Iron Maiden should have walked in on their first opportunity. Just the sheer number of concerts and tickets sold. No one in music history is close.
The Iron Maiden phenomenon is truly astonishing - they have generations of fans, half the crowd is kids.
So let me see if I got this right:
If your favorite band is not in, then the hall is a joke, even if they don't fit the criteria or another band fit it better?
That about right?
Since human beings are capable of a multitude of conflicting emotions it is possible for one to think that even if some favorite bands are in that it also can be a joke.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Doobie Brothers - should already be there.
Whitney Houston - aside from the "rock" debate as others of same genre are in - she walk in easily.
Pat Benatar - Has all the success needed and made great moves in the industry for women.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You're right about the Doobie Brothers.
Whitney will get in, but was she a rock n roller?
Pat Benatar... I don't know.I'd rather see the metal bands get in before the rappers and the pop stars.
What about:
Little Feat
Grand Funk
J. Geils
Bob Seger
Bad Company
No the R&R HOF has always been a joke. The biggest reason is that they have no criteria. It is always been a group of buddies deciding and even then they make get vetoed.
Because there is no criteria or guidelines then they can enter anyone they want.
Example (staying away from pop, rap and other debatable genres)
The Sex Pistols
They do have criteria, you just disagree with it. From their site: Criteria include the influence and significance of the artists' contributions to the development and perpetuation of rock and roll.
Granted, it's not the best criteria and it is rather vague, but I think your idea for criteria has some serious flaws, as well. Album sales and ticket sales are only indications of popularity, not talent, which just happens to be what you're criticizing in your Sex Pistols example.
Each year I have seen people continuously rag on the HOF and I would love to see it improve, but I've not seen someone come up with something better? I often see posts about who didn't get in, but I don't see posts saying, "So glad that Hendrix, the Stones, ABB, Dead, Dylan, Zeppelin, Who, Beatles, Cream, Kinks, Skynyrd, Springsteen, Stevie Ray, etc. got in!"
So here's my thought:
Have subsections.
Oldies (start to 1959)
Early rock (1960- 1965)
Classic rock (1966-1980)
Soul
Funk
Rap
Pop
Influencers
Voters choice
Musicianship
Producers
Misc.
They would need different criteria, but define it better.
Have some criteria for being on the committee, as well. And it seems a conflict of interest to be a founding member and be on the committee, but hey, who am I to say.
Since human beings are capable of a multitude of conflicting emotions it is possible for one to think that even if some favorite bands are in that it also can be a joke.
Great post! WarEagleRK for the win!
Bob Seger was inducted into the R&R HoF in 2004.
Not surprisingly, one band on the list I haven't seen mentioned on this thread is Depeche Mode. Understandable, but c'mon, Depeche Mode planted the roots and paved the way for Electronic Rock and bands like Nine Inch Nails. Almost 40 years after formation, they are still making new music and filling large venues. Like them or not, they deserve induction.
Rocknroll Hall of LAME !
Granted, it's not the best criteria and it is rather vague, but I think your idea for criteria has some serious flaws, as well. Album sales and ticket sales are only indications of popularity, not talent, which just happens to be what you're criticizing in your Sex Pistols example.
Vague? It is their way of saying "We need no criteria and will do as we please.".
As for using statistics and data for a basis of criteria, if that is flawed then so is every other HOF in existence.
My example of The Sex Pistols? Sid is in and couldn't even play the bass. He played a handful of shows that all fell apart. The band did one US tour that fell apart and played to empty country bars. LOL - They released one album and barely lasted a year.
That would be like the Baseball HOF Inducting a guy who almost played and used another guys stats. On and it only lasted one season. never happen in a million years.
Popularity and talent can't co-exist? Then why are all the "Agreed Upon" classic bands all the best sellers?
In every genre of music the same holds true. Talent rises to the top and people like and buy it. Madonna is one of the best selling artists of all time and had enough hit singles to sink a ship. Popular - damn straight. Now someone will come along and say that she has no talent and that the 100s of millions in sales are just stupid people that don't know talent. Of course that person is clearly the only one that can judge talent.
What do ticket sales mean? Only the best indicator of how many people want to hear the artists talent, perhaps the type that deserves to be in a HOF?
People debate stats because it would eliminate some of their favorite bands. Pretty much what you were accusing people of doing.
Now further proof of HOF Stupidity
Sid gets in without doing a thing besides heroin and stabbing his girlfriend to death.
If Inducted - The only members of Motorhead going in are the original three. The lineup that only lasted a few years. But they will not include the guys who played with Lemmy for 25 years.
Sid - not a note.
Mikkey and Phil get burnt for playing on albums and tour for 25 years.
Logical?
The HOF is silly but fun debate each year.
Thin Lizzy
Motorhead
Judas Priest
Pat Benatar
Rufus featuring Chaka Khan
and Iron Maidenare all long over due.
Agreed, if AC/DC qualified, so should Motorhead, Judas Priest & Iron Maiden - loved by multiple generations of headbangers -
At least you have numbers to go by in sports HOFs
Music is subjective - who gets in & who doesn’t depends on who does the picking & choosing - for every Pat Benatar there’s a Joan Jett, Patti Smith, Chrissie Hyndes & others -
While they likely wouldn’t qualify, bands like Wishbone Ash, Tucker, Grand Funk, Black Oak Arkansas etc have their own HOFs
You have numbers in music too Stephen. Some may not like what they think it represents and pretty much because it would rule out some of their favorites. Not every band and/or athlete deserves HOF status.
It doesn't mean that they are a bad band or have brilliant moments. Should bands like Wishbone Ash or Tucker be in a HOF? Hell no. Hands up those that can name a song by either?
Sales are seen as evil for some reason when they are not evil at all. Why did Dark Side Of The Moon sell so much? Because it is brilliant and stands above the others of it's genre. Now personally I hear nothing on Thriller that does a damn thing for me but I readily accept that it is brilliant. 30 million people don't all buy something shit. Within it's genre, it was the Top. The fact that the music doesn't hit me has no bearing on whether it is good or not.
The reason that they are putting all these "weaker" bands in the HOF is because in those initial years they put so many bands in. Putting all those bands in lumped together means that they are running dry now.
How many players enter a HOF on the 1st Ballot? Rare and would have to be an exceptional player. The R&R HOF - Each year most Inducted are 1st Time Nominees.
Luckily none of it matters. Crank up the Wishbone Ash this morning, Stephen. 
The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame is a museum with a gift shop. At least Sid never bet on baseball.
Absolutely bro - heck they should be in b/c of Live Dates alone:D 😮 - love that album, & as you pointed out, similar-genre ones may have sold millions more copies but it doesn’t mean that it’s ‘better’ - just more popular - & deservedly
Those 1st 2 records & Live Dates - great - not as much of an Argus fan (their 3rd one) as most WAsh fans - but am getting off topic, good post as always bro & hope your band is still rockin 
Interestingly, I’d put them all in. Other than Kraftwerk who I’ve never heard of.
Good group this year.
The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame is a museum with a gift shop. At least Sid never bet on baseball.
LOL
Maybe he should have. Less heroin and more baseball might have saved him.
Huh wah - never heard of Kraft-verk (haha:senseofhumor: ) - on the merits of Computer World alone 😮 - not to mention Autobahn & the charming synth-heavy weirdness of its 23 min title track - not familiar with the later Transylvanian Express (?) album (florid red cover 😮 )
—It’s the tops seeing Kraftwerk on the list
—Hope like heck they don’t make it, to help keep their “underground” place
[Edited on 10/20/2019 by Stephen]
I saw Dave Matthews A FEW YEARS AGO AND HE WAS GREAT. A lot of long jams live and a good show. I guess he is not liked on this forum as i see him and his band as a worthy candidates. I also have seen his guitar player Tim Reynolds solo 4 times in a small club and the guy is terrific.
As for using statistics and data for a basis of criteria, if that is flawed then so is every other HOF in existence.
My example of The Sex Pistols? Sid is in and couldn't even play the bass. He played a handful of shows that all fell apart. The band did one US tour that fell apart and played to empty country bars. LOL - They released one album and barely lasted a year.
That would be like the Baseball HOF Inducting a guy who almost played and used another guys stats. On and it only lasted one season. never happen in a million years.
Popularity and talent can't co-exist? Then why are all the "Agreed Upon" classic bands all the best sellers?
In every genre of music the same holds true. Talent rises to the top and people like and buy it. Madonna is one of the best selling artists of all time and had enough hit singles to sink a ship. Popular - damn straight. Now someone will come along and say that she has no talent and that the 100s of millions in sales are just stupid people that don't know talent. Of course that person is clearly the only one that can judge talent.
What do ticket sales mean? Only the best indicator of how many people want to hear the artists talent, perhaps the type that deserves to be in a HOF?
People debate stats because it would eliminate some of their favorite bands. Pretty much what you were accusing people of doing.
CM, you make some valid points. Popularity and talent can co-exist, often do, but not always. Stats in sports though always point to the better players and therein lies one problem. Music is subjective and can't be measured like other activities. Record sales and ticket sales are good indications, but don't always show everything about a band. I would use them for specific categories but not everything.
You keep harping on Sid, so let me give you this: Yes, everything you said about him is true, but his influence on punk rock is undeniable, and that's why he got in (and not as a solo person, but as part of the pistols). Velvet Underground and Lou are prime examples, as well. Not as talented as most musicians, but undeniably influential.
Anyhow, I was just sick of hearing people dis something w/out coming up with something better...which I have not seen you try to do, either. Maybe take a shot at it?
You keep harping on Sid, so let me give you this: Yes, everything you said about him is true, but his influence on punk rock is undeniable, and that's why he got in (and not as a solo person, but as part of the pistols). Velvet Underground and Lou are prime examples, as well. Not as talented as most musicians, but undeniably influential.
Harping on him and yet everything I said was true. LOL
Influence on punk? Not the music - he didn't play a note nor could he.
He may have sold t-shirts and become an icon for heroin abuse.
Sid and Lou Reed have nothing in common at all. One is a musician and one was a heroin addict that was in a band for a while but they didn't really do anything when he was in the band.
Putting a guy like Sid in the HOF is like putting a football player in the Baseball HOF.
Music is subjective and can't be measured like other activities. Record sales and ticket sales are good indications, but don't always show everything about a band. I would use them for specific categories but not everything.
Sure it can be measured. It has been measured since the beginning of the industry. Some people just don't want to accept it because it may rule out a band that they like. Not every band should be or has to be in the HOF.
Jann and buddies didn't use sales because they would have had to enter all those 70s bands that they hated,
Sure music is subjective and we can all like anything we want to. Some people like bands smashing garbage cans which is cool. But it should not be in a HOF.
If you used sales and tickets then all the bands that people talk about like Grand Funk etc - they would be in.
People fear sales and stats for no reason. They just show the obvious. Why do so many people buy The Beatles? The music touches them. Why does some kid buy Justin Bieber? The music touches them. It doesn't matter if you or I think it sucks. Who made us judge and jury?
The R&R HOF did not use stats to keep people out. Not to be subjective or anything else, he just wanted bands and music that he didn't like to not be included. They just started looking so foolish but not letting some in.
Johnny - I wouildn't give them $25000 either.
It may be seen as a kind of snobbery, but I agree with not relying solely on stats.
We already have the stats; anyone who wants a list of best sellers can go look at the list of best sellers. There is such a thing as artistic merit, and it goes beyond sales.
"Fifty Shades of Gray" is a best-selling novel, but it will never be seen as a classic because its merits are slight. Ditto "Twilight." These are the equivalent of fast food.
Speaking of fast food, people with an educated palate will take the homemade freshly baked tortillas over Taco Bell any day of the week, but Taco Bell outsells mom and pop because they have marketing and lots of corn syrup that kids love.
Marvel superhero movies are owning the box office and setting sales records because they show cool explosions. I get a kick out of some of the superhero movies, but I consider very few of them great because I can see that they are formulaic and shallow.
Regarding the Beatles, that is a fascinating instance of how an artist / band managed to combine music quality and innovation with commercial appeal. Their legacy is not just their commercial appeal.
I think sales matter, but I do understand people being critical of sales being a sole or major indicator because sometimes a shallow trend sells. I will show you my pet rock collection later on as an example. 😉
Not just album sales - ticket sales should weigh heavily as it means
A) They are musicians
B) People like enough to go.
For a HOF status, it has to mean something to people and your influence on them.
Taco Bell would not be up for a Culinary HOF. Perhaps a fast food HOF.
Longevity is the key even when using stats. A one hit wonder should never enter but they do now.
When an artist of any genre can stay at the top of that genre, it means they were exceptional. It means that they released album after album that people continued to buy.
Same goes with novels. Shades of Gray and Twilight would be one hit wonders and not HOF consideration.
Now James Patterson's books are not heavy reading nor are they deep. But people eat his books up over and over - they like them. HOF Author? Definitely as look at his connection to his readers and his sales. He is currently in a class of his own.
Sales from one album mean little. Sales over a 40-50 year career.....well that is HOF.
One ten city tour playing to mostly empty bars like the Sex Pistols is not a HOF career. Playing stadiums for 30+ years is a HOF career.
If stats like that were used then bands like Deep Purple, Genesis, etc would have been in long before they were. Others bands that people here complain are not in - they would be.
People will say that they don't like using stats but offer no alternative. What you end up with is exactly what we have. A small group deciding who they like and who gave them interviews 40 years ago.
Some good points regarding "one-hit wonders" and bands that don't seem to actually be playing anything. Does Milli-Vanilli belong in the HOF? Suppose that bands and acts had to wait 20 - 40 years before induction - just to see if their music stood the test of time? Nothing personal against the 'Pistols, Biggie or the other acts that I probably just don't get, but who's going to be humming, "God Save the Queen" in 50 years?
"That whole Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame thing — at least half the people in there don't have a place in any kind of hall of fame anywhere, in my opinion."
- Ginger Baker
the sex pistols are getting singled out but guess what. the following artists covered songs by the sex pistols and this is just off the top on my head :
motley crue (who most say should be in)
megadeth (a band that borderline should be in)
motorhead (a band possibly getting ready to get in)
joan jett (who is the the hof)
Madonna (who is the the hof)
hmmm, they look pretty influential in rock to have earned a place in the HOF. heck they outsold iggy and the stooges and I doubt anyone would say iggy and the stooges shouldn't be in the HOF
Iggy and The Stooges should not be in. It is like entering a career .220 batter with average fielding skills into the HOF. Would not happen.
Covered songs should get a band into the HOF?
The 5 artists that you mentioned all have had long careers, played a ton of shows, sold a ton of albums, tickets in the millions. The Sex Pistols did none of that. Do I like the Sex Pistols album? Sure it is a great album. But if having a great album is grounds for entry than most artists would get in. If the Sex Pistols had created a few albums like that and toured successfully then sure. But they didn't.
Those artists that you mentioned are all bands that used cover tunes throughout their careers. Not like the Sex Pistols were the driving force behind them becoming musicians.
Iggy and The Stooges should not be in. It is like entering a career .220 batter with average fielding skills into the HOF. Would not happen.
Covered songs should get a band into the HOF?
The 5 artists that you mentioned all have had long careers, played a ton of shows, sold a ton of albums, tickets in the millions. The Sex Pistols did none of that. Do I like the Sex Pistols album? Sure it is a great album. But if having a great album is grounds for entry than most artists would get in. If the Sex Pistols had created a few albums like that and toured successfully then sure. But they didn't.
Those artists that you mentioned are all bands that used cover tunes throughout their careers. Not like the Sex Pistols were the driving force behind them becoming musicians.
influence is part of the criteria they use to induct people . big bands like that covered your tunes, that shows influence. the velvet underground, ramones, stooges, sex pistols and buffalo springfield were all hugely influential but not big sellers or hit makers to the general public
Influence is judged how? LOL - they use that as part of their excuse for not entering some and for entering others.
Cover song? It shows that you didn't have enough tunes for the album.
Again you can write the best song ever but that one song does not make you a HOFer.
Not saying any band is good or bad, they just don't all belong in a HOF because you like their songs.
I loved hundreds of athletes that never made a HOF. Were they bad players? Hell no! They made the major leagues.
We can discuss it all again after a guy gets in and his biggest accomplishment was getting shot.
First off, I just want to thank all of you for arguing logically and rationally and not getting into yelling wars. The people who talk politics these days seem to get all bent out of shape and I'm proud that you are all above that. Thank you.
Secondly, there is likely a middle ground where making different categories with different criteria would satisfy both of us.
Third, CM, you make many great points, but here's what I keep thinking when I read what you write: They already have what you are selling...it's called The Grammy's. It's solely judged on record and ticket sales and...well, I guess I can't speak for others, but for me, they are trite and lifeless and overlook many wonderful artists. And so I'm thankful that the HOF isn't like the Grammy's (many could argue that it IS, judging by some of the inductees, and I get that) and focuses on different criteria, as flawed as I will admit it is.
You're all just sore that Robert Johnson got in but Ted Nugent will never get in, even if there are no rocknrollers left.
Influence is judged how? LOL - they use that as part of their excuse for not entering some and for entering others.
Cover song? It shows that you didn't have enough tunes for the album.
Again you can write the best song ever but that one song does not make you a HOFer.
Not saying any band is good or bad, they just don't all belong in a HOF because you like their songs.
I loved hundreds of athletes that never made a HOF. Were they bad players? Hell no! They made the major leagues.
We can discuss it all again after a guy gets in and his biggest accomplishment was getting shot.
motley crue left off several hits on a greatest hits album to cover a sex pistols song because they didn't have enough songs?
motorhead head problems coming up with enough songs for albums? not a chance
bands perform cover songs as tributes sometimes
