Frey-less Eagles??? Was it ever considered?

[MaryCalifornia]

The answer to one of the questions seems to be that they never discussed doing it without Glenn.

My two cents - of course they discussed doing it without Glenn. I'm guessing this discussion (with Irving) took place every year for many years starting in the late '80s. They never got to a point where, on balance, they thought it was a good idea to take the first steps without him, but I do think that if Glenn never got on board, Henley, Felder, Schmit, Walsh and who-knows-who-else would have eventually done something. As Don said in HOTE, he was OK with "being in a band again." He didn't say "re-forming the Eagles." Then we get into the same territory we were in in the Led Zeppelin thread - would you go see them? Many would, especially since many Eagles fans (myself included until a few years ago) don't know who sings which songs.

I don't think there would legal problems with Henley, Felder, Walsh and Schmit billing themselves as the Eagles.

Having said all of this as a narrow, direct response to the title of the thread, I think Glenn "is" the Eagles and I adore him and they wouldn't be the same without him. But as I said in the Led Zeppelin thread re: Robert Plant's unwillingness to join in, the music shouldn't be precious, and the other guys shouldn't have to sit home for years because one guy doesn't want to join in. But that's for a different thread - would you go?

[Ive always been a dreamer]

Repeating an argument doesn't make it any nore valid. I can't believe if 6 of the 7 Eagles went on tour you wouldn't refer to the as the Eagles.

Well F50 – So sorry, but believe it. Trust me, I’m not lying - so I’ll repeat again, I would NOT consider the Eagles to be a legitimate band without both Henley and Frey. And I also don’t think I’m alone in my feelings about this. I totally agree that repeating an argument doesn’t make it any more valid, but it keeps being repeated because the question keeps being repeated. This is why I’m not a big fan of these “what if” type discussions – we are all speculating about something that never happened so all we can do is give our own opinions and perspectives about it. None of us has the answer to what would have happened since it never did, so there is no right or wrong opinion here. These threads inevitably end up repetitive, circular, and inconclusive.

I mentioned earlier that I believe there are a handful of bands that are the rock and roll ‘elites’ – The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, Led Zeppelin, The Who, and the Eagles. I think their legitimacy would be compromised without both of their core members – Lennon and McCartney, Jagger and Richards, Page and Plant, Daltrey and Townsend, and Henley and Frey. And given their histories, it seems to me that they must have also agreed somewhat about this, If it ever did happen with any of them, I do believe it would diminish their legacy. JMHO

[chaim]

My two cents - of course they discussed doing it without Glenn. I'm guessing this discussion (with Irving) took place every year for many years starting in the late '80s. They never got to a point where, on balance, they thought it was a good idea to take the first steps without him, but I do think that if Glenn never got on board, Henley, Felder, Schmit, Walsh and who-knows-who-else would have eventually done something. As Don said in HOTE, he was OK with "being in a band again." He didn't say "re-forming the Eagles." Then we get into the same territory we were in in the Led Zeppelin thread - would you go see them? Many would, especially since many Eagles fans (myself included until a few years ago) don't know who sings which songs.

I don't think there would legal problems with Henley, Felder, Walsh and Schmit billing themselves as the Eagles.

Having said all of this as a narrow, direct response to the title of the thread, I think Glenn "is" the Eagles and I adore him and they wouldn't be the same without him. But as I said in the Led Zeppelin thread re: Robert Plant's unwillingness to join in, the music shouldn't be precious, and the other guys shouldn't have to sit home for years because one guy doesn't want to join in. But that's for a different thread - would you go?

The thing I underlined is what I think could be the case here in Finland. It's just a feeling. Some people might go, with somebody else singing it, "Hmm, the vocal in Take It Easy sounds a bit different". But then they'd perhaps go, "Well, the guy's older".
Zeppelin, hmmm. Not sure it they should call it Led Zeppelin without Plant, but by all means play the stuff. This is how I feel about Queen. Queen was the second band I fell in love with, and I'm a bit disappointed that Brian and Roger keep doing stuff as "Queen and whoever". Queen could have been a band in music's history books that had the same four guys all the way through. Well, the same with Zeppelin, of course. Now that John Deacon (and obviously Freddie) isn't there, I wish they wouldn't use the name Queen, although I love the fact that they still play the stuff. But it's a different thing with Queen. Even people here in Finland know that there's one rather important Queen member missing today.
But, as much as I love Glenn, Robert Plant and Freddie Mercury are perhaps more a part of the "collective consciousness" than Glenn, and therefore Glenn perhaps could've been slightly more easily replaced in the eyes of the average Joe (no pun intended) - at least at that point, when they'd been away for a few years. And this is not because Glenn isn't as good as them, but the way I see it, Eagles was never a band where individual members were raved about as much as Queen and Zeppelin. People just think about the songs when in comes to Eagles.

[VAisForEagleLovers]

I can't speak for Henley fans but his solo concert set lists are always full of intrigue and diversity. The total opposite of the Eagles model. Are they happy for Don to ride along on the Eagles gravy train while Cass County remains unreleased?

I can give my unequivocal answer. NOT HAPPY.

I wouldn't want it to have interfered with HOTE and the tour, I would have liked it to come out the same time frame as Analog man and After Hours, when the band scheduled time for solo time.

[BillBailey1976]

Do the individual members record for different companies now than the Eagles Recording Co.? If not, you'd think it would be very lucrative and beneficial to have Eagles merchandise, along with the new Walsh, Henley, and Frey material at the tables.
I would think do the albums, support them on a limited basis during breaks in the Eagles tours, and promote the heck out of it.

[BillBailey1976]

Personally, I think that the time to do solo albums is when you are together, and popular. I have always listened to the Eagles albums, BUT, since the HOTE doc and the tour and getting to see them live again, it's got my interest up even higher. I would go out and buy anything that they did right now.

[Freypower]

Do the individual members record for different companies now than the Eagles Recording Co.? If not, you'd think it would be very lucrative and beneficial to have Eagles merchandise, along with the new Walsh, Henley, and Frey material at the tables.
I would think do the albums, support them on a limited basis during breaks in the Eagles tours, and promote the heck out of it.

After Hours & Expando were on Universal. Analog Man was on Fantasy. I think Don's contract is with Warner Bros.

[BillBailey1976]

After Hours & Expando were on Universal. Analog Man was on Fantasy. I think Don's contract is with Warner Bros.

Oh, so cross promotion probably wouldn't work very well then.

[Brooke]

I've pretty much stayed out of this discussion because, as Dreamer mentioned, these 'what if' discussions drive me crazy. The constant going around in circles, there is no right or wrong answer, only opinion, cause it never happened.

For me, no, I would not go see the Eagles if Glenn or Don weren't there. As someone else mentioned, I also have no desire to see Journey, Styx, or Foreigner anymore because their lead singers left them. They just aren't the same for me. I know the remaining members and the new singers all have amazing talent, but it's just not the same. I want to hear THOSE voices on THOSE songs. I can't help it.