Looks like The Band is on a full fledged tour next year! How do you feel about that?

The timing of Azoff's MEGA 6 band bicoastal concert with the Eagles sharing headliner status with Fleetwood Mac is quite interesting. Do the math.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dawn

The timing of Azoff's MEGA 6 band bicoastal concert with the Eagles sharing headliner status with Fleetwood Mac is quite interesting. Do the math.

---

Azzof is only loyal to one person Irving Azoff. All he cares about is making money.

Plus he f***** the ticket industry and purposley mishandled GNR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sodascouts

This.

Oh, I'm not saying people who go and see the "Eagles" now don't really miss Glenn on an emotional level. I know many people who are going to see the "Eagles" now who are heartbroken over Glenn's death.

However, on a musical level, they do not believe his absence matters enough to call the band to a halt. Another voice will do.

So I guess it does come down to those who see it as just another line-up change, and those who see it as an irreparable hole.

---

Exactly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ive always been a dreamer

Ah - Looks like we've come full circle once again. I think it's been repeated ad nauseum - go see this band if you like and enjoy yourself even though most everyone acknowledges that this version of the band is not the same band you saw when Glenn was alive.

And it all boils down to this simple objection - since it's not the same band, they should not legitimately be representing themselves as the 'Eagles'. It is wrong because they are no longer that. If they called themselves something else, most of us would probably be okay with that even if we didn't want to go to a show.

---

Bingo. It's not the same band and IMO is a fraud calling themselves Eagles. Not only is it not the same, it's a much lesser quality yet expect the same or more $.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sodascouts

FALSE.

Get your facts straight if you want anyone to take your arguments seriously, travlnman2.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ive always been a dreamer

This ^^.

travlnman2 – Please cut the BS. As long as this thread is active, anyone is free to respectfully express their opinion here. To quote your earlier post, dictating who can or cannot post here “just comes off as superior and rude”. You are the only one presently posting here that is engaging in confrontational, argumentative behavior. If you are going to debate topics on this board, you need to keep your facts straight, not twist around other’s words, and be more respectful and tolerant of opposing opinions.

---

Amen Dreamer and Soda.

I think that DH, JW, TBS, DF, and VG (whew, that's a mouthful) would be better received by those of us against it if they'd drop the Eagles name. We may not all go to a show, but it's less of a problem at least when you aren't trying to come off as something that is no longer possible to be. If they want to call it Don Henley and Friends or some offshoot of the Eagles, that's fine. Just don't call it the Eagles if Glenn Frey isn't involved. Because it's not the band without Glenn. I have no problem with them playing together or solo, I don't want them to stop playing music. But it's not the Eagles, no matter what name they decide to use. It's not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Freypower

If Glenn had in fact wanted them to continue they would not have waited a year before they did so.

---

You really think this??

It's circular discussion and part of the reason I've stayed off of the boards for a few months. They're touring and performing together. They're going to sellout a hell of a lot more arenas together as the Eagles than they would individually. If you disagree, you disagree. What's the point of beating a dead horse though and being pissy with people who want to enjoy the shows?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaryCalifornia

You really think this??

---

Well, there is a rhetorical question. Would I have posted it, if I didn't think that was the case? It seems more logical to me, that's all. I gave the example of Steely Dan. Of course I can't prove it, just as those who believed he wanted them to continue can only give circumstantial evidence.

The 'they were in shock' argument was the one Delilah used in her response to me. But as I previously said, that argument has been the one used to justify their actions the entire time. 'They were in shock. Then the shock wore off'.

Well, that's great. They got over the 'shock' and they continued on. Good for them.

There are some remarkable similarities between the history of Steely Dan and the Eagles, but as far as sheer success,popularity and “iconicness”, I don’t know if they’re a good comparison for when a founding member dies. Would Queen be a better example?