I must admit he did get a bit better during some points in the latter part of last season... it always made me wonder why whenever he played with Coq Wenger always seemed to play Francis in a more advanced role on the pitch... as for Coq, he is way too reckless at the wrong times and has exhibited little offensive prowess yet finds himself in and around the box far too often... let's face it Wenger was ready to throw him in the trash heap when injuries forced him to use Francis and then he had the nerve to act like this was all part of a bigger Wenger constructed plan... he like Ramsey, Xhaka and Elneny don't offer the skills necessary to satisfy the quick transitory nature of our old offensive scheme or the stout defensive mindset needed to protect the defensive zone so that our offensive players can remain aggressive in the final third... on the front end, we have Ozil, a player of immense skill but stunted by his physical demeanor that tends to offend, the fact that he's been played out of position far too many times since arriving and that the players in front of him, minus Sanchez, make little to no sense considering what he has to offer (especially Giroud); just think about the quick counter-attack offence in Real or the space and protection he receives in the German National team's midfield, where teams couldn't afford to focus too heavily on one individual... this player was a passing «specialist» long before he arrived in North London, so only an arrogant or ignorant individual would try to reinvent the wheel and / or not surround such a talent with the necessary components... in regards to Ox, Walcott and Welbeck, although they all possess serious talents I see them in large part as headless chickens who are on the injury table too much, lack the necessary first - touch and / or lack the finishing flair to warrant their inclusion in a regular starting eleven; I would say that, of the 3, Ox showed the most upside once we went to a back 3, but even he became a bit too consumed by his pending contract talks before the season ended and that concerned me a bit... if I had to choose one of those 3 players to stay on it would be Ox due to his potential as a plausible alternative to Bellerin in that wing - back position should we continue to use that formation... in Sanchez, we get one of the most committed skill players we've seen on this squad for some years but that could all change soon, if it hasn't already of course... strangely enough, even he doesn't make sense given the constructs of the original Wenger offensive model because he holds onto the ball too long and he will give the ball up a little too often in the offensive zone... a fact that is largely forgotten due to his infectious energy and the fact that the numbers he has achieved seem to justify the means... finally, and in many ways most crucially, Giroud, there is nothing about this team or the offensive system that Wenger has traditionally employed that would even suggest such a player would make sense as a starter... too slow, too inefficient and way too easily dispossessed... once again, I think he has some special skills and, at times, has showed some world - class qualities but he's lack of mobility is an albatross around the necks of our offence... so when you ask who would be our best starting 11, I don't have a clue because of the 5 or 6 players that truly deserve a place in this side, 1 just arrived, 3 aren't under contract beyond 2018 and the other was just sold to Juve... man, this is theraputic because following this team is like an addiction to heroin without the benefits

the moment you figured out spurs is in a decent position to win the league now that vary will miss, the moment you figured out spurs feature striker is 10X better then the one we have been forced to watch for 4 years who flaps his arms every time in the box, the moment you figured out you may not finish in 4th place, this is as bad as it gets for us... if this year does not provoke serious change, then nothing will

Silent Stan is the issue and nothing will change while he is the owner, if Wenger leaves then the next manager will be given the same objectives and would the new manager do as well????

The difference will come when wenger leaves, if it is kroenke then probably nothing will change in this regard.

We can speak and shout and cry all day and night, it will change nothing but man if observing all that and still defending the man who is bringing down your team you think you love the team then watch you well in a mirror.

If he is to stay then he needs change his mentality of familiarity, he can't always allow players to stay morethan 10 years andd allowing others old players receiving money for nothing, but the best.

If the line didn't click right away (and given the way the team was free - falling, losing 14 out of 20 IIRC, nothing was clicking), it was changed by the start of the next period.The outrage on this board then was much the same as it is now over DeBoer's decision to keep certain players in the lineup.

If this season nothing changes, then they will very well sell Sanchez to a direct rival which prematurely will end our title hopes before August.

If no one turns up to a game but the rest of the work still watch it, talk about it on fan sites and pay attention to the media then nothing changed.

If we start this season without either extending Sanchez's contract or selling and replacing him with a SUITABLE alternative (S) it will be a clear sign from this organization that nothing has changed and that we will never get it right until both Kroenke and Wenger are gone... if nothing is resolved and we lose him for free, then try to find a replacement in the much inflated marketplace, this would be typical of the half - baked decision - making that has plagued this team for a number of years... this is what I call the «no man's land» of the soccer world, where teams that don't develop or recruit enough talented young players tend to lose the plot from an organizational standpoiIf we start this season without either extending Sanchez's contract or selling and replacing him with a SUITABLE alternative (S) it will be a clear sign from this organization that nothing has changed and that we will never get it right until both Kroenke and Wenger are gone... if nothing is resolved and we lose him for free, then try to find a replacement in the much inflated marketplace, this would be typical of the half - baked decision - making that has plagued this team for a number of years... this is what I call the «no man's land» of the soccer world, where teams that don't develop or recruit enough talented young players tend to lose the plot from an organizational standpoiif nothing is resolved and we lose him for free, then try to find a replacement in the much inflated marketplace, this would be typical of the half - baked decision - making that has plagued this team for a number of years... this is what I call the «no man's land» of the soccer world, where teams that don't develop or recruit enough talented young players tend to lose the plot from an organizational standpoint

If he sold to anyone else then they would also have no say in what happens so nothing would change, so as you say, «who cares».

don't think they will, they are loosing steam, and worse the players are watching spurs pass right by... this should bring change, if it does not, then nothing will....

winning to Man City is seen by some as a prowess and the resurgence of WENGERS glory days, well I don't see it that way, some see it as an outstanding victory first because we were not beaten merciless and then we scratched a win to a Man City that btw is not at it's best... we had an awful game yesterday, yes we got the points but unconvincing to say the least... WENGER is willing to change!!!!!!??? YES only when pressure mounted and for the first time his job was questioned, why did not happen before, we all know that the stubborn deluded man would have change nothing on his own accord if it wasn't because he was against the ropes....

If it wasn't, then nothing would have changed.

Nothing wrong with developing new hobbies and improving your appearance of course, but if these changes coincide with some other behavioral changes such as a lack of interest in sex, then this could well be telling you that a potential divorce is on the horizon.

If nothing changes, then continue with the next points below, but keep doing this one.

If nothing else works or they just WANT to change detergents (or need to, as you did when Planet stopped being available) then my first question is whether or not they are comfortable using mainstream detergents.

Here's one way to think about it: An occasional stool that's looser than normal for your baby is nothing to worry about, but if your baby» bowel movements suddenly change — that is, he poops more than usual and passes looser, more watery stools than usual — then it's probably diarrhea.

The problem is that your in - laws, your friend, or your neighbor is telling you that something in the way you are doing things is wrong and must be changed... Here's the bottom line: if your child is getting enough sleep, you all are sleeping well, and the people who live in the home are happy with the way things are working out, then nothing needs to be fixed, regardless of what anyone else has to say about your family's sleeping situation (p. 14).

Mandelson told David Miliband on Remembrance Day last year that Labour could not win with Brown if nothing changed, as the then foreign secretary raised fears of a major defeat.

Until labour understands that we are not sheeple anymore that can be relied upon to vote in a pig with lipstick if it was the labour candidate, then nothing will change.

And if they can't answer that question or if they say, «Oh nothing would change my mind, then you won a great point.»

«If nothing changed on the moon — if there were no lunar body tide or if its tide were completely static — then every time scientists measured the surface height at a particular location, they would get the same value,» said Mike Barker, a Sigma Space Corporation scientist based at Goddard and co-author of the new study, which is available online in Geophysical Research LetterIf nothing changed on the moon — if there were no lunar body tide or if its tide were completely static — then every time scientists measured the surface height at a particular location, they would get the same value,» said Mike Barker, a Sigma Space Corporation scientist based at Goddard and co-author of the new study, which is available online in Geophysical Research Letterif there were no lunar body tide or if its tide were completely static — then every time scientists measured the surface height at a particular location, they would get the same value,» said Mike Barker, a Sigma Space Corporation scientist based at Goddard and co-author of the new study, which is available online in Geophysical Research Letterif its tide were completely static — then every time scientists measured the surface height at a particular location, they would get the same value,» said Mike Barker, a Sigma Space Corporation scientist based at Goddard and co-author of the new study, which is available online in Geophysical Research Letters.