Eagles.... 3.0

[sodascouts]

I agree with you Soda, but it isn't 'Eagles' regardless of how this is billed. It isn't and it never will be .

I know, but this takes things into a new realm. It's official now. They didn't reform just for the purposes of touring, despite all the PR nonsense. The "Eagles" without Glenn is a full-fledged band now, a band that gets in the studio and records songs.

This is so much worse in my eyes than any touring.

Tours come and go. While I'm sure the shows will all be well-attended, the vast majority of Eagles fans will still never see Vince Gill and Deacon Frey up there singing in Glenn's place. After a few years, those shows will be all but forgotten.

I had resigned myself to basically gritting my teeth and waiting for them to finish, waiting for it to end.

But it will never end now, because recorded music will always be there. I'll do a search on iTunes for the Eagles, and this will pop up, right alongside "Take It Easy" and "Hotel California."

My fear is that this is a precursor to an "Eagles" album which is essentially a Don Henley solo album with guest appearances by Joe and Tim. It will be entirely divorced from Glenn's vision; the name "Eagles" will be nothing more than a vehicle to increase sales, and a hijacked one at that.

Am I borrowing trouble? Perhaps. But all my other fears have materialized.

I used to always say "Surely they won't." Now I brace for the worst even as I hope for the best.

[Delilah]

Here I am making a new post in this thread, because instead of the same old song we have a new one... literally.

We now have a song on the Dan Fogelberg tribute album that is released by the "Eagles" (Don Henley, Joe Walsh, Timothy B. Schmit).

There now exists in this world an Eagles song that Glenn Frey had nothing to do with.To ME, that is so freaking wrong.

The fact that they are releasing a song as the Eagles now that Glenn is gone sets a precedent, and shows they have no compunction about doing so. We may very well see an "Eagles" album without Glenn.

The thought appalls me.

By the way, this also pretty much establishes that Vince Gill and Deacon are not really members of the "Eagles" but rather "Guest Stars" on the tour.

I know agreed to stay out of this thread and I'm probably risking some kind of attack by some but I would like to offer a different perspective (and that is all I am doing, so please do not misinterpret my intentions).

Keep in mind, this not an Eagles song, it is a Dan Fogelberg song. They are not releasing it, Dan's supporters are. The Eagles and Dan go way back and have collaborated early on in their careers. It is apparent the original intention was to have the band including Glenn record one of Dan's songs as a tribute to him. It has been a long, drawn-out process, determinedly pursued by Dan's widow and friends. One of the contributors to the album, Dobie Gray, died in 2011! That's how long this journey has been. For those who wish to see some kind of special tribute to Glenn, think about how it's been like for Jean Fogelberg and Dan's loved ones trying to get this all coordinated.

It is truly unfortunate that Glenn died before all 4 Eagles could record the song together. But it appears the remaining members still wanted to carry out the plan to honor Dan. Perhaps they didn't want to throw another wrench in that plan by debating what to call themselves. It was set in motion long ago for the Eagles to pay this tribute. What else could/should they have done?

There's every possibility the band will pay a special tribute to Glenn at some point in the future. If they do record an album (unlikely but who knows), it could very well be dedicated to Glenn.

There. I will go away now.

[Dawn]

At some point, Don Henley co-founder and last original member of the Eagles will lose his voice and/or no longer be able or even willing to perform at the level expected of a legendary recording and tour band - what then? Will the remaining members and guest artists keep the band going with tributes on the jumbotron to both Glenn and Don as they trade off singing lead vocals on HC and NKIT? Will other sons and even daughters be recruited to keep the lights on? Seriously. I used to wonder how and when this would end. Now I wonder if it will end at all.

[Dawn]

Delilah you make some good points especially on the question of what should Henley, TBS and JW have done. Personally I think they should have recorded the song and used their own names. After all, this was done during the time many fans believed the death of Glenn Frey meant the end of the Eagles. That didn't change until summer 2017 with the first of the Classics concerts and the stunning revelation the Eagles would be co-headliners.

[Freypower]

Delilah you make some good points especially on the question of what should Henley, TBS and JW have done. Personally I think they should have recorded the song and used their own names. After all, this was done during the time many fans believed the death of Glenn Frey meant the end of the Eagles. That didn't change until summer 2017 with the first of the Classics concerts and the stunning revelation the Eagles would be co-headliners.

Agreed. If you look at the cover it reads ''Eagles' and underneath 'Joe Walsh' which makes it appear to be two separate tracks when in fact it is just one (Part Of The Plan). If it is only one track it should have been billed as 'Joe Walsh' if he sings it, not 'Eagles'.

I think it's ridiculous that the late Dan Fogelberg is apparently regarded as more worthy of a recorded tribute than the late Glenn Frey who founded this band. I don't really care about how long it was planned that they do this. They could have backed out. Instead they chose to do this. If the recording is in fact billed as 'Eagles' then that is what it is, regardless of who wrote it.

[Dawn]

FP, I agree. All I know is what I've read whch is that Joe Walsh sings lead on Part of the Plan with Henley and TBS doing background vocals. Why they billed it like they did is confusing.

[Dawn]

Donna Summer also passed away since recording this album. She died in 2012.

[WalshFan88]

It is just not right...it pisses me off.

I'm with you all, it's not the Eagles without Glenn point blank. If the group that tours now wants to call themselves that, that legally I guess is their right, much like it's my right to say it's almost borderline fraud. You are NOT seeing the Eagles. You are seeing a watered down version with duct tape barely holding together what's left of it (the band). It's a poor effort compared to when it was running in top shape with Glenn. It's pretty sad...going out with a whimper.

I will most certainly not be listening to this song nor will I buy it. Not interested.

Solo efforts, sure, right now I'm not to the point of boycotting DH, TBS, and JW but those three together under the Eagles banner, not just no but hell no. Nuh uh.

I like Deacon and I wish him well, but AFAIC, the sooner he distances himself from this group the better off he will be into making a name for himself in whatever he wants and not having it tarnished by having to be a caricature of his dad. If he wants to be a musician, great. If he wants to be a sports announcer, great. If he wants to fade away from the public light, great. I support him no matter what, but I would prefer him to leave the group at some point. JMO.

And Vince...I'm sorry but I actually don't have anything bad to say about him but I'd be lying if I said I really don't think he has any business being on a "Eagles" stage. If it boosts his ego, fine. He seems pretty humble and kind, but he was awfully excited to be someone replacing his old friend. I'm trying not to judge him for it, but I am a little disappointed. He isn't an Eagle. Even less than Deacon, IMO though neither of them are really "Eagles". Vince should thank his lucky stars for the opportunity to tour under that famous banner. I'm sure he does, but still.

How strongly do I really feel this way? Well, let's use this example scenario. I would have given my left kidney to have played with the Eagles. Even for just one night backstage. Now? They could offer me to play every night on tour and millions of dollars for doing so and I would turn it down. They could change my life and give me connections I could only dream of. I don't care. I swear on my life I would tell Don, Joe, and Tim (and Deacon and Vince) just that. It's called dignity, ethics, and morals. It's called doing what's right vs doing what's best for yourself. You should try it Don and Irving. There's more to life than just money. It's important, but so is having a conscience and morals and being guilt-free.

If that bothers people I feel this way, I'm sorry, it's nothing against those who want to like it (I want to make that clear so we avoid unneccesary drama here).

[WalshFan88]

I know agreed to stay out of this thread and I'm probably risking some kind of attack by some but I would like to offer a different perspective (and that is all I am doing, so please do not misinterpret my intentions).

Keep in mind, this not an Eagles song, it is a Dan Fogelberg song. They are not releasing it, Dan's supporters are. The Eagles and Dan go way back and have collaborated early on in their careers. It is apparent the original intention was to have the band including Glenn record one of Dan's songs as a tribute to him. It has been a long, drawn-out process, determinedly pursued by Dan's widow and friends. One of the contributors to the album, Dobie Gray, died in 2011! That's how long this journey has been. For those who wish to see some kind of special tribute to Glenn, think about how it's been like for Jean Fogelberg and Dan's loved ones trying to get this all coordinated.

It is truly unfortunate that Glenn died before all 4 Eagles could record the song together. But it appears the remaining members still wanted to carry out the plan to honor Dan. Perhaps they didn't want to throw another wrench in that plan by debating what to call themselves. It was set in motion long ago for the Eagles to pay this tribute. What else could/should they have done?

There's every possibility the band will pay a special tribute to Glenn at some point in the future. If they do record an album (unlikely but who knows), it could very well be dedicated to Glenn.

There. I will go away now.

I agree, it's not a new Eagles record. I'd have a problem with that too, though, for the record.

But the name on the album says Eagles, implying the real band. I'd have no problem if it said the members names individually. I have a problem with them calling this current group Eagles, when to me, that name is being misused.

I guess one takeaway from your post is that maybe I should be at least somewhat thankful it's not a new "Eagles" single or album. And that it's just on a tribute CD. And that's my own conclusion, but the possibility of an "Eagles" record sickens me more than this, so we have the old saying "it could be worse"...

[Philh]

I have to go with the opposite view. There is a music ‘legal’ ruling that says a band can continue to use it’s name as long as there is still one original member so the Eagles can call themselves Eagles.
I miss Glenn as much as the next person but life has to go on.
The Eagles will never be the same without Glenn but the song on the Dan Fogelberg album is just a song and I have no problem in seeing the Eagles name. If it helps to sell more copies then that’s ok. Don, Joe and Timothy are core members and at the risk of inciting a riot, I would love a new Eagles album at some point. Life is too short, let’s just be happy that we still have DH, Joe and Tim to hopefully make new music.