Quote
TheGreek
It is a sin and a travesty of justice that the J. Geils band is not in the hallowed halls of Cleveland .Every time I have seen them in performance they have killed in such a true rock and roll fashion and plus WHEN they do get INDUCTED we will be blessed with a reunion of Mr.Geils with his bandmates

Quote
Deltics
Former Pearl Jam drummer slams ‘Rock & Roll Hall Of Fucktardia’ for induction snub

[www.nme.com]

Quote
Deltics
Former Pearl Jam drummer slams ‘Rock & Roll Hall Of Fucktardia’ for induction snub

[www.nme.com]

Quote
RollingFreak

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000

Quote
RollingFreak

Quote
keefriff99
Journey has had a pretty remarkable career, and they still sell out sheds all over the world. They're certainly not MY type of band, but their success is undeniable.

You make a good point though...there really should be a higher standard than just sticking around long enough and being popular. How about impact, influence, artistic contribution? By that metric, then yeah, the Misfits ABSOLUTELY deserve a place in the Hall before a band like Journey, who are basically a fast-food pop-rock band...pleasant enough to listen to, but ultimately inconsequential.

We differ on "remarkable" career. Again, I don't begrudge anyone's tastes, or opinions if you don't like them and are just sticking up for them. To me, their "career" is one song. Its Don't Stop Believing and we all know that. And its a great song and they should be praised more than other bands of that time. But they hardly changed things, I hardly think they are still relevant today. They don't REALLY sell out sheds. They do decent summer business, when on a bill with 3 other bands. To me that is not what a hall of fame band makes.

I agree, it shouldn't just be popularity and relevance, but for the Hall to say it has nothing to do with that. Thats ridiculous, and its wrong because it should. Other bands were bigger than most and they should be honored. They should be honored when they MAINTAINED that relevance, even after breaking up. If a band like Journey gets in, to me that means anyone with a hit can get in. I love Grand Funk Railroad, I'm not saying they should be in the Hall of Fame! There's levels. Someone I don't like as much like, the Eagles say, deserve it way more than Grand Funk Railroad. They did way more. Just how I feel. I think we generally agree on that point, but it just gets me angry. Mainly cause it was a good hall then they totally ruined it.

Rolling Freak, I don't quite agree that "one album only" should hold up as an argument against a and getting in; or vice versa, that many albums, and long career equal a good career.
The Sex Pistols, and arguable Nirvana only did one album - yet in their cases, as with the MC5 - this album was vital to the evolution of popular music.

I don't disagree, and I know the MC5 are really beloved by people. They aren't one of my favorites although I like that album and Kick Out The Jams is a great song. I do think they are different than the Sex Pistols or Nirvana, or Guns N Roses who essentially had one album and I'm a massive fan of theirs. People don't seem to cite the MC5 quite the same way as those other ones. I would question whether the album was "vital to the evolution of popular music" but again I know they are beloved. I truly don't know enough about them to argue it properly, which in all honesty I feel many others are incapable of at least admitting. Of the list we were given, they were right up there with those I thought should go in. But just compared to others that aren't in and I think should be, and people that are going in this year like Yes and Pearl Jam which I feel are very deserved, they aren't ones I'm really fighting for. If they had more albums that were universally loved I would maybe feel different.

You're right that a long career and more albums doesn't necessarily mean a good career. Look at the Stones. But at least with the Stones they have numerous albums that are flat out amazing. With other rock acts that get put in, thats what I judge them against. They can't be the Stones or the Beatles or those guys, but I do think there's a scale and thats what I weigh them against. Some feel like they fit, others don't.

Quote
LeonidP

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000

Quote
RollingFreak

Quote
keefriff99
Journey has had a pretty remarkable career, and they still sell out sheds all over the world. They're certainly not MY type of band, but their success is undeniable.

You make a good point though...there really should be a higher standard than just sticking around long enough and being popular. How about impact, influence, artistic contribution? By that metric, then yeah, the Misfits ABSOLUTELY deserve a place in the Hall before a band like Journey, who are basically a fast-food pop-rock band...pleasant enough to listen to, but ultimately inconsequential.

We differ on "remarkable" career. Again, I don't begrudge anyone's tastes, or opinions if you don't like them and are just sticking up for them. To me, their "career" is one song. Its Don't Stop Believing and we all know that. And its a great song and they should be praised more than other bands of that time. But they hardly changed things, I hardly think they are still relevant today. They don't REALLY sell out sheds. They do decent summer business, when on a bill with 3 other bands. To me that is not what a hall of fame band makes.

I agree, it shouldn't just be popularity and relevance, but for the Hall to say it has nothing to do with that. Thats ridiculous, and its wrong because it should. Other bands were bigger than most and they should be honored. They should be honored when they MAINTAINED that relevance, even after breaking up. If a band like Journey gets in, to me that means anyone with a hit can get in. I love Grand Funk Railroad, I'm not saying they should be in the Hall of Fame! There's levels. Someone I don't like as much like, the Eagles say, deserve it way more than Grand Funk Railroad. They did way more. Just how I feel. I think we generally agree on that point, but it just gets me angry. Mainly cause it was a good hall then they totally ruined it.

Rolling Freak, I don't quite agree that "one album only" should hold up as an argument against a and getting in; or vice versa, that many albums, and long career equal a good career.
The Sex Pistols, and arguable Nirvana only did one album - yet in their cases, as with the MC5 - this album was vital to the evolution of popular music.

Sex Pistols made it for the statement they made for punk rock, and the album is considered by many to be the best punk rock album ever. Nirvana had 4 amazing albums, not 1 (actually 5 since Unplugged is also an album, and also amazing).

Quote
DandelionPowderman


That calls for an explanation

Use Your Illusion II alone sold 770.000 units in the US during the first week..

Lies sold 5 million in the US.

I won't bother to check the Appetite-numbers

Quote
keefriffhard4life
people keep saying journey are a band that built themselves on 1 hit. my question, since when?

the band has 8 albums that hit the US top 10. they have 5 top 10 hits. they have 17 top 40 hits. the bands biggest hit is actually "open arms". they have 9 albums with sales certified of 2 million or more.

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000

Quote
LeonidP

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000

Quote
RollingFreak

Quote
keefriff99
Journey has had a pretty remarkable career, and they still sell out sheds all over the world. They're certainly not MY type of band, but their success is undeniable.

You make a good point though...there really should be a higher standard than just sticking around long enough and being popular. How about impact, influence, artistic contribution? By that metric, then yeah, the Misfits ABSOLUTELY deserve a place in the Hall before a band like Journey, who are basically a fast-food pop-rock band...pleasant enough to listen to, but ultimately inconsequential.

We differ on "remarkable" career. Again, I don't begrudge anyone's tastes, or opinions if you don't like them and are just sticking up for them. To me, their "career" is one song. Its Don't Stop Believing and we all know that. And its a great song and they should be praised more than other bands of that time. But they hardly changed things, I hardly think they are still relevant today. They don't REALLY sell out sheds. They do decent summer business, when on a bill with 3 other bands. To me that is not what a hall of fame band makes.

I agree, it shouldn't just be popularity and relevance, but for the Hall to say it has nothing to do with that. Thats ridiculous, and its wrong because it should. Other bands were bigger than most and they should be honored. They should be honored when they MAINTAINED that relevance, even after breaking up. If a band like Journey gets in, to me that means anyone with a hit can get in. I love Grand Funk Railroad, I'm not saying they should be in the Hall of Fame! There's levels. Someone I don't like as much like, the Eagles say, deserve it way more than Grand Funk Railroad. They did way more. Just how I feel. I think we generally agree on that point, but it just gets me angry. Mainly cause it was a good hall then they totally ruined it.

Rolling Freak, I don't quite agree that "one album only" should hold up as an argument against a and getting in; or vice versa, that many albums, and long career equal a good career.
The Sex Pistols, and arguable Nirvana only did one album - yet in their cases, as with the MC5 - this album was vital to the evolution of popular music.

Sex Pistols made it for the statement they made for punk rock, and the album is considered by many to be the best punk rock album ever. Nirvana had 4 amazing albums, not 1 (actually 5 since Unplugged is also an album, and also amazing).

Yeah, Nirvana released 4 aLBUMS; just as the MC5 put out 3 official albums (Back in USA, and High Time). But their big album was so big, and with so much impact, that it overshadowed their other output.
Does anyone ever mention "In Utero"? A most excellent album? So when I was called Nirvana a 1 album group, it was meant as in 'might as well have been". They would be included in HOF on that album alone.

Quote
LeonidP
Anyway I also love Jeff Lynne when he was with the Traveling Wilburys.

Quote
2000 LYFH
OK, so I guess we will never get to the bottom of how this thing works, but how would you answer the following:

Would the Stones deserve to be in based on their "1980 -> present" body of work? And if the answer is no, then what would be your starting year?

And if they would have broken up in 69/70, should they be in for their 1960's body of work?

Quote
MisterDDDD
"Artists ignored by the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame are angry over the way the organization is being run and say the latest list of inductees proves the management is biased and snobby.
...

When Ertegun was chairman, the nominating committee included Keith Richards, Eric Clapton, Etta James and Rod Stewart. Now the biggest names on the committee are Robbie Robertson, Questlove and Steven Van Zandt.

Rock publicist Dorothy Carvello, Ertegun’s former assistant, told me, “The voting is rigged.”

[pagesix.com]

Quote
2000 LYFH
OK, so I guess we will never get to the bottom of how this thing works, but how would you answer the following:

Would the Stones deserve to be in based on their "1980 -> present" body of work? And if the answer is no, then what would be your starting year?

And if they would have broken up in 69/70, should they be in for their 1960's body of work?

Quote
LeonidP

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000

Quote
LeonidP

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000

Quote
RollingFreak

Quote
keefriff99
Journey has had a pretty remarkable career, and they still sell out sheds all over the world. They're certainly not MY type of band, but their success is undeniable.

You make a good point though...there really should be a higher standard than just sticking around long enough and being popular. How about impact, influence, artistic contribution? By that metric, then yeah, the Misfits ABSOLUTELY deserve a place in the Hall before a band like Journey, who are basically a fast-food pop-rock band...pleasant enough to listen to, but ultimately inconsequential.

We differ on "remarkable" career. Again, I don't begrudge anyone's tastes, or opinions if you don't like them and are just sticking up for them. To me, their "career" is one song. Its Don't Stop Believing and we all know that. And its a great song and they should be praised more than other bands of that time. But they hardly changed things, I hardly think they are still relevant today. They don't REALLY sell out sheds. They do decent summer business, when on a bill with 3 other bands. To me that is not what a hall of fame band makes.

I agree, it shouldn't just be popularity and relevance, but for the Hall to say it has nothing to do with that. Thats ridiculous, and its wrong because it should. Other bands were bigger than most and they should be honored. They should be honored when they MAINTAINED that relevance, even after breaking up. If a band like Journey gets in, to me that means anyone with a hit can get in. I love Grand Funk Railroad, I'm not saying they should be in the Hall of Fame! There's levels. Someone I don't like as much like, the Eagles say, deserve it way more than Grand Funk Railroad. They did way more. Just how I feel. I think we generally agree on that point, but it just gets me angry. Mainly cause it was a good hall then they totally ruined it.

Rolling Freak, I don't quite agree that "one album only" should hold up as an argument against a and getting in; or vice versa, that many albums, and long career equal a good career.
The Sex Pistols, and arguable Nirvana only did one album - yet in their cases, as with the MC5 - this album was vital to the evolution of popular music.

Sex Pistols made it for the statement they made for punk rock, and the album is considered by many to be the best punk rock album ever. Nirvana had 4 amazing albums, not 1 (actually 5 since Unplugged is also an album, and also amazing).

Yeah, Nirvana released 4 aLBUMS; just as the MC5 put out 3 official albums (Back in USA, and High Time). But their big album was so big, and with so much impact, that it overshadowed their other output.
Does anyone ever mention "In Utero"? A most excellent album? So when I was called Nirvana a 1 album group, it was meant as in 'might as well have been". They would be included in HOF on that album alone.

In Utero get a mention? Not in these parts, but it is my favorite as well, Nirvana fans recognize its greatness for sure.

Quote
MisterDDDD
"Artists ignored by the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame are angry over the way the organization is being run and say the latest list of inductees proves the management is biased and snobby.
...

When Ertegun was chairman, the nominating committee included Keith Richards, Eric Clapton, Etta James and Rod Stewart. Now the biggest names on the committee are Robbie Robertson, Questlove and Steven Van Zandt.

Rock publicist Dorothy Carvello, Ertegun’s former assistant, told me, “The voting is rigged.”

[pagesix.com]

Quote
tatters

Quote
2000 LYFH
OK, so I guess we will never get to the bottom of how this thing works, but how would you answer the following:

Would the Stones deserve to be in based on their "1980 -> present" body of work? And if the answer is no, then what would be your starting year?

And if they would have broken up in 69/70, should they be in for their 1960's body of work?

The Stones would be in even they'd broken up in 1965.

Quote
LeonidP

Quote
keefriffhard4life
people keep saying journey are a band that built themselves on 1 hit. my question, since when?

the band has 8 albums that hit the US top 10. they have 5 top 10 hits. they have 17 top 40 hits. the bands biggest hit is actually "open arms". they have 9 albums with sales certified of 2 million or more.

I am fully aware of the hits of Journey. They were on the radio constantly back in the mid 80s or so, it was annoying as I had to keep changing the station as so not to listen to those horrible songs.