Eagles.... 3.0

[chaim]

Even as a Glenn fan I don't mind this Grand Ole Opry thing too much, because I have zero interest in what they do. But it does bother me when I see pictures of the Eagle guys with Deacon/Gill in the media and it says "Eagles will perform...". Makes it look like Vince Gill is in the Eagles. I'd prefer "Eagles with...." or something. No "hate" involved.

[Freypower]

Because when Glenn was in the band, they were busy making albums, writing songs, touring the world, nurturing their solo careers, raising young families, working in the studio, etc. In the midst of your "hate," you may not have realized that, outside of the solo gigs, they're not really doing any of those things anymore. Maybe, God forbid, they see the twilight of their careers as a chance to explore uncharted territory. It is unfortunate and tragic that Glenn cannot participate, but the band covered plenty of territory when he was there -- far more than they could ever hope to cover without him. In the eyes of many (I assume) formerly loyal fans, the band can now do no right. Either they're not doing enough to honor Glenn, or they're doing too much. Thank goodness for Don Henley, who isn't influenced by the "hate" of a vocal minority.


They are certainly not doing 'too much' to honour him. On the contrary. They are doing nothing.

It isn't 'hate'. It's disillusion. 'Hate' is a word used by people who cannot tolerate those who feel differently from themselves.

The 'vocal minority' thing once again comes back to some on this thread who believe those of us who disagree with this should not be allowed to express an opinion. I and others have said all along that if you agree with these actions, go ahead, but please understand the 'vocal minority'(if, by the way, it IS a minority.... many poeple on this board who object to all this have basically given up posting) have as much right to express our views on it as you. I backed away again. Faced with such hostility I will have to continue to do so. I do not have to just accept this situation unquestioningly. I don't agree that loyalty overrides all other considerations. There comes a time when 'loyalty' is no longer enough.

[EagleInKansas]

Completely ridiculous to say the Eagles are doing nothing to honor Glenn. Barely worth dignifying. HIS SON IS IN THE BAND!!!! Please, before these completely self-serving declarations, stop and think about whether they have any validity whatsoever. I know there is a lot of desperation to be in a self-righteous position regarding the continuation of the Eagles, but I wish we could at least deal in facts rather than emotion. Meanwhile, I will continue to stick up for the band, I just never thought I would have to do so on their fan site. Everyone here seems to want to have all past experiences ruined by a short period of time that is not at all reflective of their legacy. I will never understand.

[Freypower]

Completely ridiculous to say the Eagles are doing nothing to honor Glenn. Barely worth dignifying. HIS SON IS IN THE BAND!!!! Please, before these completely self-serving declarations, stop and think about whether they have any validity whatsoever. I know there is a lot of desperation to be in a self-righteous position regarding the continuation of the Eagles, but I wish we could at least deal in facts rather than emotion. Meanwhile, I will continue to stick up for the band, I just never thought I would have to do so on their fan site. Everyone here seems to want to have all past experiences ruined by a short period of time that is not at all reflective of their legacy. I will never understand.

I don't know what 'facts' you are talking about.

These are the 'facts' I am dealing with.

Glenn Frey died in January 2016. At the time many statements were made that the band could not continue without him. This year, that changed. All the statements that were made were utterly hollow & meaningless.

I am not going to discuss Deacon Frey's involvement except that he is not his father, nor was he meant to be, and no matter how much people claim otherwise, he cannot replace his father. I will keep my opinions on the other 'replacement' to myself.

Emotion, whether you like it or not, is a major factor here. I'm afraid I can't just put my 'emotion' to one side & blindly continue to follow something which I no longer believe has any validity or meaning. My past enjoyment of them has not been 'ruined'; but for me they no longer exist. Call this 'self serving' if you wish. I have the right to feel this way just as you have the right to defend what you call 'the band'.

[WalshFan88]

Because when Glenn was in the band, they were busy making albums, writing songs, touring the world, nurturing their solo careers, raising young families, working in the studio, etc. In the midst of your "hate," you may not have realized that, outside of the solo gigs, they're not really doing any of those things anymore. Maybe, God forbid, they see the twilight of their careers as a chance to explore uncharted territory. It is unfortunate and tragic that Glenn cannot participate, but the band covered plenty of territory when he was there -- far more than they could ever hope to cover without him. In the eyes of many (I assume) formerly loyal fans, the band can now do no right. Either they're not doing enough to honor Glenn, or they're doing too much. Thank goodness for Don Henley, who isn't influenced by the "hate" of a vocal minority.

LOL.

When they made the decision they did, they opened themselves up to "hate". I have as much right to hate it (and have a strong point) as you do to revel in it. ;)

I don't feel sorry for them. They made their bed and now they need to lie in it!

[WalshFan88]

They are certainly not doing 'too much' to honour him. On the contrary. They are doing nothing.

It isn't 'hate'. It's disillusion. 'Hate' is a word used by people who cannot tolerate those who feel differently from themselves.

The 'vocal minority' thing once again comes back to some on this thread who believe those of us who disagree with this should not be allowed to express an opinion. I and others have said all along that if you agree with these actions, go ahead, but please understand the 'vocal minority'(if, by the way, it IS a minority.... many poeple on this board who object to all this have basically given up posting) have as much right to express our views on it as you. I backed away again. Faced with such hostility I will have to continue to do so. I do not have to just accept this situation unquestioningly. I don't agree that loyalty overrides all other considerations. There comes a time when 'loyalty' is no longer enough.

I agree. Hate is a strong word. I hate what they are doing, but I don't hate them as people. I may be disappointed, but I don't HATE them. People may disagree.

[WalshFan88]

I don't know what 'facts' you are talking about.

These are the 'facts' I am dealing with.

Glenn Frey died in January 2016. At the time many statements were made that the band could not continue without him. This year, that changed. All the statements that were made were utterly hollow & meaningless.

I am not going to discuss Deacon Frey's involvement except that he is not his father, nor was he meant to be, and no matter how much people claim otherwise, he cannot replace his father. I will keep my opinions on the other 'replacement' to myself.

Emotion, whether you like it or not, is a major factor here. I'm afraid I can't just put my 'emotion' to one side & blindly continue to follow something which I no longer believe has any validity or meaning. My past enjoyment of them has not been 'ruined'; but for me they no longer exist. Call this 'self serving' if you wish. I have the right to feel this way just as you have the right to defend what you call 'the band'.

I couldn't agree more FP....

One cannot overlook emotion, perspective, and basic human psychology.

One shouldn't put one's emotion to the side for the sake of others to be happy. One must always look after themselves first before helping or considering others. In other words, don't be a doormat/pushover. lol And don't give up your integrity just to be complacent for the sake of others happiness when it doesn't feel right.

[maryc2130]

I do think they are honoring Glenn at the concerts, by having Deacon up there and talking about missing his Dad. At the Classic East, people seemed very touched by seeing Deacon and putting Glenn's picture up at the end of Peaceful, Easy Feeling. I heard comments around me about how talented Glenn was and how much he is missed.

All that being said, I hope they do something else to remember him. At least something like the Dan Fogelberg album, if not a dedicated concert. (Although I'd love to see a concert, as well.)

[EagleInKansas]

Which is another odd position to take. They're not honoring him by having other people sing his songs, what they should do is....have other people sing his songs. I wish folks could just admit that they're much happier complaining.

[YoungEaglesFan]

Which is another odd position to take. They're not honoring him by having other people sing his songs, what they should do is....have other people sing his songs. I wish folks could just admit that they're much happier complaining.

Even though I generally agree with you Kansas I'd suggest not continuing this discussion. I had a very long one that at times become contentious. It's just such a divisive issue on here. Freypower was very emotionally attached to Glenn. It's basically impossible to change anyone's mind on the issue

[YoungEaglesFan]

I don't know what 'facts' you are talking about.

These are the 'facts' I am dealing with.

Glenn Frey died in January 2016. At the time many statements were made that the band could not continue without him. This year, that changed. All the statements that were made were utterly hollow & meaningless.

I am not going to discuss Deacon Frey's involvement except that he is not his father, nor was he meant to be, and no matter how much people claim otherwise, he cannot replace his father. I will keep my opinions on the other 'replacement' to myself.

Emotion, whether you like it or not, is a major factor here. I'm afraid I can't just put my 'emotion' to one side & blindly continue to follow something which I no longer believe has any validity or meaning. My past enjoyment of them has not been 'ruined'; but for me they no longer exist. Call this 'self serving' if you wish. I have the right to feel this way just as you have the right to defend what you call 'the band'.

I think it is a little harsh to call the word's hollow. It was a massive shock when Glenn died that I think that they were just lost. As time went on I think they gained confidence in themselves more.

[EagleInKansas]

I'm not naive enough to believe I will change anyone's mind, but I have deemed it worth my time to point out the faulty logic within many arguments presented here. It is patently false to say that the remaining Eagles are not honoring Glenn, and if one believes ignoring Glenn is even within the realm of possibilities for the remaining members, I'd question why that person was a fan of the Eagles in the first place. I also am just fine with carrying the "I actually enjoy this" torch since this message board was designed to honor the band rather than denigrate them. I've chosen to stick with them after a lifetime of fandom and will come to the defense of the remaining members, especially Don, even though it doesn't really get me anywhere.

[WalshFan88]

I'm not naive enough to believe I will change anyone's mind, but I have deemed it worth my time to point out the faulty logic within many arguments presented here. It is patently false to say that the remaining Eagles are not honoring Glenn, and if one believes ignoring Glenn is even within the realm of possibilities for the remaining members, I'd question why that person was a fan of the Eagles in the first place. I also am just fine with carrying the "I actually enjoy this" torch since this message board was designed to honor the band rather than denigrate them. I've chosen to stick with them after a lifetime of fandom and will come to the defense of the remaining members, especially Don, even though it doesn't really get me anywhere.

There is no "faulty logic", EIK. I suggest you come at it from less of a "you are so wrong to question the Eagles" point, which others have done until it was pointed out. It is not "patently false", either. Who made you the person to say when something is true or false. It's entirely subjective and based on perspective. Using your rulebook, I could say things similar in reverse, but I don't anymore and try not to. We aren't wrong for seeing a lack of a tribute and feel it's wrong to continue, you aren't wrong for seeing one and thinking it's ok to go on this way.

And to question if or why we were ever fans is just wrong, and is what Chaim and I had pointed out a few pages back. As if to be a "real" or true fan, you have to support every single thing they do. I don't think that's true. You can be a fan and still not like things they do as people or as a business (band). I'm certainly an "Eagles" fan.

If you want to defend the new band here, that's fine, but know there will be people who see it differently and have no problem pointing out when we see unfairness from others. And we are fans too. Real ones, you know. Not fake.

[EagleInKansas]

They did a private tribute, which is consistent with everything I believe to know about how the Eagles conduct themselves. The public tribute is what you're getting now. It's literally what people are asking for, which makes it difficult to reconcile its out-of-hand rejection. This is the basis of my failure to comprehend. If folks were like, "I just want them to go away forever," I could understand the dismissal of the band's current form. But since they're doing, more or less, what the most harsh critics are asking, the rejection becomes confounding. It's complaining just for the sake of it. Just say the Eagles will always be wrong and go with it. That's clearly what is in your heart.

[YoungEaglesFan]

They did a private tribute, which is consistent with everything I believe to know about how the Eagles conduct themselves. The public tribute is what you're getting now. It's literally what people are asking for, which makes it difficult to reconcile its out-of-hand rejection. This is the basis of my failure to comprehend. If folks were like, "I just want them to go away forever," I could understand the dismissal of the band's current form. But since they're doing, more or less, what the most harsh critics are asking, the rejection becomes confounding. It's complaining just for the sake of it. Just say the Eagles will always be wrong and go with it. That's clearly what is in your heart.

People who reject the current lineup typically reject it as being unfair to Glenn and "cheapening the legacy". They also don't care for how they've handled themselves since resuming the band. They aren't band haters. I think you're misunderstanding what their saying

[EagleInKansas]

Their legacy is beyond secure. And one poster earlier explicitly said that he hates the band now.

[YoungEaglesFan]

Their legacy is beyond secure. And one poster earlier explicitly said that he hates the band now.

I totally agree about the legacy being secure that was a central point I made. I'm just saying what they believe

[New Kid In Town]

Their legacy is beyond secure. And one poster earlier explicitly said that he hates the band now.

Well, I do not know who said they "hate" the band. Someone can be unhappy with the direction the band has
taken - that does not mean we hate them. I would never say that. I have been an Eagles fan since I first heard TIE on the radio in 1972. I do not remember seeing anything about people saying they hate the band. Just because this is a fan form does not mean people have to agree with everything the band does.

[Dawn]

Everywhere you look you will find fans with different opinions and yes, there are plenty of fans who do not like what has been done to keep the Eagles brand alive under the auspices of "honoring" the late Glenn Frey. I am one of those fans.

Do I hate the band?

No.

I pity them.

They didn't have to go down this road.

[Dawn]

Well, I do not know who said they "hate" the band. Someone can be unhappy with the direction the band has
taken - that does not mean we hate them. I would never say that. I have been an Eagles fan since I first heard TIE on the radio in 1972. I do not remember seeing anything about people saying they hate the band. Just because this is a fan form does not mean people have to agree with everything the band does.

Amen. Well said NKIT.

[EagleInKansas]

So the Grand Old Opry thing really rubs me wrong.

My guess is they used Vince to get them in. Vince has a strong connection with the Grand Old Opry. It's a shame Vince couldn't have pulled those same strings when his buddy Glenn was in the band. Ugh. XM is broadcasting it. I won't be listening. I had a friend tag me in it today, they don't know I hate the new band and I was too tired to explain so I just "liked it" so they know I saw it. It hurt.

"hate"

[Dawn]

I totally agree about the legacy being secure that was a central point I made. I'm just saying what they believe

Actually, I do not agree with you at all.

[Freypower]

"hate"


He said he hated what they were doing, as NKIT said, the direction they have taken. So do I, and I won't be told that I am happier complaining. I'm not going to just sit back & allow it to happen without making my feelings on it clear, not in this thread. I don't comment on the threads about the shows. I leave those for the people who agree with the situation. I completely disagree that their current shows constitute a 'public tribute'. They are shows being played as the Eagles with two people brought in to replace Glenn Frey. They have not been billed in any way as a 'public tribute'. It is not what I asked for, in any way, shape or form. So yes, I have rejected it (I am not going to go back & respond to every previous post, I'm just summing up). If you think they are still the Eagles, fine. But you will have to understand that others do not share this view.

[WalshFan88]

He said he hated what they were doing, as NKIT said, the direction they have taken. So do I, and I won't be told that I am happier complaining. I'm not going to just sit back & allow it to happen without making my feelings on it clear, not in this thread. I don't comment on the threads about the shows. I leave those for the people who agree with the situation. I completely disagree that their current shows constitute a 'public tribute'. They are shows being played as the Eagles with two people brought in to replace Glenn Frey. They have not been billed in any way as a 'public tribute'. It is not what I asked for, in any way, shape or form. So yes, I have rejected it (I am not going to go back & respond to every previous post, I'm just summing up). If you think they are still the Eagles, fine. But you will have to understand that others do not share this view.

That's it.

I hate the new lineup, I hate them moving forward without who I consider the most important member, I hate them going back on their word regardless of their right to do so, I hate how greedy this feels, I hate the division it's caused, etc.

But I don't hate Don, Joe, and Tim. Or even Vince. Disappointed, you betcha. But I don't hate them, nor do I hate what I call the Eagles. I love the Eagles, they are my favorite band. But I do not consider a Glenn-less Eagles to still be Eagles. I don't hate the guys, I hate what they are doing and the decisions they've made.

[chaim]

While we're at it, I don't find it very logical either to say that people who hate what they are doing now are actually acting on "hate" if one person has used the word "hate". Anyway, this discussion is "going nowhere fast".

[EagleInKansas]

I think we're putting way more stock in all of this than even the Eagles themselves. There's no way any of them are worried about legacy or the public perception from either casual fans or diehards like us. They put in 45 years and want to go out on less depressing terms, all while introducing the world to the son of their leader and most influential member. They're riding off into the sunset and trying to make people feel good in the process. This is the post script, the afterword, the epilogue. The story has been told already. The legacy is complete and immovable.

[Annoying Twit]

I'll just say that I do not think it's certain that this is a time limited last hurrah. Given what we're seeing now, I think it's entirely possible that Eagles will remain active for some time.

This comment is not meant to judge, or defend. It's just a comment on how the current situation appears to me.

[Dawn]

Yep, kinda looks like no one is going to leave any money on the table especially now that their so called "experiment" appears to have enabled them with a way to capitalize on replacing Glenn Frey ... cue the video ... spotlight on ...

Well Done Azoff and Henley.

And THAT my friends is the sad reality ... Glenn Frey had been replaced and the Eagles legacy sold out. You don't have to agree but please, don't be naive or play the haters-gonna-hate card to silence disenchanted fans who have seen behind the curtain and are disgusted.

[Dawn]

I think we're putting way more stock in all of this than even the Eagles themselves. There's no way any of them are worried about legacy or the public perception from either casual fans or diehards like us. They put in 45 years and want to go out on less depressing terms, all while introducing the world to the son of their leader and most influential member. They're riding off into the sunset and trying to make people feel good in the process. This is the post script, the afterword, the epilogue. The story has been told already. The legacy is complete and immovable.

Sorry, the only part of this I can/will agree with is that it does appear none of Glenn's former band mates, new hires, managers, agents, promoters, and anyone else with their finger in the pie (so to speak) is worried about the Eagles legacy or public perception.

Hell no. That's what public relations firms are for, is it not? :roll:

[Dawn]

That's it.

I hate the new lineup, I hate them moving forward without who I consider the most important member, I hate them going back on their word regardless of their right to do so, I hate how greedy this feels, I hate the division it's caused, etc.

But I don't hate Don, Joe, and Tim. Or even Vince. Disappointed, you betcha. But I don't hate them, nor do I hate what I call the Eagles. I love the Eagles, they are my favorite band. But I do not consider a Glenn-less Eagles to still be Eagles. I don't hate the guys, I hate what they are doing and the decisions they've made.

i second that emotion. :censored::sigh:

[MaryCalifornia]

The only reason we have an Eagles 3.0 is because of Cindy Frey. She controls Glenn's business affairs, his estate, and his personal legacy, and she wants Don, Joe and Tim to continue to be active as the Eagles. Can we at least acknowledge that if someone hates what the Eagles are doing, SHE is the cause? This all begins and ends with her, NONE of this would be happening without her enthusiastic endorsement. Anyone disagree?

I just think it's so strange how people entirely ignore and disregard her role in the Eagles continuing without Glenn. It's like there's a huge blind spot, and all of the ire is directed toward those who truly aren't the decision-makers.

The reason I'm jumping in is because I miss everyone here and I hope we can someday acknowledge the tragedy is that Glenn died too soon, not what the other guys do in the future. I want Soda and everybody else to enjoy what is and will happen with the guys.

[Freypower]

The only reason we have an Eagles 3.0 is because of Cindy Frey. She controls Glenn's business affairs, his estate, and his personal legacy, and she wants Don, Joe and Tim to continue to be active as the Eagles. Can we at least acknowledge that if someone hates what the Eagles are doing, SHE is the cause? This all begins and ends with her, NONE of this would be happening without her enthusiastic endorsement. Anyone disagree?

I just think it's so strange how people entirely ignore and disregard her role in the Eagles continuing without Glenn. It's like there's a huge blind spot, and all of the ire is directed toward those who truly aren't the decision-makers.

The reason I'm jumping in is because I miss everyone here and I hope we can someday acknowledge the tragedy is that Glenn died too soon, not what the other guys do in the future. I want Soda and everybody else to enjoy what is and will happen with the guys.

I don't agree that because Cindy endorsed this, she CAUSED it. She didn't initiate it. Therefore she didn't cause it. It is possible that the only thing she endorsed were the two festival shows. For all we know they have now continued to book more dates without her endorsement, which frankly, they probably no longer need.

I can't agree with the 'riding off into the sunset' stuff. It was unfortunate that they couldn't do that with Glenn. They could have done it with one tribute show, and then they could have called it quits. That would have been the dignified and proper thing to do. So what if it would have been 'depressing'? It at least would have acknowledged reality instead of the cllinging on at all costs mentality that they seem to have developed. If the story has been told, there is no need for a bogus epilogue. All it has done is leave a bad taste in the mouths of people such as myself.

I can't 'enjoy' what they are doing. Why should I? I'm sorry, but I don't do the My Country Right Or Wrong thing. I do think Glenn Frey has not been sufficiently acknowleged, and probably will never be now. That's the real tragedy.

[EagleInKansas]

Glenn Frey is constantly acknowledged. Often explicitly, and forever in the fact that his son is on stage with the remaining members of the Eagles. His son. His literal blood. Very difficult for any tribute to exceed that.

[WalshFan88]

As far as Cindy, well I don't think it was her idea, so I personally can't blame her. He did endorse it and give the ok, but I think it wasn't her idea. That had to be Irving who IMO brainwashed Don and that's how it all started. I could be wrong, but from what I've seen and what I know about Irving, I think he's the bad guy.

The case with Cindy reminds me of that and Ronnie Van Zant of Lynyrd Skynyrd and his wife Judy.

When Skynyrd did their first Tribute Tour in the late 80s, the idea is that they would never use the name again afterwards. After awhile Gary Rossington and Dale Krantz wants to keep it going. They pressured Judy into going along with it with the rule was for that to use the name 3 original members had to be in the band. It was done in court and everything. Well fast forward years later, and there is only one original member and they pressured Judy to revise the deal and she also likely saw the money on the table (not saying Cindy is that way), but the pressure with money involved is very hard to pass up. Right now Gary is the only original member and he's in poor health with a bad heart. When Gary dies, and if they continue the band, IMO Judy will go along with it yet again and then you have a band that doesn't have anything to do with the real Lynyrd Skynyrd watering down the name. I love Gary as a player, but I think he is a greedy man.

It's not an exact comparison, but if you forget about the rule of three, the takeaway and similarity is that pressure with money included is hard to pass up and that it waters down the name.

[WalshFan88]

Glenn Frey is constantly acknowledged. Often explicitly, and forever in the fact that his son is on stage with the remaining members of the Eagles. His son. His literal blood. Very difficult for any tribute to exceed that.

I can see where you are coming from somewhat. I think the deal is that they haven't outright and explicitly done something billed as a Glenn tribute. A CD, a concert dedicated for that, a DVD, something.

As far as Deacon, I agree that it is nice for him to be there, but that IMO isn't what people are asking for. They are asking for something specific, I could be wrong but I think the above descriptions/options are more what those like FP want.

Me, I'm not really interested in it at the point, my comments on the lack of a tribute were more in support of Freypower and those that feel like it. I'm not upset at this point because of a lack of a tribute, it's more about them going forward.

That said, I can perhaps understand how it might be contradictory to both wish for a Tribute album but not seemingly want one. I think it has to be billed explicitly as a Glenn tribute album and not just a new Eagles record.

[sodascouts]

Regarding the Opry, I think it's very possible the band wasn't interested in playing it while Glenn was still alive. Seeing what a big fan Vince Gill is of the band, I daresay if Glenn had picked up the phone and told him they'd like an invitation, he would have arranged it. It simply may not have been something that was a priority for Glenn and now that he's gone and Don's in control, it's been put on the agenda.


I'll just say that I do not think it's certain that this is a time limited last hurrah. Given what we're seeing now, I think it's entirely possible that Eagles will remain active for some time.


That's what I've braced myself for. Not just touring, but new recordings too - Part of the Plan is dipping the toe in the water, I believe. I hope I'm wrong. As I said earlier, recordings will stick around long after the shows fade, and those really will screw with the legacy as the Eagles changes from a band into "Don Henley and friends."

Again, though, I don't want to borrow trouble; I will wait and see if they go further. Perhaps I'm wrong. I just want to prepare for the worst.

[New Kid In Town]

MaryCalifornia - I miss you posting here. I have always enjoyed reading your thoughtful take on things. I hope we "see" you more often.

I do not think Cindy initiate it. I think that was done by Irving and endorsed by Don. JMHO, but I think they were toying with the idea as early as March 2016 when Don gave that interview with the Montreal newspaper. He said then that the only way the Eagles could continue would be if Deacon was aboard. After there was a back lash, he backed off saying he had never discussed it with Cindy. This was two months after Glenn died.
I can see Cindy approving this. Their son is up there playing in his father's band, looking like his Dad did when he was 23-25 years old. I would guess it is probably very healing for both of them and perhaps they feel a way to honor Glenn. However, I do believe none of this would have happened if it was not initiated by Irving or Irving and Don.

[sodascouts]

MaryCalifornia, I'm glad to see you, too! I echo what others have said about Cindy's endorsement of it not being the same as initiating it, but I also want to add that I appreciate where you're coming from and it's sweet of you to want everyone to share your enthusiasm. You have a good heart!

However, nothing will change my fundamental belief that without Glenn Frey - the band's co-founder, driving force, and a fundamental part of its direction, vision, and sound - there is no Eagles.

[WKMB55]

Evidentally Cindy Frey is the only person Glenn trusted to make future decisions since he left her totally in charge of everything he spent most of his life working for. They were together for quite some time and I would think they said things to each other concerning business and personal matters that no one else but the two of them will ever know about. Based solely on articles I have read about the Frey's, I have a hard time believing that Irving or Don could push her into anything that she wasn't comfortable with. I'm not sure they would try. Even if they did, she seems totally capable of standing her ground. Since Glenn's passing, I've read a lot of comments (more pro than con) on 3 or 4 fan sites about Don, Joe and Timothy's right to continue. Some of the comments seem to indicate that there are a few fans who have self appointed themselves as guardians of Glenn's legacy when in reality Cindy is the only one who legally holds that right. While I haven't been to an Eagles concert since 2015 and I have yet to make a decision about future shows, I respect everyone elses right to their feelings, decisions and choices. I won't attempt to change your mind and you won't change mine.

[YoungEaglesFan]

Actually, I do not agree with you at all.

No I meant I agree with Kansas about his views on the bands legacy. Not you sorry

[Annoying Twit]

Evidentally Cindy Frey is the only person Glenn trusted to make future decisions since he left her totally in charge of everything he spent most of his life working for. They were together for quite some time and I would think they said things to each other concerning business and personal matters that no one else but the two of them will ever know about. Based solely on articles I have read about the Frey's, I have a hard time believing that Irving or Don could push her into anything that she wasn't comfortable with. I'm not sure they would try. Even if they did, she seems totally capable of standing her ground. Since Glenn's passing, I've read a lot of comments (more pro than con) on 3 or 4 fan sites about Don, Joe and Timothy's right to continue. Some of the comments seem to indicate that there are a few fans who have self appointed themselves as guardians of Glenn's legacy when in reality Cindy is the only one who legally holds that right. While I haven't been to an Eagles concert since 2015 and I have yet to make a decision about future shows, I respect everyone elses right to their feelings, decisions and choices. I won't attempt to change your mind and you won't change mine.

I agree completely with what you say in terms of Cindy being the person who is now naturally the guardian of Glenn's legacy.

But, it isn't just Cindy who would have had a say; I don't believe that anyone could make Deacon participate if he didn't think it was the right thing to do.

[maryc2130]

As far as Cindy, well I don't think it was her idea, so I personally can't blame her. He did endorse it and give the ok, but I think it wasn't her idea. That had to be Irving who IMO brainwashed Don and that's how it all started. I could be wrong, but from what I've seen and what I know about Irving, I think he's the bad guy.

The case with Cindy reminds me of that and Ronnie Van Zant of Lynyrd Skynyrd and his wife Judy.

When Skynyrd did their first Tribute Tour in the late 80s, the idea is that they would never use the name again afterwards. After awhile Gary Rossington and Dale Krantz wants to keep it going. They pressured Judy into going along with it with the rule was for that to use the name 3 original members had to be in the band. It was done in court and everything. Well fast forward years later, and there is only one original member and they pressured Judy to revise the deal and she also likely saw the money on the table (not saying Cindy is that way), but the pressure with money involved is very hard to pass up. Right now Gary is the only original member and he's in poor health with a bad heart. When Gary dies, and if they continue the band, IMO Judy will go along with it yet again and then you have a band that doesn't have anything to do with the real Lynyrd Skynyrd watering down the name. I love Gary as a player, but I think he is a greedy man.

It's not an exact comparison, but if you forget about the rule of three, the takeaway and similarity is that pressure with money included is hard to pass up and that it waters down the name.

As to the part I've bolded: I doubt anyone brainwashes Don. He's an extremely intelligent man with (very) strong opinions of his own. Irving may have put on the pressure and tried to talk him into it, but from everything I've seen and read about the man, Don makes his own decisions.

I've been saying all along when people blame Don and/or Irving in this that it couldn't have happened without Cindy's approval. Glenn's family, as well as his former band mates and manager, approve of it. In part, that's why I still have trouble understanding why so many people here oppose it. I do respect everyone's right to their opinions, but I don't really understand them. But I digress. If Glenn's family, and more specifically Cindy Frey, did not approve of these concerts, they would not be taking place.

And whoever said Don and Irving might have tried to add on dates without Cindy noticing is wrong, IMHO. Her son is performing with them, how could she not notice? And now that she's co-owner of Eagles, she most likely has the power to reject or approve any major move on the bands' part, unless she's okay with Don making all the decisions, which I very much doubt.

[VillageGirl]

Loved reading your post above Mary! Pretty much feel the same.

[MaryCalifornia]

Thanks Soda, you're the best!

I'd like to also point out that I'm sure that Cindy and her 3 children WANT the money that will roll in from future Eagles activities, I'm guessing the money is not insubstantial. Cindy is young and God willing has many decades of life ahead of her - of course she welcomes future and different income streams for herself and her family and Glenn's remaining relatives that he supports. There is nothing wrong with this, it is not unsavory.

This isn't some fairytale fantasyland - it is real life, and it's hard, and Don, Joe, Tim and Cindy are human. Life is messy and complicated and people don't know how to act when someone dies. FreyPower thinks the Eagles should do the "dignified and proper thing". This made me laugh because...um...since when? They're a rock band for God's sake! Underage hookers! Illegal drugs! Bad behavior! Their history is that they play music and make money. That is what they're continuing to do.

They took their time to mourn Glenn, all in their own ways, and now they're living life again and making it up as they go. I wish their fans wouldn't think they're morally reprehensible for trying to continue to live, honor Glenn, and perpetuate the world's enjoyment of the Eagles. It's totally fine if you don't think that's really the Eagles up there, but you don't need to criticize them, you should wish for their success, not for their failure.

Also fantasyland - thinking Don, Tim and Joe would be up there every night as the Eagles if Cindy wasn't behind them 100%. To suggest coercion has zero basis in the facts as we know them and implies that Cindy is weak.

[New Kid In Town]

Hi Mary - Welcome back !
I agree with almost everything you say. The Eagles have always been a business and about making money. This goes back to when they were first formed in Aug. 1971, with their well known desire by all to make a shit load of money. I also believe that no one can make Cindy or Deacon do something they do not want to do. I of course don't know her, but I don't get the impression Cindy is, for lack of a better word, a wimp(sorry). I can't see Glenn marrying some meek, "yes honey" type of woman. I would guess she now feels it is her responsibility to support her family as well as any of Glenn's family members he supported such as his Dad. As I said in my earlier post, I would guess she feels this is a way to honor Glenn and probably gives them some kind of peace and closure. And this is just MHO, but I don't think Don, Cindy, Joe, or Tim care about what any of us think. They will do want they want to do and what they feel is best for them.

[WKMB55]

Mary California, I think post #1544 in this thread is the best I have read in a long time!!

I don't understand some of the criticisms from others. I don't know of anyone who works without expecting to get paid. I also applaud Glenn's personal and work families for moving forward and embracing life. I think that their decisions indicate that at least they believe in a future and they still have hope.

You are absolutely right. Soda is the best!!

[Freypower]

As to the part I've bolded: I doubt anyone brainwashes Don. He's an extremely intelligent man with (very) strong opinions of his own. Irving may have put on the pressure and tried to talk him into it, but from everything I've seen and read about the man, Don makes his own decisions.

I've been saying all along when people blame Don and/or Irving in this that it couldn't have happened without Cindy's approval. Glenn's family, as well as his former band mates and manager, approve of it. In part, that's why I still have trouble understanding why so many people here oppose it. I do respect everyone's right to their opinions, but I don't really understand them. But I digress. If Glenn's family, and more specifically Cindy Frey, did not approve of these concerts, they would not be taking place.

And whoever said Don and Irving might have tried to add on dates without Cindy noticing is wrong, IMHO. Her son is performing with them, how could she not notice? And now that she's co-owner of Eagles, she most likely has the power to reject or approve any major move on the bands' part, unless she's okay with Don making all the decisions, which I very much doubt.

I think you refer to me here. I never said Cindy would not 'notice'. However now the process has been set in motion & she gave her approval, she probably doesn't have to do it any more. It's taken for granted that she approves of it.

[Freypower]

Thanks Soda, you're the best!

I'd like to also point out that I'm sure that Cindy and her 3 children WANT the money that will roll in from future Eagles activities, I'm guessing the money is not insubstantial. Cindy is young and God willing has many decades of life ahead of her - of course she welcomes future and different income streams for herself and her family and Glenn's remaining relatives that he supports. There is nothing wrong with this, it is not unsavory.

This isn't some fairytale fantasyland - it is real life, and it's hard, and Don, Joe, Tim and Cindy are human. Life is messy and complicated and people don't know how to act when someone dies. FreyPower thinks the Eagles should do the "dignified and proper thing". This made me laugh because...um...since when? They're a rock band for God's sake! Underage hookers! Illegal drugs! Bad behavior! Their history is that they play music and make money. That is what they're continuing to do.

They took their time to mourn Glenn, all in their own ways, and now they're living life again and making it up as they go. I wish their fans wouldn't think they're morally reprehensible for trying to continue to live, honor Glenn, and perpetuate the world's enjoyment of the Eagles. It's totally fine if you don't think that's really the Eagles up there, but you don't need to criticize them, you should wish for their success, not for their failure.

Also fantasyland - thinking Don, Tim and Joe would be up there every night as the Eagles if Cindy wasn't behind them 100%. To suggest coercion has zero basis in the facts as we know them and implies that Cindy is weak.

Once again I am told that I am not entitled to an opinion. Once again I am told I SHOULD 'wish' for their success. I fail to see why. These are extremely rich men. They are not going to starve.

You talk about me living in fantasyland & then you describe the stuff they did when they were young, in the 70s. They are not young any more, and they are a 'rock band' only in the broadest sense of the term. They could have continued their solo careers & I would not have had a problem. I do have a problem with them calling themselves Eagles, when for me they are no longer any such thing.

Let them make money, then, if that is all they care about. But I don't have to give them any more of MY money. I've done that.

[WalshFan88]

I must agree with FP in the sense I feel a strong presence that we shouldn't be critical of the band because they know best and that they are somehow untouchable or off limits. Nothing could be further from the truth. I also agree with her that I'd like to think they've moved past their carefree years and are maybe mature enough now to do the dignified thing. If not, that's saddening.

As far as Don Henley being brainwashed, I was actually trying to come up with a reason it happened that doesn't put all of the blame on him. I was more or less giving him the benefit of the doubt. Maybe he is just as guilty as Irving.

I'm not saying Cindy's weak, but I am saying that just because she approved it doesn't necessarily mean it was the right decision or that there wasn't some kind of secondary gain influencing her decision. I have the right to believe that as much as some of you do on believing that the band is ok for doing what they are and that we should all support them regardless and wish for their success. I have no intention of doing that, as that is nothing more than blind support. I loved what I called the Eagles, and that is not what is out there now with that name.

That's really all I have to say about it at this time.

[WalshFan88]

Mary California, I think post #1544 in this thread is the best I have read in a long time!!

I don't understand some of the criticisms from others. I don't know of anyone who works without expecting to get paid. I also applaud Glenn's personal and work families for moving forward and embracing life. I think that their decisions indicate that at least they believe in a future and they still have hope.

You are absolutely right. Soda is the best!!

I think you are a bit misguided WKM. I'm not asking them to work for no money. I'm asking them to not work under the Eagles name at all. If they want to make money, which is fine under the right umbrella, they can find a new name and or focus on their solo careers. They can sell real Eagles unreleased vault stuff, they can sell merchandise, whatever. But they lose all of my respect doing what they are doing. To me it's fraudulent. It just is, and that's just how I feel about it.

Don, Joe, and Tim without Glenn but with Glenn's son and Vince Gill doesn't not = Eagles. While I agree that the sum of the parts are greater, for me Glenn was the Eagles heart and soul. I know not everyone feels that way and that's perfectly ok. But it really was his baby and I don't think there is any changing the way I feel about that, I have my own observations and things I've seen. Not to mention his contributions. That is just my take on it, but it does influence how I feel about this Eagles 3.0 business.

[WalshFan88]

And this is just MHO, but I don't think Don, Cindy, Joe, or Tim care about what any of us think. They will do want they want to do and what they feel is best for them.

And that's fine, but with that comes repercussions they will have to face. They can make those decisions and we can comment on said decisions and choose rather or not to support them financially any more or not, and that will inevitably be noticeable at some point. And I know there are a lot more that feel like me so I feel pretty confident in that regard that at some point it will be noticed.

They have the freedom to move on, and we have the freedom to not support them and criticize them. It's really just that simple. It works both ways.

[WalshFan88]

It's totally fine if you don't think that's really the Eagles up there, but you don't need to criticize them, you should wish for their success, not for their failure.

Looks an awful lot like what FP is saying, AT. Saying we should wish for their success.

[Annoying Twit]

Looks an awful lot like what FP is saying, AT. Saying we should wish for their success.

Hmm... I deleted my post and will read more carefully next time. This is a very tricky thread, because of long history.

[WalshFan88]

Hmm... I deleted my post and will read more carefully next time. This is a very tricky thread, because of long history.

That's ok. I just wanted you to know it wasn't made up.

[YoungEaglesFan]

I think you are a bit misguided WKM. I'm not asking them to work for no money. I'm asking them to not work under the Eagles name at all. If they want to make money, which is fine under the right umbrella, they can find a new name and or focus on their solo careers. They can sell real Eagles unreleased vault stuff, they can sell merchandise, whatever. But they lose all of my respect doing what they are doing. To me it's fraudulent. It just is, and that's just how I feel about it.

Don, Joe, and Tim without Glenn but with Glenn's son and Vince Gill doesn't not = Eagles. While I agree that the sum of the parts are greater, for me Glenn was the Eagles heart and soul. I know not everyone feels that way and that's perfectly ok. But it really was his baby and I don't think there is any changing the way I feel about that, I have my own observations and things I've seen. Not to mention his contributions. That is just my take on it, but it does influence how I feel about this Eagles 3.0 business.

I fail to see how this fraudulent. People pay to have the remaining Eagles plus help play music. If you're only issue is using the name Eagles then we are only arguing over semantics. If Joe Don and Tim plus Deacon and Vince played the Eagles music at the east and west without calling it the Eagles everyone would still view them as the Eagles. To make logical sense you ought to either be OK with Eagles 3.0 or just simply oppose any new Eagles activities. I could easily devils advocate and argue that what Glenn and Don did to the band made them fraudulent. That is a pretty common view now

[EagleInKansas]

No other band in the history of this planet, outside of the Beatles, could sell 55,000 tickets after losing their frontman. Could the Stones sell out Dodger Stadium without Mick? Hell no. I know it's little consolation to people, but that's Glenn's legacy to me -- a big part of it, anyway. He created something so much larger than life that even when he's not there, they're megahuge. Glenn did that. That's why I deeply believe that every time they step on the stage they are honoring Glenn.

[Dawn]

While no one expects the band to work for free I have yet to see anyone supporting the band actually concede that MONEY could/would be a major incentive for touring under the Eagles brand name until ... wait for it .... the question was asked.

Of course, Song Power ... keeping the songs alive ... sounds better than show me the money but let's keep it real and understand the Eagles is a business and hiring Vince Gill and Deacon Frey to replace Glenn Frey was a fate accompli.

[Dawn]

I believe the Eagles got alot of mileage out of Vince Gill and Deacon Frey. What happens if they take either or both of them out of the lineup?

Also the first two concerts Classics East and West were 6 bands and fans had to buy 2day passes until one day passes were made available. The Eagles were one of three bands performing. At Classic Northwest it was Eagles and Doobie Brothers.

[Freypower]

I believe the Eagles got alot of mileage out of Vince Gill and Deacon Frey. What happens if they take either or both of them out of the lineup?

Well, let's be honest here. They could replace GIll with anyone. Deacon Frey on the other hand provides the only connecton left with his father. Take him out, you take out the last vestiges of credibilty this operation has. But that is another issue for down the track, no doubt for next year when a 30 or 40 date American tour is announced.

[YoungEaglesFan]

While no one expects the band to work for free I have yet to see anyone supporting the band actually concede that MONEY could/would be a major incentive for touring under the Eagles brand name until ... wait for it .... the question was asked.

Of course, Song Power ... keeping the songs alive ... sounds better than show me the money but let's keep it real and understand the Eagles is a business and hiring Vince Gill and Deacon Frey to replace Glenn Frey was a fate accompli.

Of course money played a role but to only criticize the band for money grabbing now is hypocritical. Hell freezes over was a tour at least partly done for money, same thing since the LROOE tour. They kept going because of money. Unless you're putting new material out, you're recycling old stuff for money. So to criticize the new lineup for money grabbing is unfair

[YoungEaglesFan]

Well, let's be honest here. They could replace GIll with anyone. Deacon Frey on the other hand provides the only connecton left with his father. Take him out, you take out the last vestiges of credibilty this operation has. But that is another issue for down the track, no doubt for next year when a 30 or 40 date American tour is announced.

I personally don't see a better replacement than Gill. His vocal type is at least similar to Glenn's. It's not Glenn but it's close in tone. I don't think a better replacement exists. Don is close to him and Gill doesn't have anything else really going on

[New Kid In Town]

no doubt for next year when a 30 or 40 date American tour is announced.

I bet Irving is in the process of working that out as we sit here discussing this.

YEF - QUOTE : "Of course money played a role but to only criticize the band for money grabbing now is hypocritical. Hell freezes over was a tour at least partly done for money, same thing since the LROOE tour. They kept going because of money. Unless you're putting new material out, you're recycling old stuff for money. So to criticize the new lineup for money grabbing is unfair."

I agree with part of this. HFO was def done partly for the money. The Eagles started the trend with the crazy ticket prices when they charged $100 as a top ticket price. However. LROOE was done to promote their new cd, the first in almost 30 years. Of course they toured to make money but to also sell the cd. What was the quote Don said - something along the lines of "You keep coming and we'll keep playing". Touring is the only way a band can make money now and the Eagles have always been one of the top grossing bands since HFO.

[YoungEaglesFan]

I bet Irving is in the process of working that out as we sit here discussing this.

I'm willing to bet he is lurking on this webpage right now testing the waters for a multi leg world tour

[New Kid In Town]

I'm willing to bet he is lurking on this webpage right now testing the waters for a multi leg world tour

Yep, I agree. I would not be surprised if they have someone who reads this site every day.

[YoungEaglesFan]

Yep, I agree. I would not be surprised if they have someone who reads this site every day.

Sodascouts is most likely a Irving Azoff paid agent

[Dawn]

Not hypocritical ...the Classic tour is Azoffs answer to the mega moneymaker Desert Trip.2016.

[chaim]

Again, contrary to what some may think, those who are very much opposed to something the band does are entitled to their opinion. Seems to me that when some people are against what the band do, some are against those people feeling that way. There are enough supporters of the current lineup here IMO. There's no need for everyone to feel the same.

EDIT:

Someone said that the same amount of people would attend the concerts if they didn't use the name Eagles. Err.......I don't agree.

[YoungEaglesFan]

Not hypocritical ...the Classic tour is Azoffs answer to the mega moneymaker Desert Trip.2016.

Dawn- I agree the classic concrets were money grabs (in my opinion one worth seeing), but the Eagles have not been above Money grabbing before and are notorious for it. Glenn being a big part of that. I choose not to judge him for it but I also choose not to judge the current lineup for trying to make money

[WalshFan88]

I fail to see how this fraudulent. People pay to have the remaining Eagles plus help play music. If you're only issue is using the name Eagles then we are only arguing over semantics. If Joe Don and Tim plus Deacon and Vince played the Eagles music at the east and west without calling it the Eagles everyone would still view them as the Eagles. To make logical sense you ought to either be OK with Eagles 3.0 or just simply oppose any new Eagles activities. I could easily devils advocate and argue that what Glenn and Don did to the band made them fraudulent. That is a pretty common view now

Well legally/technically it isn't. But to me it feels like it is.

Using the Eagles name without Glenn in the band IS the issue, and I don't think it's quite right to dwindle it down to something little. It's a legendary name that should have been left alone IMO after it's founding father and co-lead songwriter died.

[WalshFan88]

Well, let's be honest here. They could replace GIll with anyone. Deacon Frey on the other hand provides the only connecton left with his father. Take him out, you take out the last vestiges of credibilty this operation has. But that is another issue for down the track, no doubt for next year when a 30 or 40 date American tour is announced.

I would agree.

I think Deacon being there, for some people, is enough to win them back from feeling like we do. If you take him out I feel there would be even more uproar, from people we haven't even heard from yet. Just my gut feeling on this.

[WalshFan88]

Again, contrary to what some may think, those who are very much opposed to something the band does are entitled to their opinion. Seems to me that when some people are against what the band do, some are against those people feeling that way. There are enough supporters of the current lineup here IMO. There's no need for everyone to feel the same.

EDIT:

Someone said that the same amount of people would attend the concerts if they didn't use the name Eagles. Err.......I don't agree.

Amen.

[WalshFan88]

Dawn- I agree the classic concrets were money grabs (in my opinion one worth seeing), but the Eagles have not been above Money grabbing before and are notorious for it. Glenn being a big part of that. I choose not to judge him for it but I also choose not to judge the current lineup for trying to make money

I would agree with this, but IMO it's a whole other level when they are doing it without Glenn. But I won't deny they've always been money hungry. So maybe I shouldn't be as surprised as I am. But I just feel it cheapens the name to continue under the name without Glenn there. I feel it hurts their legacy.

[WalshFan88]

I'm torn on whether or not I will support the Eagles financially in the future outside of anything to do with the new lineup.

Case in point, normally I wouldn't have thought twice about buying the newly announced 40th Anniversary Hotel California deluxe remaster for 99 bucks. Because honestly I would love to have it but I won't lie, I'm having a hard time doing it because I feel like not only I'd feel hypocritical, look hypocritical, and it would be supporting them still, though not related to the new lineup. I realize Glenn's family would get some of the profits (but they do with the concerts) but I still struggle with the idea of buying this. But, it's also classic Eagles and I want it badly. I really hate to think of how it got to this point, where normally I wouldn't even think twice. Now I'm battling my emotions on it and my own multiple views. I'm leaning towards passing on it, but it does have Glenn and his family would see some of that and it's my favorite record of all time and I'd love to have it.

[Magnolia]

I have thought long and hard about posting on this thread. I'm not a big fan of conflict and this thread has a lot of that in it but I decided to go ahead and give my two cents on why I'm "pro" current lineup. Everyone is entitled to their opinions on whether or not the Eagles should continue to tour and use the name. I don't want to belittle or dismiss anyone's feelings on the matter. This is just my own thoughts.

I never saw the band live while Glenn was alive but from watching dvds, he had a spark that can never be replaced nor should it be replaced. However, that being said, I'm fine with the band currently going on under the name of Eagles. It's morbid to think about, but we don't know how much longer we will have Don, or Joe, or Timothy around. I for one will enjoy the band for as long as I can.

I became more than a casual fan because of the interest surrounding Deacon playing in the band. I researched more and fell in love with the band that Glenn started. I bought the cds and the dvds and I'm grateful to the current lineup for opening my eyes to all the wonderful things Glenn and the Eagles have done.

[Funk 50]

I've been disappointed with Eagles 3.0 so far but I haven't totally given up on them yet. I'm interested in seeing them live if they're gonna play the whole of the Hotel California album, maybe Good Day In Hell too. It's sad that Glenn wont be there, I'm guessing that Randy wont be able to cut it anymore and Felder's still too distant. I'm sure the Eagles can still put on a marvelous show.

The HFO Tour showed the entertainment industry that it was possible to sell very expensive tickets in huge venues if enough was invested in the show.

Joe's just been in Japan with Irving and David Beckham, trying to get them to invest in better concert infrastructure, I presume so the Eagles will be able to put on some shows there in future.

[sodascouts]

I think Deacon being there, for some people, is enough to win them back from feeling like we do.

Yes - they're very lucky Glenn had a son who can sing and play guitar.

[sodascouts]

I'm torn on whether or not I will support the Eagles financially in the future outside of anything to do with the new lineup.

Case in point, normally I wouldn't have thought twice about buying the newly announced 40th Anniversary Hotel California deluxe remaster for 99 bucks. Because honestly I would love to have it but I won't lie, I'm having a hard time doing it because I feel like not only I'd feel hypocritical, look hypocritical, and it would be supporting them still, though not related to the new lineup. I realize Glenn's family would get some of the profits (but they do with the concerts) but I still struggle with the idea of buying this. But, it's also classic Eagles and I want it badly. I really hate to think of how it got to this point, where normally I wouldn't even think twice. Now I'm battling my emotions on it and my own multiple views. I'm leaning towards passing on it, but it does have Glenn and his family would see some of that and it's my favorite record of all time and I'd love to have it.

Sweetie, it is not hypocritical at all. You and I are still Eagles fans, as is everyone else who is not supportive of what is now calling themselves the Eagles.

There is no need to boycott re-releases as they have nothing to do with what is now going on. You are not only depriving yourself of what you love, but you are boycotting the work of the very person whose contribution they are deeming unnecessary by continuing (which is the entire problem I have with this - I feel Glenn is necessary for it to be the Eagles).

[New Kid In Town]

Amen Soda. I told Austin he should buy it and not feel guilty about it. It's his favorite album.
I also think that without Deacon this would never be happening.
As a side note - I wonder if Taylor or Otis can sing and play an instrument. I know Taylor is an actress and Otis has fooled around on drums. I mean sing and play like Deacon, who is a very talented kid.

[sodascouts]

Taylor can sing quite well. I don't know about Otis. I wonder how he feels... but I don't want to get off topic.

At any rate, I certainly plan on getting the re-release. In fact, I'm even going to get the $100 version!

[Dawn]

Yes, the band hit pay dirt with Deacon. In fact, one might argue Deacon sealed the deal especially given Don Henley's statements.

[groupie2686]

Taylor can sing quite well. I don't know about Otis. I wonder how he feels... but I don't want to get off topic.

At any rate, I certainly plan on getting the re-release. In fact, I'm even going to get the $100 version!

If you don't mind me asking, how do you know Taylor can sing? I've read your accounts of meeting Glenn over the years, and it is incredible - I'm so jealous!

I've been following this thread for months now and I haven't wanted to get into it, but I might as well throw my two cents in. Glenn was the reason I got into the Eagles, so to me, it's not the Eagles without him. Not even with his son in the band. I have nothing against anyone who supports this and will not try to convince them otherwise. But for me, the Eagles ended in 2016.

[sodascouts]

Yes, the band hit pay dirt with Deacon. In fact, one might argue Deacon sealed the deal especially given Don Henley's statements.

Then the question becomes, if they do decide to record (Heaven forbid), do they continue with Deacon or set him aside once they decide he's no longer necessary to lend them legitimacy?


If you don't mind me asking, how do you know Taylor can sing? I've read your accounts of meeting Glenn over the years, and it is incredible - I'm so jealous!

Glenn gave us some stuff that night we visited him in Niagara Falls. One of the items had Taylor singing on it. "Underground swag" he called it. And he told us if we ever shared it, he would consider us to be in his "penalty box for life"! But obviously he never would have given it to us if he really thought we would share it with anyone... and he was right. 10 years later and it's still safe, and it always will be.


I've been following this thread for months now and I haven't wanted to get into it, but I might as well throw my two cents in. Glenn was the reason I got into the Eagles, so to me, it's not the Eagles without him. Not even with his son in the band. I have nothing against anyone who supports this and will not try to convince them otherwise. But for me, the Eagles ended in 2016.Amen!

[WKMB55]

As I read everyone's recent opinions about Deacon's purpose in the band, I was thinking the same thing Soda was concerning the fact that Glenn and Cindy have 3 children all with at least some musical talent.

Then the thought jokingly went through my head that if Don, Joe, Timothy, Vince and Deacon continue for several years then Otis will be old enough to make his own decision about singing with the band if invited. I hesitated to post my thought because of the strong reactions that I expected would follow.

I agree with Soda 100% that its best to just leave this subject alone because its only crazy speculation and doesn't belong in the 3.0 discussion.

[WKMB55]

I don't know whether anyone else feels the same as I do, but neither the addition of Vince Gill and Deacon Frey or the release of Vince or Deacon will ever have any influence regarding my feelings about this entire situation.

[sodascouts]

I also think that without Deacon this would never be happening.

Well, where there's a will, there's a way. With the lure of the kind of money the Classic shows and the following tours will bring, I think it still would have happened. They could have still "done it for the fans."

One thing's for sure, though - it would have met with a lot more fan resistance without Deacon, and the press would not have been as kind.


I don't know whether anyone else feels the same as I do, but neither the addition of Vince Gill and Deacon Frey or the release of Vince or Deacon will ever have any influence regarding my feelings about this entire situation.

::raises hand::

[BillBailey1976]

I agree. If they had wanted to do this, Deacon or not, they would have. As much power as everyone is giving Cindy Frey in the decision to continue, had Henley wanted to go on, he probably could have. I'm sure there are loophole clauses in contracts, and issues like "preventing him from earning a living" as ludicrous as that sounds.
Since he is at least a 50 percent owner, maybe more in some of the Eagles related companies, he would probably have the right to use the name to promote himself and the others.

[WalshFan88]

Sweetie, it is not hypocritical at all. You and I are still Eagles fans, as is everyone else who is not supportive of what is now calling themselves the Eagles.

There is no need to boycott re-releases as they have nothing to do with what is now going on. You are not only depriving yourself of what you love, but you are boycotting the work of the very person whose contribution they are deeming unnecessary by continuing (which is the entire problem I have with this - I feel Glenn is necessary for it to be the Eagles).

Thanks!

I think I will probably try and get it. It is something that means a lot to me.

[Dawn]

I don't know if we will ever know the backstory on what really happened but I do know the Classic didn't happen overnite. I also believe not revealing the names of both of the mystery guest artists before tickets went on sale was an ill advised publicity stunt that made them look desperate.

[UndertheWire]

When the "Classic" events were first rumoured, one story was that Henley would be part of it, either as a solo artist or with Joe and Timothy if they agreed. That would fit both with plans being made well in advance but Timothy not knowing of them.

[Glennhoney]

Then the question becomes, if they do decide to record (Heaven forbid), do they continue with Deacon or set him aside once they decide he's no longer necessary to lend them legitimacy?



Glenn gave us some stuff that night we visited him in Niagara Falls. One of the items had Taylor singing on it. "Underground swag" he called it. And he told us if we ever shared it, he would consider us to be in his "penalty box for life"! But obviously he never would have given it to us if he really thought we would share it with anyone... and he was right. 10 years later and it's still safe, and it always will be.

Amen!
I recall somebody saying they had received a Christmas card with CD from the Frey's one year and that Otis was quite the singer....anybody remember that???..I imagine they all have some talent...

[Glennhoney]

I don't know if we will ever know the backstory on what really happened but I do know the Classic didn't happen overnite. I also believe not revealing the names of both of the mystery guest artists before tickets went on sale was an ill advised publicity stunt that made them look desperate.
I agree............

[Dawn]

I wonder if Deacon had declined if Henley would have been willing to roll the dice with just Vince Gill? I also wonder how long they will keep touring but then again it's no secret touring is where the money is and if folks are willing to pay upwards of $500 per ticket and everybody is in good health I guess we can expect to see them adding more dates indefinitly.

[Dawn]

As for Azoff and The Classics ... he's done 3 concerts for 2017 I would imagine we should start hearing rumblings soon about any live concert DVDs being released as well as any concerts planned for 2018.

[WalshFan88]

I wonder if Deacon had declined if Henley would have been willing to roll the dice with just Vince Gill? I also wonder how long they will keep touring but then again it's no secret touring is where the money is and if folks are willing to pay upwards of $500 per ticket and everybody is in good health I guess we can expect to see them adding more dates indefinitly.

My gut tells me yes...sadly.

My guess is that they'll stop when Henley can't go anymore. Until then they'll just replace members as needed and keep that cash cow on life support indefinitely.

[EagleInKansas]

Selling out an NBA arena two nights in a row really lends credibility to your "life support" assertion.

[sodascouts]

Yep. This has proven that if you put "EAGLES" on the marquee, people will come. I don't think most casual fans even give a crap who's onstage. They just want to hear "Hotel California." The band could have hired pretty much anybody with a good voice to sing Glenn's parts and these people would have showed up.


My guess is that they'll stop when Henley can't go anymore

I wonder if even Don Henley's replaceable at this point - they could get a soundalike like Journey did, after all. Why stop when Don drops? Keep the music alive! Do it for the fans!

[YoungEaglesFan]

Yep. This has proven that if you put "EAGLES" on the marquee, people will come. I don't think most casual fans even give a crap who's onstage. They just want to hear "Hotel California." The band could have hired pretty much anybody with a good voice to sing Glenn's parts and these people would have showed up.



I wonder if even Don Henley's replaceable at this point - they could get a soundalike like Journey did, after all. Why stop when Don drops? Keep the music alive! Do it for the fans!

I know there’s a bit of sarcasm thrown in but don’s Voice is more unique. You will have no chance at finding a sound alike. Losing don would be the definitive end

[New Kid In Town]

I don't know if we will ever know the backstory on what really happened but I do know the Classic didn't happen overnite. I also believe not revealing the names of both of the mystery guest artists before tickets went on sale was an ill advised publicity stunt that made them look desperate.

Dawn - I totally agree. I have said it before, but I think this all began March 2016, when Don gave that interview with the Montreal newspaper saying the only way they would/could continue was if Deacon was involved. He took a lot of shit for that with the media calling it a money grab coming only two months after Glenn's death. He backed off saying he had never discussed it with Cindy and was just mussing. Well, I think he and Irving were possibly working it then. It takes planning to come up with those kind of festivals, they don't happen overnight.

[Freypower]

I know there’s a bit of sarcasm thrown in but don’s Voice is more unique. You will have no chance at finding a sound alike. Losing don would be the definitive end

Once again.... for a start either something is unique or it is not. There is no such thing as 'more unique'. Frey's voice was as unique as Henley's. If he could be replaced, so could Henley. Leave personal preferences out of it.

[LovinGlennGirl]

I know there’s a bit of sarcasm thrown in but don’s Voice is more unique. You will have no chance at finding a sound alike. Losing don would be the definitive end

Some of us thought it was the definitive end when Glenn died. We were wrong then. Sadly.

[YoungEaglesFan]

Once again.... for a start either something is unique or it is not. There is no such thing as 'more unique'. Frey's voice was as unique as Henley's. If he could be replaced, so could Henley. Leave personal preferences out of it.

I don’t mean unique as better. His timbre is more rare than that of Glenn’s. Finding someone with a smooth timbre is not as hard as someone of Don’s raspy timbre. In that regard Gill is a better vocal replacement than Deacon

[YoungEaglesFan]

Some of us thought it was the definitive end when Glenn died. We were wrong then. Sadly.

As someone who didn’t get to see them until after Glenn died, im not going to say it’s sad they went on but I can understand people being upset about it

[sodascouts]

Losing don would be the definitive end


As someone who didn’t get to see them until after Glenn died, im not going to say it’s sad they went on but I can understand people being upset about it

Well, by the same logic, there are people who will not have seen the band before Don Henley goes, so after he does, why not keep the "Eagles" going without him so those people can see the band, too? Why say losing Don is the definitive end?

The new person may not sound exactly like Don, but will that be a problem? Vince doesn't sound like Glenn and people don't seem terribly bothered.

[YoungEaglesFan]

Well, by the same logic, there are people who will not have seen the band before Don Henley goes, so after he does, why not keep the "Eagles" going without him so those people can see the band, too? Why say losing Don is the definitive end?

The new person may not sound exactly like Don, but will that be a problem? Vince doesn't sound like Glenn and people don't seem terribly bothered.

I’m saying it would be hypocritical for me to both highly enjoy my concert experience but then say the band should call it quits. And trust me there’s not a chance they could move on without both Don and Glenn. You still have the majority of the set list intact without one of them but without both you’re done. And who would lead the effort? Joe? Tim? Neither would dare do such a thing. I know you guys disagree with me about the band continuing but this is pretty much an absurd argument

[WalshFan88]

Well, by the same logic, there are people who will not have seen the band before Don Henley goes, so after he does, why not keep the "Eagles" going without him so those people can see the band, too? Why say losing Don is the definitive end?

The new person may not sound exactly like Don, but will that be a problem? Vince doesn't sound like Glenn and people don't seem terribly bothered.

I agree Soda.

I also agree with FP that Glenn's voice is just as unique as Don's.

[chaim]

I dunno, to me saying that a raspy voice is tougher to replace than a "smooth" voice is a bit like saying that a guy who plays guitar with lots of distortion is harder to replace than a guy who plays with a cleaner sound. It's not like all the raspy voices are unique and non-raspy voices aren't. (According to a legend, some people thought it was Rod Stewart when they heard Peter Criss sing Kiss's "Hard luck woman") Dean Martin didn't have a raspy voice, and one could consider it rather "smooth", but I wouldn't want to hear just anybody with a "smooth" voice sing the songs he's known for.

I do get the point, but IMHO "smooth" says next to nothing about Glenn's voice. It's just one way of putting it into some category. But it goes much deeper than that.

[LovinGlennGirl]

As someone who didn’t get to see them until after Glenn died, im not going to say it’s sad they went on but I can understand people being upset about it

If you didn't get to see them before Glenn died, then you didn't get to see them.

[YoungEaglesFan]

I didn’t think this would be controversial to say that if Don passed away the band would be 100% done. Only part of my argument was that Henley’s voice would be very hard to replace. Does anyone here have anyone in mind right now on who could replace him? There was at least one obvious one for Glenn (deacon) and Gill is in the roughly the same ball park in terms of timbre. Not the same not as good but it was about as good as you’re going to get in terms of mainstream people right now. Would anyone think the Eagles could find someone who sounds like Joe Walsh If he passed? No they couldn’t because his nasal quality is not that common. It’s just silly to argue this. I understand that it’s done to show an apparent hypocrisy in my and other pro Eagles 3.0 people but it’s not. The band would lose anyone who was part of the first 4 Albums. You would have almost the ENTIRE set list be of someone who wasn’t in the band ever. I’m not hear to debate Glenn again. I’m just pointing out the obvious that the band is done without Don

[lacaille0808]

I really think that Don is just carrying on touring with the band until his own son is old enough and ready to take the banner and take his place.

Now, I know this is pure conjecture. But when they replaced Deacon after Glenn, Don put it this way: "an old system both in Eastern and Western culture called the guild system, where the father is the master and the son is the apprentice. The trade, the craft, the business is handed down from father to son."

Surely, he, too, had thought of what would happen to the Eagles when his time comes and takes the inevitable final bow. I think, somehow, they want to keep flying the 'Eagles' flag by passing it on to their heirs.

...btw, hello! I've been lurking on here for a while and enjoying reading all the posts. I'm a 70's Eagles fan- the original four to all of them at the end of the decade. Would I buy a concert ticket now if they come to my area-Europe? No way! unless they halve their price (lol, dream on) then I may be tempted.

I'm happy watching the DC concert again and again. For me, that's the real Eagles.

[YoungEaglesFan]

I really think that Don is just carrying on touring with the band until his own son is old enough and ready to take the banner and take his place.

Now, I know this is pure conjecture. But when they replaced Deacon after Glenn, Don put it this way: "an old system both in Eastern and Western culture called the guild system, where the father is the master and the son is the apprentice. The trade, the craft, the business is handed down from father to son."

Surely, he, too, had thought of what would happen to the Eagles when his time comes and takes the inevitable final bow. I think, somehow, they want to keep flying the 'Eagles' flag by passing it on to their heirs.

...btw, hello! I've been lurking on here for a while and enjoying reading all the posts. I'm a 70's Eagles fan- the original four to all of them at the end of the decade. Would I buy a concert ticket now if they come to my area-Europe? No way! unless they halve their price (lol, dream on) then I may be tempted.

I'm happy watching the DC concert again and again. For me, that's the real Eagles.

Well that’s an interesting view but I think his son has mentioned not having an interest in being in the music business. His son plus deacon and Otis would be an interesting group.

[UndertheWire]

There are tribute bands that come close to reproducing the voices of both Don and Joe. Clearly, there is scope to continue with replacements as an official, high quality, tribute band.

[New Kid In Town]

So true UTW and a good point. I have a friend who saw an Eagles Tribute Band here in NJ with her husband. She said they were great and the lead singers sounded almost exactly like Don and Glenn. We think Don's voice is unique but the truth is there are people all over the country who sing in bands and probably sound like Don and Glenn. We just haven't heard them. I know there a quite a few Eagles Tribute Bands who, based on reviews I have read, are quite good and sound pretty close to both of them.

[chaim]

I don't hear a Glennish tone in either Deacon or Vince. (Sure, none of them has a raspy voice, but it doesn't make them similar to me.) So I don't get why we should mention a possible replacement who would sound like Don.

[YoungEaglesFan]

I don't hear a Glennish tone in either Deacon or Vince. (Sure, none of them has a raspy voice, but it doesn't make them similar to me.) So I don't get why we should mention a possible replacement who would sound like Don.

I said that deacon isn’t that close to his dad but Vince is a decent replacement. Again everyone is focusing on the vocal replacement which is a small part of my argument

[YoungEaglesFan]

There are tribute bands that come close to reproducing the voices of both Don and Joe. Clearly, there is scope to continue with replacements as an official, high quality, tribute band.

I’ve seen one tribute band have someone sound close to Don. And the band would never stoop to a level of just grabbing anyone that sounds like the Don. There is more to it than that

[chaim]

I said that deacon isn’t that close to his dad but Vince is a decent replacement. Again everyone is focusing on the vocal replacement which is a small part of my argument

Well, I don't agree about Glenn/Vince. They're very different. People will focus on whatever they like in an internet forum, especially if they strongly disagree on something.

[YoungEaglesFan]

I’m just stunned that people are so disillusioned by the replacement of Glenn that they would think they would go with Joe Tim Deacon Vince and a replacement for don. None of them are original eagles, 80% of the setlist would be from non eagles. It just wouldn’t happen. If Don had died instead of Glenn it would be conceivable the band would move just as easy as they did with Glenn. Though not necessarily true, public opinion has don as the Better singer. They are equal in my eyes but most believed don to be better including Geffen, Felder, Randy, geffen, rolling stone magazine

[chaim]

I’m just stunned that people are so disillusioned by the replacement of Glenn that they would think they would go with Joe Tim Deacon Vince and a replacement for don. None of them are original eagles, 80% of the setlist would be from non eagles. It just wouldn’t happen. If Don had died instead of Glenn it would be conceivable the band would move just as easy as they did with Glenn. Though not necessarily true, public opinion has don as the Better singer. They are equal in my eyes but most believed don to be better including Geffen, Felder, Randy, geffen, rolling stone magazine

I'm sure that is true. Look, I get what you're saying here, but I just strongly disagree on Glenn and Vince having anything in common tonewise.

[buffyfan145]

I highly doubt the band will still go on after Don passes too but it's because he's the leader now and I don't see Joe or Timothy in that position like Glenn used to be. In 20-30 years all 7 Eagles and Iriving will all have passed on and by that point a lot of the original fans will have too. The Millennials (my generation) and Generation Z only make up a small portion of Eagles fans, especially as the latter are still kids, so by that point in the future it won't be profitable as most of us will have moved on and who knows what music will be like by then or if it's even safe to go with how crazy this world is. So eventually they won't be touring anymore because they'll all be gone and times will have completely changed.

[YoungEaglesFan]

I'm sure that is true. Look, I get what you're saying here, but I just strongly disagree on Glenn and Vince having anything in common tonewise.

I’d say they’re similar but it’s not something worth arguing over

[chaim]

I’d say they’re similar but it’s not something worth arguing over

As long as someone keeps bringing it up - this voice thing - I'll keep saying how I feel about it.

[YoungEaglesFan]

As long as someone keeps bringing it up - this voice thing - I'll keep saying how I feel about it.

Don't get me wrong, you're totally in your right to say your opinion on it but I just don't want to argue about it is all

[Freypower]

I’m just stunned that people are so disillusioned by the replacement of Glenn that they would think they would go with Joe Tim Deacon Vince and a replacement for don. None of them are original eagles, 80% of the setlist would be from non eagles. It just wouldn’t happen. If Don had died instead of Glenn it would be conceivable the band would move just as easy as they did with Glenn. Though not necessarily true, public opinion has don as the Better singer. They are equal in my eyes but most believed don to be better including Geffen, Felder, Randy, geffen, rolling stone magazine

Another sweeping generalisation We have already been through this. I don't have to agree with 'public opinion', 'most' or especially, Don Felder, who thought Frey was a talentless hack. The operative word is opinion.

[YoungEaglesFan]

Another sweeping generalisation We have already been through this. I don't have to agree with 'public opinion', 'most' or especially, Don Felder, who thought Frey was a talentless hack. The operative word is opinion.

I’m not exactly sure why you think I said you had to agree with them. I said “though not necessarily true” for a reason. If I said that just because they saw it that way that means you have to agree, that would be absurd. I don’t know which of the two I prefer I go back and forth. But I’m stating the truth that what I’m saying is some ridiculous thing. But this is not my main point. The main point is the Eagles would not carry on as any ties to ANY song on the greatest hits album would be entirely gone. They would carry on with joe and Tim as tje only Eagles.

[Freypower]

I’m not exactly sure why you think I said you had to agree with them. I said “though not necessarily true” for a reason. If I said that just because they saw it that way that means you have to agree, that would be absurd. I don’t know which of the two I prefer I go back and forth. But I’m stating the truth that what I’m saying is some ridiculous thing. But this is not my main point. The main point is the Eagles would not carry on as any ties to ANY song on the greatest hits album would be entirely gone. They would carry on with joe and Tim as tje only Eagles.

And the main point of myself & others who agree with me is that they should not have carried on without Glenn. But never mind. What was stated by Soda, I think, is that they've gone this far. Why wouldn't they do it again, no matter how rdiculous it may seem.

There was more to their music than the ten greatest hits songs, by the way. They had one album with Joe, one album with Joe & Tim, and one album with both Joe & Tim (LROOE) which both you & they seem to have forgotten ever existed. So although Joe & Tim did not sing most of those songs, they could conceivably decide to get someone to replace Henley if they thought they could get away with it. What they have done, basically, is to tear up the rule book. It's a bit late to say 'they will never replace Henley' when it was assumed they would never replace Frey. It is HIGHLY UNLIKELY, yes. But it is not impossible.

[YoungEaglesFan]

And the main point of myself & others who agree with me is that they should not have carried on without Glenn. But never mind. What was stated by Soda, I think, is that they've gone this far. Why wouldn't they do it again, no matter how rdiculous it may seem.

There was more to their music than the ten greatest hits songs, by the way. They had one album with Joe, one album with Joe & Tim, and one album with both Joe & Tim (LROOE) which both you & they seem to have forgotten ever existed. So although Joe & Tim did not sing most of those songs, they could conceivably decide to get someone to replace Henley if they thought they could get away with it. What they have done, basically, is to tear up the rule book. It's a bit late to say 'they will never replace Henley' when it was assumed they would never replace Frey. It is HIGHLY UNLIKELY, yes. But it is not impossible.

I'm not here to talk about "should" replace Henley or Glenn. I'm here to say why they "wouldn't" replace Don. The Eagles [I]need[I] one of Don and Glenn. I'm aware that they had more than a greatest hits album but the material on the greatest hits and the HC album plus a couple songs from TLR that drive people to the concerts still. Joe and Tim know their place within the band and they wouldn't consider it. Something like this is not outside the realm of possiblity but it would be unfathomable. And it would be a lot worse than what is currently happen. I'm not sure everyone assumed they would stop because a good while before the new tour Don at one point said they could continue with Deacon. That was scrapped and then it happened. If they continued on, it would be like Bernie, Randy, and Felder calling themselves the Eagles and then having a tour. There would be little interest from the public anyhow. On a separate note, having read Soda's story with Glenn only reinforces my sadness of never getting to see Glenn.

[Dawn]

Have to say I personally believed Henley and many others when they said Glenn Frey was irreplaceable -- until he wasn't. And yes, that is what has happened with the addition of Vince Gill and Deacon Frey.

[sodascouts]

It's very simple: if whoever was left holding the reins thought it would be profitable for the band to continue without Don, it would. Of course, one would have to decide if the band would still be marketable with neither of its lead singers. ... but if people just want to see "the Eagles"... again, other bands have done it.

And for this band, there is no line to cross anymore.


Joe and Tim know their place within the band and they wouldn't consider it.Who said it would be up to them?

[Freypower]

I'm not here to talk about "should" replace Henley or Glenn. I'm here to say why they "wouldn't" replace Don. The Eagles [i]need[i] one of Don and Glenn. I'm aware that they had more than a greatest hits album but the material on the greatest hits and the HC album plus a couple songs from TLR that drive people to the concerts still. Joe and Tim know their place within the band and they wouldn't consider it. Something like this is not outside the realm of possiblity but it would be unfathomable. And it would be a lot worse than what is currently happen. I'm not sure everyone assumed they would stop because a good while before the new tour Don at one point said they could continue with Deacon. That was scrapped and then it happened.If they continued on, it would be like Bernie, Randy, and Felder calling themselves the Eagles and then having a tour. There would be little interest from the public anyhow. On a separate note, having read Soda's story with Glenn only reinforces my sadness of never getting to see Glenn.

Sadly , we are past 'shouldn't'. Now it is about 'wouldn't' and it can no longer be assumed that they 'wouldn't'.

It was not a question of assuming they would stop. It was a question of believing the statements they made. Well, I was naive enough to do so. I will not make that mistake again & neither should anyone else.

[sodascouts]

Have to say I personally believed Henley and many others when they said Glenn Frey was irreplaceable -- until he wasn't. And yes, that is what has happened with the addition of Vince Gill and Deacon Frey.

Even the Eagles' official site used the word "replaced" - check out the caption of the photo here:

https://eagles.com/news/293163

[Dawn]

Even the Eagles' official site used the word "replaced" - check out the caption of the photo here:

https://eagles.com/news/293163

Thanks, well, there we have it. :sigh:

[YoungEaglesFan]

It's very simple: if whoever was left holding the reins thought it would be profitable for the band to continue without Don, it would. Of course, one would have to decide if the band would still be marketable with neither of its lead singers. ... but if people just want to see "the Eagles"... again, other bands have done it.

And for this band, there is no line to cross anymore.

Who said it would be up to them?

That's a fair point but they would probably be uncomfortable doing so and they can't be forced to keep going. I have a hard time them being ok with it and I doubt Irving would do that. I think this would be a new line and I'm willing to bet they wouldn't cross it but only time will tell

[LovinGlennGirl]

Even the Eagles' official site used the word "replaced" - check out the caption of the photo here:

https://eagles.com/news/293163

And that is why I just can't commit to buying a ticket at this time. When I saw Henley in January, it was solo and before the grand announcement. Don't care if it right or wrong for someone else, it feels so wrong to me. I may change my mind, I may see another solo show, but not yet. I wanted to believe that Glenn was not replaceable, Henley said so. Doesn't appear so.

And for those who think Their Greatest Hits are all there is, remember that Hotel California, Heartache Tonight and others were not even out yet, they are on Part two.

[New Kid In Town]

I know people may disagree with me on this, but it is MHO that had Don passed instead of Glenn, the Eagles would have performed their last concert on July 29,2015. I think the Eagles legacy meant a lot to Glenn. For whatever reason Don changed his mind and decided to continue and replaced Glenn with Vince and Deacon. Some support it some don't. I have expressed my felling before numerous times and don't care to re-hash it again. However, I will say for those who never saw them before, go an enjoy yourselves. They are 70 and almost 70 and will not be doing this much longer.

I think Vince has a nice voice but neither he nor Deacon sound like Glenn. Vince is also a tenor but his voice is different. Deacon's voice is a little deeper to me. JMHO.

[chaim]

Don't get me wrong, you're totally in your right to say your opinion on it but I just don't want to argue about it is all

Well, if you don't want to argue about something, don't mention it as a fact. :-) IMO it's not fair to keep saying that "Glenn's voice is easier to replace than Don's" and then say you don't want to argue about it. However, if you express it as the way you see it, it's a different matter.

[YoungEaglesFan]

And that is why I just can't commit to buying a ticket at this time. When I saw Henley in January, it was solo and before the grand announcement. Don't care if it right or wrong for someone else, it feels so wrong to me. I may change my mind, I may see another solo show, but not yet. I wanted to believe that Glenn was not replaceable, Henley said so. Doesn't appear so.

And for those who think Their Greatest Hits are all there is, remember that Hotel California, Heartache Tonight and others were not even out yet, they are on Part two.

Please don’t take what I said as they were only the greatest hits. ICTYW, HT, TLR, NKIT, HC, LITFL are nothing to make fun of but what I’m saying is that a massive chunk of the eagles catalogue is rendered useless

[YoungEaglesFan]

Well, if you don't want to argue about something, don't mention it as a fact. :-) IMO it's not fair to keep saying that "Glenn's voice is easier to replace than Don's" and then say you don't want to argue about it. However, if you express it as the way you see it, it's a different matter.

That’s fair. I just don’t want to make this a big deal, it wasn’t a comment I found to be important to my argument. I think the list of voices similar to Don is shorter than the list similar to Glenn. It’s something I could be wrong about but there really isn’t any facts to help you or I, so it would just turn into a personal opinion argument which can get messy is all

[YoungEaglesFan]

I know people may disagree with me on this, but it is MHO that had Don passed instead of Glenn, the Eagles would have performed their last concert on July 29,2015. I think the Eagles legacy meant a lot to Glenn. For whatever reason Don changed his mind and decided to continue and replaced Glenn with Vince and Deacon. Some support it some don't. I have expressed my felling before numerous times and don't care to re-hash it again. However, I will say for those who never saw them before, go an enjoy yourselves. They are 70 and almost 70 and will not be doing this much longer.

I think Vince has a nice voice but neither he nor Deacon sound like Glenn. Vince is also a tenor but his voice is different. Deacon's voice is a little deeper to me. JMHO.

I totally agree, I do think the band made good choice in replacements. I can’t think of anyone else better situated for the situation

[chaim]

That’s fair. I just don’t want to make this a big deal, it wasn’t a comment I found to be important to my argument. I think the list of voices similar to Don is shorter than the list similar to Glenn. It’s something I could be wrong about but there really isn’t any facts to help you or I, so it would just turn into a personal opinion argument which can get messy is all

You will not get into a "messy" personal opinion argument with me over this kind of thing.

[sodascouts]

I know people may disagree with me on this, but it is MHO that had Don passed instead of Glenn, the Eagles would have performed their last concert on July 29,2015. I think the Eagles legacy meant a lot to Glenn.

Yes, have to agree with you there. He was thinking about winding the Eagles down before he died; he certainly wouldn't have insisted they continue if they'd lost Don. He might have even called it quits if they'd lost Joe or Tim. The Eagles were not his life, and he'd proven more than once that he was able to leave money on the table.

He threatened to sue when they thought about continuing to go on without him in the early 90s, and he'd said things like "I started it; I ended it" when talking about the band. That's why I call BS on "He would have wanted us to keep going."

Even if that were true, though, the basic fact remains the same: without Glenn Frey's voice, without his artistic contribution, that band is not really the Eagles. It's three guys who used to be in the Eagles singing with Vince Gill and Glenn's son.


And that is why I just can't commit to buying a ticket at this time. When I saw Henley in January, it was solo and before the grand announcement. Don't care if it right or wrong for someone else, it feels so wrong to me. I may change my mind, I may see another solo show, but not yet. I wanted to believe that Glenn was not replaceable, Henley said so. Doesn't appear so.

I feel the same, except I know I won't change my mind about these shows. Maybe one day I'll want to go to a solo show again... but never one of these shows.

[LovinGlennGirl]

Yes, have to agree with you there. He was thinking about winding the Eagles down before he died; he certainly wouldn't have insisted they continue if they'd lost Don. He might have even called it quits if they'd lost Joe or Tim. The Eagles were not his life, and he'd proven more than once that he was able to leave money on the table.

He threatened to sue when they thought about continuing to go on without him in the early 90s, and he'd said things like "I started it; I ended it" when talking about the band. That's why I call BS on "He would have wanted us to keep going."

Even if that were true, though, the basic fact remains the same: without Glenn Frey's voice, without his artistic contribution, that band is not really the Eagles. It's three guys who used to be in the Eagles singing with Vince Gill and Glenn's son.



I feel the same, except I know I won't change my mind about these shows. Maybe one day I'll want to go to a solo show again... but never one of these shows.

Soda, exactly how I feel.

[New Kid In Town]

That's why I call BS on "He would have wanted us to keep going."

Even if that were true, though, the basic fact remains the same: without Glenn Frey's voice, without his artistic contribution, that band is not really the Eagles. It's three guys who used to be in the Eagles singing with Vince Gill and Glenn's son.

Soda - I have bolded your thought to say that is what I would expect Don, Tim and Joe to say. How else can they legitimize their continuing after Don's saying over and over for an entire year that the band was over, that you can't go on without the guy who founded the band. It is the only way to make it legitimate and have the fans, or most fans accept it.

[maryc2130]

Yes, have to agree with you there. He was thinking about winding the Eagles down before he died; he certainly wouldn't have insisted they continue if they'd lost Don. He might have even called it quits if they'd lost Joe or Tim. The Eagles were not his life, and he'd proven more than once that he was able to leave money on the table.

He threatened to sue when they thought about continuing to go on without him in the early 90s, and he'd said things like "I started it; I ended it" when talking about the band. That's why I call BS on "He would have wanted us to keep going."

Even if that were true, though, the basic fact remains the same: without Glenn Frey's voice, without his artistic contribution, that band is not really the Eagles. It's three guys who used to be in the Eagles singing with Vince Gill and Glenn's son.



I feel the same, except I know I won't change my mind about these shows. Maybe one day I'll want to go to a solo show again... but never one of these shows.

I agree, but that doesn't mean Glenn would have hated this iteration of the Eagles. There's no way of knowing how he would have felt, but it's hard to imagine he would have disliked seeing his son Deacon with his old band mates and his friend Vince Gill. No, it's not the same as the Eagles with Glenn, but the group sounds great and they seem to be having a great time. Except Deacon, they're in (or approaching, for Vince) their twilight years, and of course they won't be doing it much longer. If nothing else, I love seeing the smiles on the guys' faces when they're up their together.


ETA: This quote from Joe Walsh in the Michigan News-Herald seemed related:

“So we figured we would at least try it and see where it went and we worked on it and thought it through and we tried it out in Los Angeles and it was just magic. It really was. It was received wonderfully and the energy that we all have is very, very healing, so I think Glenn would be proud of this and we decided to do it some more.”

Link to the article:

http://http://www.thenewsherald.com/downriver_life/entertainment/eagles-fly-into-the-late-glenn-frey-s-home-town/article_4eacb82b-ff14-59bb-bd78-f9bd6940de28.html (http://www.thenewsherald.com/downriver_life/entertainment/eagles-fly-into-the-late-glenn-frey-s-home-town/article_4eacb82b-ff14-59bb-bd78-f9bd6940de28.html)

[Brooke]

Yes, have to agree with you there. He was thinking about winding the Eagles down before he died; he certainly wouldn't have insisted they continue if they'd lost Don. He might have even called it quits if they'd lost Joe or Tim. The Eagles were not his life, and he'd proven more than once that he was able to leave money on the table.

He threatened to sue when they thought about continuing to go on without him in the early 90s, and he'd said things like "I started it; I ended it" when talking about the band. That's why I call BS on "He would have wanted us to keep going."

Even if that were true, though, the basic fact remains the same: without Glenn Frey's voice, without his artistic contribution, that band is not really the Eagles. It's three guys who used to be in the Eagles singing with Vince Gill and Glenn's son.



I feel the same, except I know I won't change my mind about these shows. Maybe one day I'll want to go to a solo show again... but never one of these shows.

So agree with you on all of this!

I had forgotten about the part I bolded! But, also, Glenn told Bernie that this isn't over at the last HotE show. So, by then, he had not decided to quit yet.

It's all speculation.

[YoungEaglesFan]

You will not get into a "messy" personal opinion argument with me over this kind of thing.

I just look to avoid getting into a lot of arguments is all. If you want to, I’ll engage in one

[FreyFollower]

Lord, have mercy! Geeeeez!:stop: I can't stand it!

[chaim]

I just look to avoid getting into a lot of arguments is all. If you want to, I’ll engage in one

From where I'm standing our argument was settled before it got real messy, LOL!

[Freypower]

So agree with you on all of this!

I had forgotten about the part I bolded! But, also, Glenn told Bernie that this isn't over at the last HotE show. So, by then, he had not decided to quit yet.

It's all speculation.

He did not know they were going to continue without him.

[WalshFan88]

Yes, have to agree with you there. He was thinking about winding the Eagles down before he died; he certainly wouldn't have insisted they continue if they'd lost Don. He might have even called it quits if they'd lost Joe or Tim. The Eagles were not his life, and he'd proven more than once that he was able to leave money on the table.

He threatened to sue when they thought about continuing to go on without him in the early 90s, and he'd said things like "I started it; I ended it" when talking about the band. That's why I call BS on "He would have wanted us to keep going."

Even if that were true, though, the basic fact remains the same: without Glenn Frey's voice, without his artistic contribution, that band is not really the Eagles. It's three guys who used to be in the Eagles singing with Vince Gill and Glenn's son.



I feel the same, except I know I won't change my mind about these shows. Maybe one day I'll want to go to a solo show again... but never one of these shows.

Couldn't agree more.

No one will convince me that Glenn would have been for this OR that he would have wanted it or would have continued the band if something happened to Don.

[Dawn]

Just saw this comment posted on one of the youtube videos of the Eagles mini fall concert tour

"Can't reheat a souffle ... time to let it go guys."

[Dawn]

http://www.statesman.com/rf/image_large/Pub/p8/CmgSharedContent/2017/06/01/Images/GettyImages-510500008-Rfdk7LM0VYCvNdA5DiGkzaP-680x383.jpg

LOS ANGELES, CA - FEBRUARY 15: Musician Don Henley (3rd from R) of the Eagles accepts the band's 1977 Record of the Year award for "Hotel California" onstage from National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences President Neil Portnow (2nd from R) and broadcast producer Ken Ehrlich (R) during The 58th GRAMMY Awards at Staples Center on February 15, 2016 in Los Angeles, California. (Photo by Kevork Djansezian/Getty Images