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

[sodascouts]

This is from Don Felder's book:

"In November [of 1990] Irving called to tell me 'We're on' [regarding an Eagles reunion]. [...] I arrived at a little rehearsal hall in North Hollywood. [...] Glenn was supposed to fly in from Aspen any day with two or three songs he'd written, but he never showed. He supposedly sent a message through Irving instead saying that he had his songs already written and would meet us in the studio. We carried on, rehearsing a couple numbers Don was going to sing and one great ballad called 'People Can Change,' which Don wrote for Timothy to sing. We all believed it was aimed at Glenn. [...] Over the next day or two, we started recording tracks that Don would sing, convincing ourselves that Glenn could come in later and play his guitar or add whatever he felt they needed. He kept putting us off until Irving arrived, stone-faced. 'Glenn's not coming to the party,' he said, his dismay evident. 'He's decided not to do it. It's over.'

[...]

We looked at each other and shook our heads in disbelief. Someone said, 'Well, if he doesn't want to do it, let's just go ahead without him.'

[...]

Glenn threatened to go to the press and say we weren't the Eagles without him. He said he'd even file a lawsuit to stop us from going ahead. He issued a series of increasingly angry statements, enough for us to say, 'OK, maybe we really shouldn't do it.'"

I agree with Glenn.

Hmm. I think we have our answer as to whether he'd want the Eagles to continue without him...

[chaim]

As humble as Glenn could be as a musician, he knew his place in the band.

[WalshFan88]

Thanks for that quote Soda.

Chaim - I completely agree. It was Glenn's band and he was their fearless leader. He knew an Eagles without him cannot be legitimate. It's a fraudulent thing now. Maybe not legally, but that's what it is.

[sodascouts]

At the time, Don Henley admitted they needed Glenn as well. He admitted that without him, it wasn't truly the Eagles. From pg 238 on Don Felder's book:

"Don [Henley] summed it up. 'Without Glenn on board, it would just be like Don Henley and his backing band.'"

Apparently, he's cool with pretending "Don Henley and his backing band" is the "Eagles" now, though.

[WalshFan88]

At the time, Don Henley admitted they needed Glenn as well. He admitted that without him, it wasn't truly the Eagles. He said:

"Without Glenn on board, it would just be like Don Henley and his backing band."

Apparently, he's cool with pretending "Don Henley and his backing band" is the 'Eagles' now, though.

Yeah, I wonder what changed his mind? ($$$$$$)

[Ive always been a dreamer]

Yeah - the question about whether or not Glenn would have approved of the band continuing as the Eagles now has been discussed on the board several times already since the announcement that they would do so.

Based on Glenn's past behavior and spoken words, there is plenty of evidence, some of which has just been posted, to suggest that he would not have approved. But, the most telling thing for me are the statements that the band members made after his death about the band being over, and then after they changed their minds, not once has anyone declaratively stated that he would have been okay with it. The closest that you can get to this are several statements by the band members that they "think" Glenn would approve. If Cindy Frey or anyone else were aware that he wished the band to continue, I believe that they would have just came out and said so.

Even if there was evidence that Glenn would have been on board with this, it really would not significantly change the way I feel about it. I would definitely have felt better about the band member's decision and wouldn't feel as betrayed by them as I do now. However, I would have also felt that Glenn was misguided and that the band would not be legitimate. And, like I've said before, I still would not be interested in seeing the band without him unless it was a tribute concert in his honor. So, once again, count me in too ...

#NoGlennNoEagles

And finally, regardless of the answer to the question, I personally feel he would be very proud of his son even if he disapproved of the band's decision to continue.

[moonrambler]

I'd need audio or video proof of him saying that he wanted the band to continue when he's gone. I don't trust anyone's word of mouth when it comes to this stuff as there are a lot of biased supporters out there. Even audio can be doctored, but I'd prefer that or even better, video rather than words on a new page. Or someone claiming Glenn said something to them or something they've read.

Even if there was evidence that Glenn would have been on board with this, it really would not significantly change the way I feel about it. I would definitely have felt better about the band member's decision and wouldn't feel as betrayed by them as I do now. However, I would have also felt that Glenn was misguided and that the band would not be legitimate. And, like I've said before, I still would not be interested in seeing the band without him unless it was a tribute concert in his honor. So, once again, count me in too ...

#NoGlennNoEagles

I appreciate the answers to my own particular question. I was curious how fans would feel if there was evidence he would approve of this. It's done quite often now, although I'm not sure how often this happens when a founding member has passed on. Quite a few bands are touring without someone who was an integral band member.

[sodascouts]

I appreciate the answers to my own particular question. I was curious how fans would feel if there was evidence he would approve of this. It's done quite often now, although I'm not sure how often this happens when a founding member has passed on. Quite a few bands are touring without someone who was an integral band member.

Moonrambler, in light of what I posted:

Glenn threatened to go to the press and say we weren't the Eagles without him.

How would you feel about the "Eagles" continuing without Glenn if you knew for a fact that he did NOT wish them to do so?

I leave that question open to any supporters of this "new lineup."

PS. Good to see you again!

[Ive always been a dreamer]

Excellent question, Soda. I don't believe in all our discussions, the question has ever been asked in reverse like this.

And WB from me too, MR. Hope all has been well with you. With regard to bands bringing in replacements, I think each situation is different. In the case of the Eagles, if this had happened early in their careers before the band's legacy was well- established, I believe I would have been okay with it albeit very sad. But, in the twilight of the band's career when they have nothing to gain but a bigger bank account, NO WAY! I would have felt the same way if it had been any of the remaining members. But, this is particularly true of Don and Glenn who were the only remaining founding members and the ones responsible for writing and singing the band's most memorable songs. As I've said several times ... to quote Kenny R. - "you got to know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em'.

[moonrambler]

Moonrambler, in light of what I posted:

How would you feel about the "Eagles" continuing without Glenn if you knew for a fact that he did NOT wish them to do so?

I leave that question open to any supporters of this "new lineup."

PS. Good to see you again!

Excellent question, Soda. I don't believe in all our discussions, the question has ever been asked in reverse like this.

And WB from me too, MR. Hope all has been well with you. With regard to bands bringing in replacements, I think each situation is different. In the case of the Eagles, if this had happened early in their careers before the band's legacy was well- established, I believe I would have been okay with it albeit very sad. But, in the twilight of the band's career when they have nothing to gain but a bigger bank account, NO WAY! I would have felt the same way if it had been any of the remaining members. But, this is particularly true of Don and Glenn who were the only remaining founding members and the ones responsible for writing and singing the band's most memorable songs. As I've said several times ... to quote Kenny R. - "you got to know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em'.

Thank you, Soda and Dreamer.

I am uncomfortable about the band touring in this version as Eagles and have not gone to a concert. I think I can understand why they feel compelled to do so and don't think it's just a money grab. Being Eagles is their life to a large extent.

To me, they do not seem like Eagles without Glenn. I had a difficult enough time accepting the band as Eagles each time a band member left voluntarily.

If we knew for a fact that Glenn did not want them to continue touring under the band name without him, then I would be completely against it. I honestly don't think that's the case, though or I doubt that his wife and son would have gone along with it.

At this point, most bands of that era have lost someone, and a lot of them have continued to tour under the band name anyway. I don't know how their biggest fans generally feel about it, though, because I don't pay attention. For instance, with the movie last year, it highlights the fact that Queen tours without Freddie. Before they started doing that, I couldn't imagine they ever would. But then again, Freddie was not a founding member.