Would you be ok with the Eagles continuing without Glenn

[OutlawManNJ]

Look, crazier things have happened. Queen which arguably had the best voice in rock history continued performing after Freddy Mercurys death. Other bands have continued...others stopped.

Would you be ok with the Eagles continuing to tour under the name Eagles without glenn? What if they subbed him with Jackson Browne which would possibly be the only plausible substitute (not that JB would accept but Ive seen stranger things).

If that were to happen, could there be a chance that a Jackson Browne could even inject new life (new music) into the Eagles? Ill admit I always wondered why JB was never an Eagle and I would at the very least be curious. I actually enjoyed seening him playing with the band at Grammy Cerimony.

[Victim of Love]

IMO, I simply can't envision the guys seeing their way clear to continue without Glenn. Eagles was his baby, his brainchild, and try as I may to picture someone else filling the void, there isn't a single person I can think of who could step in to fill out the roster. Add to that the times we've heard Glenn and Don state that their harmonies weren't an accident, that their sound was the result of their unique voices blending together, they would be hard-pressed to find anyone who comes close to Glenn. As much as I would love to see them continue, as much as I want to hear them again, I simply don't see a future version of them, at least not billed as "Eagles".

I also think about the fact the Glenn was the youngest of the four, and while he had long-term health issues that the others didn't (other than Timothy's cancer issue, that we know of), I think they're all confronting their own mortality and seriously reassessing what is truly most important to them, that being their families.

Those things being said, I'm hoping that in the coming months we'll be blessed with a fitting memorial to Glenn by the guys (as Irving eluded to when Glenn passed) that will include the likes of Jackson, JD, Jack Tempchin and many others and that it will be televised. Their performance at last night's Grammys was wonderful but their demeanor clearing showed that they are still processing their loss and not ready.

[EaglesCN]

If they can go on, that's what we're looking for. But I think in recent years Don and Timothy's voice became hoarse, perhaps they sing not long, may they will choose not to continue (of course, this is not what we want to see)Although continue is a good thing,everyone has their own style, Jackson has his style. He can't replace Glenn, to tell the truth I feel since Queen has found a new lead singer, their taste has changed,maybe Jackson will replace Glenn onstage, but real Eagles has come to an end.

[Outlawman13]

In my opinion, I think the Eagles are done! No one can replace Glenn! I can't envision Don going on without Glenn!!

[GlennLover]

JD Souther has stated that it would be "sac religious" for the Eagles to continue without Glenn. I agree.

[wasl89]

JD Souther has stated that it would be "sac religious" for the Eagles to continue without Glenn. I agree.

That's the way I think about it, there's no Eagles without Glenn. It's really sad to realise that

[Elizasong]

No Glenn = No Eagles

[chaim]

They would never continue as the Eagles, but my answer to the actual question is "no, I wouldn't be ok with it".

I'm not referring to OutlawManNJ and other people who are fans enough to have joined this forum, but I think there are a lot of people out there who raise this subject who don't know how much Glenn contributed to the band - also stuff that we don't actually see. Arranging vocal harmonies...It's been said that he was there suggesting parts when his band mates were figuring out their own parts. So Glenn didn't just come up with his own parts. He was overseeing the overall process in many ways - live as well as in the pre-production rehearsals and studio. Although with YES something like that happened when Trevor Rabin took Jon Anderson's place as the "overseer". But YES was a totally different band in the 80's, and they weren't even going to call themselves YES. That came "from the above". And Queen...I don't think they have actually operated as "Queen" in decades. As far as I know it's always "Queen with some singer". There's a difference IMO. Personally I don't care for that - especially when John Deacon isn't there either.

[Brooke]

No. It's pretty much been alluded to that the Eagles are done. I don't think the guys would want to nor would Jackson. There are no Eagles without Glenn.

[travlnman2]

No they are done. But have you guys ever heard of the Rossington Collins band? After the 1977 plane crash when three members of Lynyrd Skynyrd were killed including Ronnie Van Zant. Members Allen Collins and Gary Rossington went on for a little bit ine a new band with a few new members and a female singer. So I guess the guys can do something like that new faces new music new identy with the tribute to Glenn at the end of a show.

Edited I am also quite sad this is the end because I will never get to see them live. They came to my area twice but I was busy with other engagments.