Frey-less Eagles??? Was it ever considered?

[UndertheWire]

Is there a thread for speculating about future plans? I'm interested to read everyone's ideas but it doesn't seem to fit in with the "what if?" speculation of most of this thread.

I've a few, rather obvious, thoughts on breakups and reunions.

In 1980, they were men in their thirties, still with ideas and creativity that they wanted to explore outside the confines of a band, so it's no surprise there was a lot of new material. However, by 2001, they were in their fifties with different priorities and maybe running low on fresh ideas.

When a band reunites, I wonder if they still have it. Can they still play? Can they sing? Is it going to be embarassing? In 1994, I would have looked at the solo careers and thought Henley, Frey & Walsh still have it and Schmit looks like he's kept busy so they were probably ok. However, if it was 2015 and they were reuniting after a 14 year break, I'd have serious concerns. As solo artists, it's unlikely that they would have continued to have the level of success they had in the eighties (indeed, it had dropped off in the nineties) and so they would be retired or playing in small venues. How would they cope with the larger venues and the pressures of working within the band again? Would they just be a novelty act with a bunch of elderly men, who used to be famous, going through the motions?

[VAisForEagleLovers]

I agree, UTW.

While we're playing 'what if' scenarios that by definition aren't based in reality, what if they had reunited in 1992 (or whenever the first attempt was) without Glenn, and then did that tour and nothing else, then reunited again in, say, 2006 with Glenn? IMO, most would have lost respect for them in 1992 for reuniting without a key member, and doing it for real in 2006 would have made them a novelty act.

Our guys took a lot of heat, and continue to do so, that reuniting and subsequent tours have been a money grab. I don't get this. Who goes on tour purely for the fun of it? Some do, but it's a vast minority. When a band goes on tour, sells out arenas, delivers a quality, perfect concert, gets rave reviews, and the fans are happy, it's not a money grab.

Getting back together without Glenn at any point would have been a money grab.

[UndertheWire]

Going with the scenario of a Frey-less reunion tour between around 1991-1992, I wonder what impact it might have had on Glenn's solo career. Perhaps the extra publicity might have helped Strange Weather - it's a good album so why wasn't it more successful? Or perhaps Glenn would have reinvented himself as a country artist - he had plans to record in Nashville and had invested in the Soundcheck facility. Did he also have thoughts of working with Dave Edmunds, or am I imagining that?

[Funk 50]

I'm sorry that I wasn't clear. I meant discussion as whether or not to continue in the event of a death in the group. I was saying if Tim or Joe passed away, they would probably discuss the options of staying together or calling it quits, but that if Glenn or Don passed away, I don't think there'd even be a discussion at this point i their careers.

Thanks for the reply BillBailey1976. I think I get the gist. They may continue if they lose Joe or Tim but they'll definitely terminate the Eagles if founders Glenn or Don die or become incapable first.

I dunno. Glenn says to the audience "If you keep payin', we'll keep playin' and since a few, stuttering years they experienced at the beginning of their career, they've enjoyed consistent success, despite all the upheavals, controversy and the passing of much time. It seems, ultimately the audience will decide when the Eagles cease to be.

I'm sure Irving will be calculating the possibilities presented by the fast approaching anniversary of Hotel California and if that's a hit, and everything the Eagles do, seems to be, then The Long Run or Hell Freezes Over's 25th. They could squeeze in a 10th birthday for Long Road Out Of Eden.

I'm disappointed they didn't mark the anniversary of Desperado, especially with Bernie returning but even ignoring all the anniversaries, the successful return of Leadon has given them a fifth lead singer, which will help them continue with a 3 hour show and even allow a couple of new/old tracks to be added to the set list. I don't know what he can contribute to a Hotel California celebration though.

The Beach Boys 50th was quite a good do. Decent album and reunion tour but it's quickly returned to being a travesty. The only way the Eagles will fall into that rut is if they become more famous for their litigation than for their music.

One of the reasons I gave for not attending the HOTE tour was the matter of authenticity. Don and Glenn walking out on stage as if to play a duet, when in fact other, invisible musicians, are also playing along. With that attitude to authenticity, they still have a long career ahead of them, as long as they are vertical men as Ringo would put it.

[Funk 50]

Going with the scenario of a Frey-less reunion tour between around 1991-1992, I wonder what impact it might have had on Glenn's solo career. Perhaps the extra publicity might have helped Strange Weather - it's a good album

I think it would have helped Glenn's solo career but there would still be pressure on him to return to the Eagles. It was great to hear all those new Frey tracks together.

Maybe the Eagles could have performed a couple more tracks than Silent Spring. River Of Dreams is a particular favourite, with the full intro.

[Eagles Rule]

Today I was thinking about the reunion attempt that was made in 1990. You had Henley, Felder, Walsh and Schmitt on board, but Frey balked at the 11th hour.
So, let's suppose for a moment that they'd said, "Fine, no Glenn, we're still doing this". I have a couple of questions to ponder about that time.

1. Was there any consideration to move forward with the members they had?
(Remember Don H. and Don F. could have voted to move forward and Glenn couldn't have stopped it....2/3 of the Board of Directors would have had say so)

2. Had this lineup moved forward, what sort of success would they have enjoyed?

3. What sort of Setlist would they have employed? More Henley would be a given, but would they have brought in more Walsh Solos, a few Schmitt songs, maybe even bringing back Visions as a live song??
(From the HFO special, you would have only lost TS, TIE, and TGFY. Touring would have impacted more)

I know this didnt happen, but I like to wonder sometimes.

1. After watching the documenrty I thought the same thing when everyone was there with the promise of Glenn showing up. When he left them at the alter, Henley & Felder could have voted to go on since they were 2 of the 3 owners of the company. Joe and certainly Timmy would have been on board.

2. I think they would have been very successful just like other bands who get back together without one of the original members.

3. I am not sure who would be the best guy to sign the songs Glenn was lead on, but with that much talent someone would be able to do it. The songs would sound different, but Glenn does a horrible TITTL and the fans still enjoy it. I always wonder why Timmy doesn't sing it since his voice is closer to Randy's.
They might have brought back Randy & Bernie since the main reason they left was because of Glenn.
The other guys would have gotten more of a chance to sing like Timmy who has a great voice.

I am sure Glenn would have sued and probably settled out of court like Felder did years later. Or maybe it would have pressured him to come back, because he gave in and came back a few years later anyway.

The Eagles could get by without Glenn easier than without Don H in my opinion. If Glenn never came back, the other guys would have reunited sooner or later.

[Freypower]

1. After watching the documenrty I thought the same thing when everyone was there with the promise of Glenn showing up. When he left them at the alter, Henley & Felder could have voted to go on since they were 2 of the 3 owners of the company. Joe and certainly Timmy would have been on board.

2. I think they would have been very successful just like other bands who get back together without one of the original members.

3. I am not sure who would be the best guy to sign the songs Glenn was lead on, but with that much talent someone would be able to do it. The songs would sound different, but Glenn does a horrible TITTL and the fans still enjoy it. I always wonder why Timmy doesn't sing it since his voice is closer to Randy's.
They might have brought back Randy & Bernie since the main reason they left was because of Glenn.
The other guys would have gotten more of a chance to sing like Timmy who has a great voice.

I am sure Glenn would have sued and probably settled out of court like Felder did years later. Or maybe it would have pressured him to come back, because he gave in and came back a few years later anyway.

The Eagles could get by without Glenn easier than without Don H in my opinion. If Glenn never came back, the other guys would have reunited sooner or later.

On what basis do you make this assertion?

If Glenn's version of TITTL is so 'horrible' then why do the fans enjoy it?

As for them being just as successful, I'm sorry, but I don't think they would have been. The fact that they chose not to continue says rather more than 'what if'.

[Freypower]

Thanks for the reply BillBailey1976. I think I get the gist. They may continue if they lose Joe or Tim but they'll definitely terminate the Eagles if founders Glenn or Don die or become incapable first.

I dunno. Glenn says to the audience "If you keep payin', we'll keep playin' and since a few, stuttering years they experienced at the beginning of their career, they've enjoyed consistent success, despite all the upheavals, controversy and the passing of much time. It seems, ultimately the audience will decide when the Eagles cease to be.

I'm sure Irving will be calculating the possibilities presented by the fast approaching anniversary of Hotel California and if that's a hit, and everything the Eagles do, seems to be, then The Long Run or Hell Freezes Over's 25th. They could squeeze in a 10th birthday for Long Road Out Of Eden.

I'm disappointed they didn't mark the anniversary of Desperado, especially with Bernie returning but even ignoring all the anniversaries, the successful return of Leadon has given them a fifth lead singer, which will help them continue with a 3 hour show and even allow a couple of new/old tracks to be added to the set list. I don't know what he can contribute to a Hotel California celebration though.

The Beach Boys 50th was quite a good do. Decent album and reunion tour but it's quickly returned to being a travesty. The only way the Eagles will fall into that rut is if they become more famous for their litigation than for their music.

One of the reasons I gave for not attending the HOTE tour was the matter of authenticity. Don and Glenn walking out on stage as if to play a duet, when in fact other, invisible musicians, are also playing along. With that attitude to authenticity, they still have a long career ahead of them, as long as they are vertical men as Ringo would put it.

You answered your own question. This band does not mark anniversaries.

I think it's a bit much for you to complain about lack of authenticity when you haven't even seen the HOTE show. Yet you are happy to talk about the successful return of Bernie Leadon.

[Eagles Rule]

On what basis do you make this assertion?

If Glenn's version of TITTL is so 'horrible' then why do the fans enjoy it?

As for them being just as successful, I'm sorry, but I don't think they would have been. The fact that they chose not to continue says rather more than 'what if'.

Most great bands from that era are touring to rake in the dough. Some do not have their only lead vocalist of the band, such as Foreigner, Styx, Journey. But there fans are willing to pay to see them. At least with the Eagles they have so many different people who can sing their own songs,( Henley, Joe, and Timmy) that fans would still come out. Someone could have subbed if for Glenn.

I'm sorry but Glenn's voice is not suited for TITTL. That is why I wonder why Timmy doesn't sing it. No one is going to sing it like Randy, but fans still love the song. That is why fans still enjoy it even though Glenn cannot do it justice.

I never said they would be just as successful. I said they would still be successful without Glenn. That is a big difference because some fans would not come without Glenn. But he was not irreplaceable, just like Lou Gramm, Dennis DeYoung or Steve Perry were not.

[Freypower]

Most great bands from that era are touring to rake in the dough. Some do not have their only lead vocalist of the band, such as Foreigner, Styx, Journey. But there fans are willing to pay to see them. At least with the Eagles they have so many different people who can sing their own songs,( Henley, Joe, and Timmy) that fans would still come out. Someone could have subbed if for Glenn.

I'm sorry but Glenn's voice is not suited for TITTL. That is why I wonder why Timmy doesn't sing it. No one is going to sing it like Randy, but fans still love the song. That is why fans still enjoy it even though Glenn cannot do it justice.

I never said they would be just as successful. I said they would still be successful without Glenn. That is a big difference because some fans would not come without Glenn. But he was not irreplaceable, just like Lou Gramm, Dennis DeYoung or Steve Perry were not.

Some of us think his voice, his personality, his leadership skills, his musicianship, etc etc, are irreplaceable just as Henley is irreplaceable. You say TITTL doesn't work with him singing it. You are entitled to your opinion and I am entitled to mine which is that the songs he sings also wouldn't work with others singing them. You make one rule for TITTL & then another rule for Glenn's songs. Consistency would be nice.