OFFICIAL Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Thread-First post vid

[DirtyDeeds]

I guess what I'm trying to ask ultimately is, is there anyone here who is absolutely accepting of Rob Trujillo's induction with Metallica who can also honestly justify Tommy, Chris and Richard not being inducted with GNR. If so, why?

I'm not against Rob Trujilo being in there, and if they had inducted Pitman, Ron, Bucket, Chris, etc., etc., etc., etc., I wouldn't have been against that either, but at the same time, if I was the one voting for or against people, I wouldn't have voted for any of those guys (Trujilo or New Gn'R guys) either.

It's not quantifiable, I guess it goes by gut feeling, but I think they try to induct the people that made the bands matter (I'm borrowing someone else's words from the forum with that, but I liked the way they said it. I wish I could remember who said it so I could credit them. I think it may have been zint, but not sure) for some reason or another, but I do think they make mistakes sometimes. Of course, there is the issue of omission of entire bands like Deep Purple or KISS, etc., but I do think they've made mistakes with individual members of inducted bands. The worst one that I am aware of, probably because they are another one of my three #1 favorite bands (bit of an oxymoron I guess, but I have a three-way tie for favorite) is when they left out Mark Evans, the original bassist from AC/DC. No, AC/DC's bass is nothing incredibly special, but the simple playing fits the simple, straightforward hard rock they play. Anyway, Mark played on the first three or four (depending on which continent you live on) AC/DC albums and was on the recordings and associated tours for the following AC/DC essentials: TNT, High Voltage, It's a Long Way to the Top (If You Wanna Rock 'n' Roll), The Jack, Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap, Problem Child, Big Balls, Jailbreak, Let There Be Rock, Hell Ain't a Bad Place to Be, and Whole Lotta Rosie. It's just inconceivable to me not to induct someone who was a part of those songs. However, that wasn't even the worst part. The worst part was that when it was announced that AC/DC would be inducted, the Rock n' Roll Hall of Fame told Mark Evans that he was being inducted. He was all excited, bought a plane ticket to America, was going to come to the ceremony and reunite for the first time with his old band (They parted amicably. There were no issues. He had just had enough of the road and playing rock star and wanted more of a domestic life) since 1977. Then a couple weeks later they called him and told him there had been a mistake and he actually was not being inducted. That was an incredibly shitty thing to do if you ask me. Incredibly shitty.

Edited April 16, 2012 by DirtyDeeds

[henfjel]

Originally gave this its own thread, but given the abundance of HoF discussion twas decided it might be better to try and import it in here.

The ceremony's been something I've been thoroughly uninterested in since its announcement and I've pretty much kept quiet on my general feelings about it, which were that it was always going to be an industry back-slapping festival and neither really about Rock n Roll, nor really about giving anything back to the fans given the ludicrous exclusivity of the event itself and the limited range of its immediate broadcast.

But the more I think about it, the more I'm quite disturbed about the fact that with Guns N Roses, the induction only encompassed certain members of the band based on some abstract criteria I'm still having trouble deciphering really... The members inducted; Axl, Izzy, Slash, Duff, Steven, Dizzy and Matt... how were they selected to be the only members of the rather lengthy list of people who've come and gone through Guns N Roses both before and after some of them?

Before I get a ludicrous number of posts saying "How could you expect them to induct Pitman?" etc. talking about how it's the most ridiculous thing to expect in the world... They inducted Rob Trujillo with Metallica without batting an eyelid. At the time, he'd been in Metallica for a significantly shorter period than Tommy, Chris and even Richard have been in Guns and they'd only put out two records during his tenure. The complete industry dismissal of post-1994 GNR and these guys who've given up a lot of time and effort touring the world seems like a much more brutal snub than anything which Axl did...

I can understand why acknowledging any of post '94 GNR would present the HOF with an enormous logistical problem, where then would they stop? But the degree of hypocrisy involved in the selection process means that the ceremony itself is not something I can view as honourable or admirable in any way.

I guess what I'm trying to ask ultimately is, is there anyone here who is absolutely accepting of Rob Trujillo's induction with Metallica who can also honestly justify Tommy, Chris and Richard not being inducted with GNR. If so, why?

I mean beyond the abstract field of personal opinion, i.e. "Metallica is still Metallica." That might work for you on a personal level, but overall we're looking at a similar scenario, a collective of musicians releasing music under a particular name where personnel has changed... this happens all the time in bands. Accepting it in this instance should be no more traumatic.

hi! saw your thread and was about to post this..

Though I see what you mean here, I do see why none of the post 94 Guns N' Roses members where inducted. As far as my knowledge goes, bands are inducted 25 years after the debut album of said band. I read somewhere that what they did with guns was to induct those who played in the band while they rised to fame, and who was a part of the band turning famous since there has been so many members. Therefore, no post '94 guys since none of them where there to help bring Guns N' Roses to worldwide fame.

About Metallica: Both Cliff Burton and Jason Newsted were also inducted. I guess they inducted Rob since he had played there for 8 years and participated on several albums by then

Edited April 16, 2012 by henfjel

[FuddMckagan]

Rob shouldn't have been inducted with Metallica, and the new guitarist shouldn't have been inducted with RHCP.

[gunsguy]

Graeme this is part of the problem with HOF, no one really knows what makes one person get in over others, alot of the inductees of past dont make any sense really. Even with RHCP last night

Take Matt, he was not around when the 25 year thing went on. It is a mind boggling thing the HOF and what makes them decide certain things

Edited April 16, 2012 by gunsguy

[axlsalinger]

Thing is, the Hall seems to be open to including a replacement band member or two. That is why they included Trujillo. It's a different scenario, than inducting 17 different members of a band. Not a knock on New GNR, I love both eras of the group, but it's an entirely different group. And as great as CD is, it didn't catch the imagination of the entire rock world like AFD and UYI.

Don't forget that they did include Matt Sorum, who like Trujillo replaced a long-time member, also included Dizzy. Once you start inducting new Guns members, it's very hard to differentiate. If you include Tommy, do you include Fortus? What about Bucket? The list goes on. Obviously a tough decision for all concerned.

Edited April 16, 2012 by axlsalinger

[RZ4]

Originally gave this its own thread, but given the abundance of HoF discussion twas decided it might be better to try and import it in here.

The ceremony's been something I've been thoroughly uninterested in since its announcement and I've pretty much kept quiet on my general feelings about it, which were that it was always going to be an industry back-slapping festival and neither really about Rock n Roll, nor really about giving anything back to the fans given the ludicrous exclusivity of the event itself and the limited range of its immediate broadcast.

But the more I think about it, the more I'm quite disturbed about the fact that with Guns N Roses, the induction only encompassed certain members of the band based on some abstract criteria I'm still having trouble deciphering really... The members inducted; Axl, Izzy, Slash, Duff, Steven, Dizzy and Matt... how were they selected to be the only members of the rather lengthy list of people who've come and gone through Guns N Roses both before and after some of them?

Before I get a ludicrous number of posts saying "How could you expect them to induct Pitman?" etc. talking about how it's the most ridiculous thing to expect in the world... They inducted Rob Trujillo with Metallica without batting an eyelid. At the time, he'd been in Metallica for a significantly shorter period than Tommy, Chris and even Richard have been in Guns and they'd only put out two records during his tenure. The complete industry dismissal of post-1994 GNR and these guys who've given up a lot of time and effort touring the world seems like a much more brutal snub than anything which Axl did...

I can understand why acknowledging any of post '94 GNR would present the HOF with an enormous logistical problem, where then would they stop? But the degree of hypocrisy involved in the selection process means that the ceremony itself is not something I can view as honourable or admirable in any way.

I guess what I'm trying to ask ultimately is, is there anyone here who is absolutely accepting of Rob Trujillo's induction with Metallica who can also honestly justify Tommy, Chris and Richard not being inducted with GNR. If so, why?

I mean beyond the abstract field of personal opinion, i.e. "Metallica is still Metallica." That might work for you on a personal level, but overall we're looking at a similar scenario, a collective of musicians releasing music under a particular name where personnel has changed... this happens all the time in bands. Accepting it in this instance should be no more traumatic.

On paper, the Metallica/Rob Trujillo comparison is a good point. However, I think the main difference is that Metallica had stayed in the public eye and been relatively mainstream for all of the years after Jason Newsted left, and with three other guys still in the band that are considered more or less originals to the masses (not enough people know that Mustaine came before Kirk) - it made it acceptable that their new bassist was included in the proceedings. Also, it helped that James and Lars seemingly tried to publicly make Rob look and feel like a "legit" full member of the band after he joined and the way they demonstrated that in the "Some Kind of Monster" documentary. The key was there were still more original members than replacements and the band was still out in the open.

In contrast, despite all of the intricate details that GNR fans on the internet know about the band post-94, it's really been a mystery to most casual music fans out there. A lot of people know that Axl still carried on with the name (the 2002 VMAs helped with that, even if the performance in hindsight didn't), but Axl never really had a smooth transition due all of those dark years and the lack of publicity and promotion. Metallica has stayed in the public eye the entire time, even after going through a few different bass players, whereas GNR was completely torn down and built back up and there was never a proper primer put out there for people to connect to the dots. Lack of consistent musical output of course plays a big factor too, as Metallica released music right after Rob joined, whereas with GNR, it's been a lot more complicated and drawn out, and again - with very little promotion. The world has never gotten a chance to really get to know or appreciate the years of work that the post-94 members contributed to the ongoing GNR brand. Even with the US tours every few years starting in 2002 and the eventual release of CD, it didn't do enough to bridge that gap that became so large to the public and the media in general. So it makes it much easier for something like the RNRHOF to solely zero in on the members that were a part of the band's successes before the long hiatus began.

Edited April 16, 2012 by RZ4

[Graeme]

I guess what I'm trying to ask ultimately is, is there anyone here who is absolutely accepting of Rob Trujillo's induction with Metallica who can also honestly justify Tommy, Chris and Richard not being inducted with GNR. If so, why?

I'm not against Rob Trujilo being in there, and if they had inducted Pitman, Ron, Bucket, Chris, etc., etc., etc., etc., I wouldn't have been against that either, but at the same time, if I was the one voting for or against people, I wouldn't have voted for any of those guys (Trujilo or New Gn'R guys) either.

It's not quantifiable, I guess it goes by gut feeling, but I think they try to induct the people that made the bands matter (I'm borrowing someone else's words from the forum with that, but I liked the way they said it. I wish I could remember who said it so I could credit them. I think it may have been zint, but not sure) for some reason or another, but I do think they make mistakes sometimes. Of course, there is the issue of omission of entire bands like Deep Purple or KISS, etc., but I do think they've made mistakes with individual members of inducted bands. The worst one that I am aware of, probably because they are another one of my three #1 favorite bands (bit of an oxymoron I guess, but I have a three-way tie for favorite) is when they left out Mark Evans, the original bassist from AC/DC. No, AC/DC's bass is nothing incredibly special, but the simple playing fits the simple, straightforward hard rock they play. Anyway, Mark played on the first three or four (depending on which continent you live on) AC/DC albums and was on the recordings and associated tours for the following AC/DC essentials: TNT, High Voltage, It's a Long Way to the Top (If You Wanna Rock 'n' Roll), The Jack, Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap, Problem Child, Big Balls, Jailbreak, Let There Be Rock, Hell Ain't a Bad Place to Be, and Whole Lotta Rosie. It's just inconceivable to me not to induct someone who was a part of those songs. However, that wasn't even the worst part. The worst part was that when it was announced that AC/DC would be inducted, the Rock n' Roll Hall of Fame told Mark Evans that he was being inducted. He was all excited, bought a plane ticket to America, was going to come to the ceremony and reunite for the first time with his old band (They parted amicably. There were no issues. He had just had enough of the road and playing rock star and wanted more of a domestic life) since 1977. Then a couple weeks later they called him and told him there had been a mistake and he actually was not being inducted. That was an incredibly shitty thing to do if you ask me. Incredibly shitty.

Exactly, I mean who is it who decides who's important to a band? Any Guns fan knows how important Izzy was to the formation of the group and to the writing and the sound on the Appetite and Illusions albums, yet if you look at the sphere of comments about the performance last night... Very few people seem to be batting an eyelid about his absence, and he certainly hasn't attracted the degree of backlash and hate that Axl has... It's not quantifiable at all. And therefore the results are unfair.

Originally gave this its own thread, but given the abundance of HoF discussion twas decided it might be better to try and import it in here.

The ceremony's been something I've been thoroughly uninterested in since its announcement and I've pretty much kept quiet on my general feelings about it, which were that it was always going to be an industry back-slapping festival and neither really about Rock n Roll, nor really about giving anything back to the fans given the ludicrous exclusivity of the event itself and the limited range of its immediate broadcast.

But the more I think about it, the more I'm quite disturbed about the fact that with Guns N Roses, the induction only encompassed certain members of the band based on some abstract criteria I'm still having trouble deciphering really... The members inducted; Axl, Izzy, Slash, Duff, Steven, Dizzy and Matt... how were they selected to be the only members of the rather lengthy list of people who've come and gone through Guns N Roses both before and after some of them?

Before I get a ludicrous number of posts saying "How could you expect them to induct Pitman?" etc. talking about how it's the most ridiculous thing to expect in the world... They inducted Rob Trujillo with Metallica without batting an eyelid. At the time, he'd been in Metallica for a significantly shorter period than Tommy, Chris and even Richard have been in Guns and they'd only put out two records during his tenure. The complete industry dismissal of post-1994 GNR and these guys who've given up a lot of time and effort touring the world seems like a much more brutal snub than anything which Axl did...

I can understand why acknowledging any of post '94 GNR would present the HOF with an enormous logistical problem, where then would they stop? But the degree of hypocrisy involved in the selection process means that the ceremony itself is not something I can view as honourable or admirable in any way.

I guess what I'm trying to ask ultimately is, is there anyone here who is absolutely accepting of Rob Trujillo's induction with Metallica who can also honestly justify Tommy, Chris and Richard not being inducted with GNR. If so, why?

I mean beyond the abstract field of personal opinion, i.e. "Metallica is still Metallica." That might work for you on a personal level, but overall we're looking at a similar scenario, a collective of musicians releasing music under a particular name where personnel has changed... this happens all the time in bands. Accepting it in this instance should be no more traumatic.

hi! saw your thread and was about to post this..

Though I see what you mean here, I do see why none of the post 94 Guns N' Roses members where inducted. As far as my knowledge goes, bands are inducted 25 years after the debut album of said band. I read somewhere that what they did with guns was to induct those who played in the band while they rised to fame, and who was a part of the band turning famous since there has been so many members. Therefore, no post '94 guys since none of them where there to help bring Guns N' Roses to worldwide fame.

About Metallica: Both Cliff Burton and Jason Newsted were also inducted. I guess they inducted Rob since he had played there for 8 years and participated on several albums by then

Yeah, the "making the band famous" thing does make sense within that specific context, but Rob Trujillo arguably played no part in making Metallica successful initially, therefore it seems to me that the HoF just arbitrarily makes up the rules as it goes along, supposedly validating/invalidating the acts to a certain extent... Therefore, does it seem that the refusal to induct members of post '94 GNR is part of a wider industry move to try and force a reunion. A current which has always been there and something which has ultimately been the aim of every single manager of Guns, and indeed most industry figures since Slash left the band? If so, is it not understandable why Axl wouldn't want to take any part in the ceremony given his commitment to what the band is now?

[nonlinear]

Thing is, the Hall seems to be open to including a replacement band member or two. That is why they included Trujillo. It's a different scenario, than inducting 17 different members of a band. Not a knock on New GNR, I love both eras of the group, but it's an entirely different group. And as great as CD is, it didn't catch the imagination of the entire rock world like AFD and UYI.

Don't forget that they did include Matt Sorum, who like Trujillo replaced a long-time member, also included Dizzy. Once you start inducting new Guns members, it's very hard to differentiate. If you include Tommy, do you include Fortus? What about Bucket? The list goes on. Obviously a tough decision for all concerned.

This. as I posted in the other thread (which seems to have been deleted), Metallica is still Metallica. GNR isn't really GNR anymore, it's Axl's solo project.

[gunsguy]

Originally gave this its own thread, but given the abundance of HoF discussion twas decided it might be better to try and import it in here.

The ceremony's been something I've been thoroughly uninterested in since its announcement and I've pretty much kept quiet on my general feelings about it, which were that it was always going to be an industry back-slapping festival and neither really about Rock n Roll, nor really about giving anything back to the fans given the ludicrous exclusivity of the event itself and the limited range of its immediate broadcast.

But the more I think about it, the more I'm quite disturbed about the fact that with Guns N Roses, the induction only encompassed certain members of the band based on some abstract criteria I'm still having trouble deciphering really... The members inducted; Axl, Izzy, Slash, Duff, Steven, Dizzy and Matt... how were they selected to be the only members of the rather lengthy list of people who've come and gone through Guns N Roses both before and after some of them?

Before I get a ludicrous number of posts saying "How could you expect them to induct Pitman?" etc. talking about how it's the most ridiculous thing to expect in the world... They inducted Rob Trujillo with Metallica without batting an eyelid. At the time, he'd been in Metallica for a significantly shorter period than Tommy, Chris and even Richard have been in Guns and they'd only put out two records during his tenure. The complete industry dismissal of post-1994 GNR and these guys who've given up a lot of time and effort touring the world seems like a much more brutal snub than anything which Axl did...

I can understand why acknowledging any of post '94 GNR would present the HOF with an enormous logistical problem, where then would they stop? But the degree of hypocrisy involved in the selection process means that the ceremony itself is not something I can view as honourable or admirable in any way.

I guess what I'm trying to ask ultimately is, is there anyone here who is absolutely accepting of Rob Trujillo's induction with Metallica who can also honestly justify Tommy, Chris and Richard not being inducted with GNR. If so, why?

I mean beyond the abstract field of personal opinion, i.e. "Metallica is still Metallica." That might work for you on a personal level, but overall we're looking at a similar scenario, a collective of musicians releasing music under a particular name where personnel has changed... this happens all the time in bands. Accepting it in this instance should be no more traumatic.

On paper, the Metallica/Rob Trujillo comparison is a good point. However, I think the main difference is that Metallica had stayed in the public eye and been relatively mainstream for all of the years after Jason Newsted left, and with three other guys still in the band that are considered more or less originals to the masses (not enough people know that Mustaine came before Kirk) - it made it acceptable that their new bassist was included in the proceedings. Also, it helped that James and Lars seemingly tried to publicly make Rob look and feel like a "legit" full member of the band after he joined and the way they demonstrated that in the "Some Kind of Monster" documentary. They key was there were still more original members than replacements and the band was still out in the open.

In contrast, despite all of the intricate details that GNR fans on the internet know about the band post-94, it's really been a mystery to most casual music fans out there. A lot of people know that Axl still carried on with the name (the 2002 VMAs helped with that, even if the performance in hindsight didn't), but Axl never really had a smooth transition due all of those dark years and the lack of publicity and promotion. Metallica has stayed in the public eye the entire time, even after going through a few different bass players, whereas GNR was completely torn down and built back up and there was never a proper primer put out there for people to connect to the dots. Lack of consistent musical output of course plays a big factor too, as Metallica released music right after Rob joined, whereas with GNR, it's been a lot more complicated and drawn out, and again - with very little promotion. The world has never gotten a chance to really get to know or appreciate the years of work that the post-94 members contributed to the ongoing GNR brand. Even with the US tours every few years starting in 2002 and the eventual release of CD, it didn't do enough to bridge that gap that became so large to the public and the media in general. So it makes it much easier for something like the RNRHOF to solely zero in on the members that were a part of the band's successes before the long hiatus began.

So then what is the criteria? Is it 25 years after they are in and only the members that were there at the time? Or is it you can induct some who were there during some kind of rise to fame? Is it you can induct a "new" guy because the band stayed relevant? What is HOFs criteria? I am curious because there does not seem to be any, which is why people think the HOF is not a big deal or whatever. Even the users here a few months ago didn't think HOF was a big deal untill Axl backed out. If the HOF had some concrete formula then people would respect it a bit more I would think, they don't and if you look at all the past inductions you will se alot of wierd decisions in there.

Here is one, did you know Madonna, yeah Madonna is in the HOF! WTF? How does that make you feel?

*edit* I am NOT suggesting all members should have been inducted but where is the line here? At what point do they say no or yes for that matter?

Edited April 16, 2012 by gunsguy

[Graeme]

Thing is, the Hall seems to be open to including a replacement band member or two. That is why they included Trujillo. It's a different scenario, than inducting 17 different members of a band. Not a knock on New GNR, I love both eras of the group, but it's an entirely different group. And as great as CD is, it didn't catch the imagination of the entire rock world like AFD and UYI.

Don't forget that they did include Matt Sorum, who like Trujillo replaced a long-time member, also included Dizzy. Once you start inducting new Guns members, it's very hard to differentiate. If you include Tommy, do you include Fortus? What about Bucket? The list goes on. Obviously a tough decision for all concerned.

This. as I posted in the other thread (which seems to have been deleted), Metallica is still Metallica. GNR isn't really GNR anymore, it's Axl's solo project.

As I stated when I updated my post. That's just like, your opinion man.

[gunsguy]

Thing is, the Hall seems to be open to including a replacement band member or two. That is why they included Trujillo. It's a different scenario, than inducting 17 different members of a band. Not a knock on New GNR, I love both eras of the group, but it's an entirely different group. And as great as CD is, it didn't catch the imagination of the entire rock world like AFD and UYI.

Don't forget that they did include Matt Sorum, who like Trujillo replaced a long-time member, also included Dizzy. Once you start inducting new Guns members, it's very hard to differentiate. If you include Tommy, do you include Fortus? What about Bucket? The list goes on. Obviously a tough decision for all concerned.

This. as I posted in the other thread (which seems to have been deleted), Metallica is still Metallica. GNR isn't really GNR anymore, it's Axl's solo project.

As I stated when I updated my post. That's just like, your opinion man.

Agreed Metallica is MEtallica because you believe it is... or not, that is a personal opinion... same goes for Guns

[axlsalinger]

Here is one, did you know Madonna, yeah Madonna is in the HOF! WTF? How does that make you feel?

The Hall does cover a number of different genres, it's not only there to honour "rock". With that in mind, whether you like her or not, inducting Madonna seems like a no-brainer to me. I don't get this argument at all.

[gunsguy]

Here is one, did you know Madonna, yeah Madonna is in the HOF! WTF? How does that make you feel?

The Hall does cover a number of different genres, it's not only there to honour "rock". With that in mind, whether you like her or not, inducting Madonna seems like a no-brainer to me. I don't get this argument at all.

but not Rush? ok then

there are alot of strange things with HOF

Edited April 16, 2012 by gunsguy

[axlsalinger]

That one's tough for me, because I really don't like Rush at all. I understand how popular they were in their heyday, and appreciate that they're all great musicians, I just don't like their music. May simply be Geddy's voice, which has never been my cup of tea.

The really interesting one to me is KISS. I mean, personally I am not a fan. Gene Simmons may be my least favourite musician and "celebrity" of all time. Hate that guy. Think Paul Stanley and Peter Criss are losers as well, and a weak singer / drummer respectively. The only musically talented guy there is Ace. Musically, they have some decent songs, but overall their catalogue is just filled with mediocrity. All that being said, I think they should have gotten in a long time ago, considering how many musicians were inspired by them, how they transformed the live concert experience, and just how popular they were and are overall.

Probably both bands should be in there. I just find it kind of funny that I don't really like either group very much at all.

[wasted]

having thought about it, what bugs me is if these guys wanted a reunion so much why did they quit. they are happy to take all the glory as the good guys. but the fact is no matter how great AFD is they let the fans down. And the main reason we had to wait for CD was that they quit. Duff can play bass as good as Tommy, Slash can do a few of Axl's ballads it's not a massive sell out, or as bad as what he's done after GNR. It makes no sense to me.

that's why Izzy didn't show up cos he said goodbye long ago he doesn't feel right showing up for the limelight which he said he didn't want.

[gunsguy]

having thought about it, what bugs me is if these guys wanted a reunion so much why did they quit. they are happy to take all the glory as the good guys. but the fact is no matter how great AFD is they let the fans down. And the main reason we had to wait for CD was that they quit. Duff can play bass as good as Tommy, Slash can do a few of Axl's ballads it's not a massive sell out, or as bad as what he's done after GNR. It makes no sense to me.

that's why Izzy didn't show up cos he said goodbye long ago he doesn't feel right showing up for the limelight which he said he didn't want.

You said it all, these guys quit the band. Alot of fans forget this tiny little improtant detail.

[Midnight Rambler]

God damnit what a performance. I was really blown away - slash was the ulitmate guitar god, adler and sorum - fantastic and duff i find to be such an inspiration, i cant really put into words how i feel after seeing the boys perform, kinda emotional, felt like i was 12 years old again. Class act all the way by the boys. Im pleased they got gilby to fill in for izzy - imo izzy gets a pass for not showing up - hes been out of the public eye for 20 years. I feel its truely a fuckin shame that axl didnt show up though, i dont know but now after seeing the hall of fame thing im really not comfrotable with axl toruing as gnr, it just feels wrong. I think if axl had of shown up - all would have been forgiven if you know what i mean, closure etc, i dunno im just ramblin now.

Anyway, today im really proud to call myself a Guns N Roses fan.

Edit: Brilliant speechs by Duff, Steven, Slash and Matt.

Edited April 16, 2012 by Midnight Rambler

[tat2d1]

having thought about it, what bugs me is if these guys wanted a reunion so much why did they quit. they are happy to take all the glory as the good guys. but the fact is no matter how great AFD is they let the fans down. And the main reason we had to wait for CD was that they quit. Duff can play bass as good as Tommy, Slash can do a few of Axl's ballads it's not a massive sell out, or as bad as what he's done after GNR. It makes no sense to me.

that's why Izzy didn't show up cos he said goodbye long ago he doesn't feel right showing up for the limelight which he said he didn't want.

You said it all, these guys quit the band. Alot of fans forget this tiny little improtant detail.

Yeah, they all just abandoned poor Axl for no reason............please Nobody is forgetting that they quit (with the exception of Matt & Steven). Adler is the only one I ever hear talking about how badly he wants a reunion. The others seem quite happy & content doing their own things.

[axlsalinger]

They quit in large part because Axl made the working conditions intolerable. Not to say he's solely to blame by any means, the drug abuse didn't help and they contributed to what happened, but it's a much more complicated situation than just saying they quit.

I think with the alternative music wave that washed over the music scene in the early 90's, combined with Axl's eclectic taste in music, he really struggled to figure out a new direction to take the music. I really wonder what would have happened if he had just released an industrial-tinged solo album, then returned to Guns. We could have 4 or 5 new GNR albums by now.

[gunsguy]

having thought about it, what bugs me is if these guys wanted a reunion so much why did they quit. they are happy to take all the glory as the good guys. but the fact is no matter how great AFD is they let the fans down. And the main reason we had to wait for CD was that they quit. Duff can play bass as good as Tommy, Slash can do a few of Axl's ballads it's not a massive sell out, or as bad as what he's done after GNR. It makes no sense to me.

that's why Izzy didn't show up cos he said goodbye long ago he doesn't feel right showing up for the limelight which he said he didn't want.

You said it all, these guys quit the band. Alot of fans forget this tiny little improtant detail.

Yeah, they all just abandoned poor Axl for no reason............please Nobody is forgetting that they quit (with the exception of Matt & Steven). Adler is the only one I ever hear talking about how badly he wants a reunion. The others seem quite happy & content doing their own things.

So then if they are happy why aren't we? I am just happy they are alive and playing and/or creating music

[Midnight Rambler]

They quit in large part because Axl made the working conditions intolerable. Not to say he's solely to blame by any means, the drug abuse didn't help and they contributed to what happened, but it's a much more complicated situation than just saying they quit.

I think with the alternative music wave that washed over the music scene in the early 90's, combined with Axl's eclectic taste in music, he really struggled to figure out a new direction to take the music. I really wonder what would have happened if he had just released an industrial-tinged solo album, then returned to Guns. We could have 4 or 5 new GNR albums by now.

I often wonder/think the same thing.

[tat2d1]

having thought about it, what bugs me is if these guys wanted a reunion so much why did they quit. they are happy to take all the glory as the good guys. but the fact is no matter how great AFD is they let the fans down. And the main reason we had to wait for CD was that they quit. Duff can play bass as good as Tommy, Slash can do a few of Axl's ballads it's not a massive sell out, or as bad as what he's done after GNR. It makes no sense to me.

that's why Izzy didn't show up cos he said goodbye long ago he doesn't feel right showing up for the limelight which he said he didn't want.

You said it all, these guys quit the band. Alot of fans forget this tiny little improtant detail.

Yeah, they all just abandoned poor Axl for no reason............please Nobody is forgetting that they quit (with the exception of Matt & Steven). Adler is the only one I ever hear talking about how badly he wants a reunion. The others seem quite happy & content doing their own things.

So then if they are happy why aren't we? I am just happy they are alive and playing and/or creating music

I'm happy.

[wasted]

They quit and they were happy to let Axl take the blame for it and then pop up at Hof to take the credit and talk about the fans. If they cared about the fans they would never have quit. I guess they maybe didn't think it would turn out this way. But really they could have used Hof to set thongs straight but they chose the conceited glory.

I'm happy that other fans enjoyed it and it seems like a good night. Something about the whole thing doesn't seem right when Axl n Izzy feel so bad they can't even show up.

[evergreen_layne]

Thing is, the Hall seems to be open to including a replacement band member or two. That is why they included Trujillo. It's a different scenario, than inducting 17 different members of a band. Not a knock on New GNR, I love both eras of the group, but it's an entirely different group. And as great as CD is, it didn't catch the imagination of the entire rock world like AFD and UYI.

Don't forget that they did include Matt Sorum, who like Trujillo replaced a long-time member, also included Dizzy. Once you start inducting new Guns members, it's very hard to differentiate. If you include Tommy, do you include Fortus? What about Bucket? The list goes on. Obviously a tough decision for all concerned.

This. as I posted in the other thread (which seems to have been deleted), Metallica is still Metallica. GNR isn't really GNR anymore, it's Axl's solo project.

I agree. Metallica had one new member who hadn't been with the band since they'd become "Metallica". The new GNR has about 20. Its been diluted to the point where its unidentifiable.

[WhatsHerface]

Haha, if only.

Loving the induction speech so far. And Miles sounded great during the perfomance!