Thursday's Take: A rant about the Rock & Roll HOFBy BRYAN DAVIS PUBLISHER,
I was reading earlier about a famous guitar player who was criticizing the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame.
The man, Joe Walsh, played guitar for the Eagles for a number of years, and has since rejoined them in various reunion tours. He also had a successful career outside of the Eagles.
Walsh took issue with the Hall of Fame’s nomination methods. He claims that corporate sponsors often get to pick nominees, with fans deciding the final vote, giving way to too much politics.
I have always had a thumbs down opinion of the Rock & Roll HOF.
I believe that any Hall of Fame that does not allow itself to go at least one year without inducting a class is just not legitimate.
The need for these celebrities to have a big party for themselves and get patted on the back by their peers overshadows the fact that sometimes, you just don’t have a qualified group of nominees.
For instance, you’re scraping the bottom of the barrel when you induct Joan Baez to the Rock & Roll HOF.
A couple of years ago, the Major League Baseball HOF had no inductees.
This was amazing, and at the same time, telling about how sacred a Hall of Fame is.
This is opposed to the National Football Hall of Fame, which lets anyone who stayed in the league 10 years into its hall of honor.
I was watching Drew Brees break the all-time record for yards by a quarterback last week, and they kept talking about his cementing his Hall of Fame credentials.
I’m pretty sure he was going to get in without that records and many others.
The Rock & Roll Hall of Fame had an astounding first few years, because there were a backlog of artists who were groundbreaking and deserved it, like Indianola’s own B.B. King, who was a first-year inductee.
As the years have passed, it has become about longevity rather than artists’ contributions to rock music.
If you stick around 25 years, you’re sure to get inducted.
Walsh may have a point about the politics, but that’s the least of this organization’s problems.