Eagles.... 3.0

[Philh]

New interview with Timothy including his thoughts on Deacon

http://bestclassicbands.com/timothy-...rview-5-17-17/

[sodascouts]

In that interview, Timothy calls Deacon and the mystery person "guests" rather than new members of the band.

I wonder which it is?

[NightMistBlue]

They're going to need a real front man to lead the show. Glenn was the master of ceremonies at Eagles concerts. It doesn't seem like Henley could fill that role sitting behind a drumkit for most of the concert.

P.S. Thank you for the Timothy interview, Philh - that's good stuff.

[eaglesfan]

I have a question for everybody who is upset about the Eagles reforming without Frey.

Presumably, nobody has a problem with any of the Eagles performing as solo artists, or even as part of other bands if that somehow happened.

I'm guessing too that nobody would have a problem with the members performing with one another, right? In other words, if Henley and Walsh were to perform together in a Henley/Walsh concert and they performed both solo and Eagles songs, that would be okay, correct?

And then what if they added Schmit to the mix as well..would that be okay?


And then if they decided that Deacon Frey is a talented kid who could perform some of his father's parts and he joined them, would that be okay?

I'm asking all this because it seems to me that what people actually object to is using the name the Eagles. My guess is that that is the issue...using the Eagles name. Not that they are performing together?

[sodascouts]

I have a question for everybody who is upset about the Eagles reforming without Frey.

Presumably, nobody has a problem with any of the Eagles performing as solo artists, or even as part of other bands if that somehow happened.

I'm guessing too that nobody would have a problem with the members performing with one another, right? In other words, if Henley and Walsh were to perform together in a Henley/Walsh concert and they performed both solo and Eagles songs, that would be okay, correct?

And then what if they added Schmit to the mix as well..would that be okay?


And then if they decided that Deacon Frey is a talented kid who could perform some of his father's parts and he joined them, would that be okay?

I'm asking all this because it seems to me that what people actually object to is using the name the Eagles. My guess is that that is the issue...using the Eagles name. Not that they are performing together?

Speaking for myself, yes. The fundamental problem - indeed, for me, the only problem - is that they are calling themselves the Eagles.

It's more than just meaningless semantics. When they continue as the Eagles without him, they are saying that he's not essential to the Eagles. His loss does not mean they cannot continue. It simply means their line-up changes.

That is what I have a problem with.

[eaglesfan]

Speaking for myself, yes. The fundamental problem - indeed, for me, the only problem - is that they are calling themselves the Eagles.

It's more than just meaningless semantics. When they continue as the Eagles without him they are saying that he's not essential to the Eagles. His loss does not mean they cannot continue. It simply means their line-up changes.

That is what I have a problem with.

Got it. I mean, I understand the point, I really do. But I don't think that Henley or Walsh or Azoff think that Frey is unimportant to the band or anything, but for them to sell tickets they need to call themselves the Eagles. If they call themselves "Don Henley Joe Walsh and Timothy B Schmit", then they probably don't really sell out arenas the way they will if they call themselves the Eagles.

And I get why some might feel that's not right. On the other hand, the Eagles, including Frey, have always been about business first and foremost.

[sodascouts]

They're going to need a real front man to lead the show. Glenn was the master of ceremonies at Eagles concerts. It doesn't seem like Henley could fill that role sitting behind a drumkit for most of the concert.

I don't know about whomever they add to the band taking on the role of the new master of ceremonies, even Deacon. I can't visualize a new member introducing Don Henley, Joe Walsh, and Timothy B. Schmit to the crowd!

I don't think Don plans to be sitting behind that drumkit. He has had plenty of practice being a front man at solo shows, and Scott Crago can take on more of the drumming to allow him to become the new "Master of Ceremonies." I suspect that is what will happen.

P.S. Thank you for the Timothy interview, Philh - that's good stuff.

Yes, thank you, Phil. Sorry I forgot to do so earlier.

[New Kid In Town]

Eaglesfan - I agree with Soda. I object to Don, Joe and Tim calling themselves "Eagles" when one of the two founding members is no longer with us. Don can say all he wants about "Glenn is irreplaceable" but in fact that is what they plan to do if they start touring, which if you read between the lines that is apparently what they have planned. I can not speak for other on this board, but yes, I object to them calling themselves "Eagles". I have no objection with Don, Joe and Tim touring together performing Eagles songs. In fact, I would pay to see them perform together.

Soda, I could also see Don stepping forward to perform those duties. When I saw him he barely played the drums. He is the front man when he tours alone.

Phil - Thank you for the interview.

[Dawn]

Don Henley insists that Glenn Frey is irreplaceable but judging by his actions it appears that is exactly what is transpiring under the banner name of the Eagles with "special guests".

Second, what's getting lost in the sauce is The Classic is widely considered to be Azoff's bicoastal response to last year's hugely successful/profitable Desert Trip which is no small endeavor. Exactly when, where and how this all came together is not likely to be publicized. Heck, we don't even know who the other mystery addition to the band's lineup is.

[Brooke]

Speaking for myself, yes. The fundamental problem - indeed, for me, the only problem - is that they are calling themselves the Eagles.

It's more than just meaningless semantics. When they continue as the Eagles without him they are saying that he's not essential to the Eagles. His loss does not mean they cannot continue. It simply means their line-up changes.

That is what I have a problem with.

Yes, this is what I want to say and can't get out! Thank you!

Got it. I mean, I understand the point, I really do. But I don't think that Henley or Walsh or Azoff think that Frey is unimportant to the band or anything, but for them to sell tickets they need to call themselves the Eagles. If they call themselves "Don Henley Joe Walsh and Timothy B Schmit", then they probably don't really sell out arenas the way they will if they call themselves the Eagles.

And I get why some might feel that's not right. On the other hand, the Eagles, including Frey, have always been about business first and foremost.

I think you are spot on here. "Show me the money"