Nominations are expected to be announced in a few weeks. I'm gonna post the press release right below what I'm typing but my main question is who do you think should be inducted that hasn't? Two of my choices would be the Wings & the Jacksons. If Eric Clapton can be inducted 3 times, there's no reason why Paul McCartney (with the Wings) & Michael Jackson (with the Jacksons) can't be.

Anyway, what do yal think? Here's the article:

2010 Rock Hall Nomination Details Revealed

09.12.09 09:48 PM Filed in: 2010 Ceremony | Rock Hall Politics
Writing on the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame blog yesterday, Jim Henke, Rock Hall Chief Curator and Nominating Committee Member, revealed some interesting tidbits about this year's nominations, but not the actual nominees.

The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame’s Nominating Committee – a diverse group made up of about 30 rock and roll experts, including music executives, music journalists, historians and even a couple of musicians – met in New York City this past Wednesday to compile the ballot for the next Rock and Roll Hall of Fame inductee election.

The only news here is that the Nominating Committee met on September 9th. Next, Henke explains the nomination process:

Each member of the [Nominating Committee] can suggest up to three potential nominees. In addition, there are three subcommittees – one on progressive rock and heavy metal, one on hip-hop and one on early rock and rollers and rhythm & blues – that convene prior to the big meeting and suggest potential nominees in those categories.

Henke confirms that the Rock Hall is utilizing the genre subcommittees again this year after they were introduced last year. By acknowledging the specific groups, one could reasonably deduce that the there will be at least one nominee on the ballot from each of the three subcommittees.

The big question here is why is the Rock Hall lumping together prog rock and heavy metal? What do they have in common other than the fact they're both underrepresented in the Hall of Fame? It's possible that the genre subcommittee members are fluent in both metal and prog, so they're just combined into one, but that still seems strange. Metallica filled this slot on the ballot last year, leaving the prog rock selection, Yes, without a nomination. Perhaps that changes this year.

Henke also divulges new criteria for becoming a Hall of Famer:

The only official eligibility requirement is that an artist must have released his or her first record at least 25 years ago. Beyond that, the committee evaluates the influence an artist has had on rock and roll, the longevity of the artist’s career and the overall importance. Unlike sports halls of fame, where one can point to the statistics an athlete compiled over the course of his career, the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame is not based on numbers. In fact, record sales play a very small role in determining who is nominated. As a result, it’s all very subjective. And all of the members of the Nominating Committee are very passionate about their suggestions.

The key line there is that the Nominating Committee evaluates, "the longevity of the artist's career and the overall importance." We have never officially heard that "longevity" is part of the induction criteria, but it's always been a part of our "induction chances" calculations.

Henke continues with more news about this year's ballot:

This year the committee members discussed a very wide range of artists – from those whose careers began in the Fifties to some who are still very active. Overall, more than 50 potential nominees were discussed and debated. Then a ballot listing all of the artists was distributed and each member got to vote for their top 15 artists. That vote determined who will go on the ballot, which is then distributed to the Hall of Fame’s voters – a group that includes all living inductees, as well as various executives, journalists, historians and the like. In the end, 12 artists made the ballot, and five will ultimately be inducted into the Hall of Fame. I can’t say who the nominees are, but I was very happy with the results – it’s a very diverse group of artists in terms of musical styles, eras, etc. But stay tuned – the nominees’ names will be made public soon.

The Rock Hall had nominated just nine artists the previous three years, so bumping up to 12 this year is a welcome development, and one we have been lobbying for.

Look for the official announcement of the nominees to happen within the next couple of weeks.
[Edited 9/19/09 18:20pm]

Janet Jackson

Hopefully they'll put some worthy nominees in there...

Joan Jett, Rush, and X should be in there..

Wings and the Jacksons are never going to be inducted as separate acts. they're both already in there as individuals and with the group that made them famous/successful

everyone considers the Jacksons the same as the Jackson 5 with nothing more than a name-change to get around legal issues.

and Paul McCartney only credited Wings on his records (either along with his name or as the band itself) in order to put distance between himself and the Beatles baggage and to insist that he was off on a new thing, even though it was mostly just paul with a back-up band.

as far as I can tell, and admittedly, I know almost nothing about him/them, but Clapton's 3 inductions are for completely unrelated bands and/or solo work.

errant said:

Eric Clapton was basically a side man/band leader in some of the groups he was in anyways.

The Jacksons are technically "The Jackson 5" and "Wings" was Paul McCartney's background band, they credited Wings songs to him on his Rock & Roll Hall of Fame page.

Timmy84 said:

that's because Wings WAS Paul McCartney and it was only rockstar bullshit or a mood he was in that Wings got any credit on those records at all. i mean, it's GENEROUS bullshit, but it's about on par with Prince being inducted as Prince, Prince and the Revolution and Prince and the New Power Generation.

it ain't gonna happen. it doesn't need to happen. it shouldn't happen.

errant said:

So true.

errant said:

The line up in the Jacksons is actually different from the line up in the Jackson 5; Randy replaced Jermaine, so technically they are different groups. It's like when you get presenters talking to Jermaine about the Jackson 5 and then they show a clip of "Don't Blame it on the Boogie" Jermaine was never part of the whole Destiny/Triumph era.

whatsgoingon said:

it's a different line up, but it's the same concept, mostly the same guys doing roughly the same thing. hell, even on wikipedia and allmusic, the Jacksons albums are lumped in with the Jackson 5's discography.

had Motown not insisted that the J5 give up that name when they switched labels, they would have still been called the Jackson 5 for those albums as well, Jermaine or no Jermaine.

If they consider the Jackson 5 and Jacksons as the same group, than Randy would also be in the Hall of Fame with his big brothers ... They don't cinsider them the same, but they do for Parliament/Funkadelic though?

LittleBLUECorvette said:

You notice that when the Supremes and Temptations were inducted that they only inducted the original lineups. Same with the Jackson 5. Cindy Birdsong wasn't inducted with Diana, Flo and Mary and neither was Jean Terrell. No other Temptations member after Dennis Edwards was included in the Hall of Fame and two of the original members of both groups (Eldridge Bryant and Barbara Martin) were not included.

However all lineups of Martha and the Vandellas (1962-1972) were inducted from the originals (Martha Reeves, Annette Beard, Rosalind Ashford) to its replacements for Martha (Betty Kelly, Lois Reeves and Sandra Tilley).

Saying the Jacksons were "different" from the Jackson 5 is like saying that about the Bluebelles/Labelle and yet though both groups changed their musical styles, most of the same members were in those groups.
[Edited 9/20/09 11:01am]

And in here: http://www.rockhall.com/i...ckson-five

"Enjoy Yourself", "Shake Your Body" and "Show You the Way to Go" were included in the "Jackson 5's" essential period. So in essence the Jacksons' career as a group from 1969 to 1984 was respected. The only thing they didn't do was induct Randy.

Chicago, Blood, Sweat, & Tears, The Doobie Brothers, Toto, Steely Dan, Kansas,and Boston are a few bands that I think are LONG overdue 4 RRHOF induction, but as The Ramones said years ago these "inductions" end up being nothing more than a populartiy contest.
[Edited 9/20/09 11:14am]
[Edited 9/20/09 11:16am]
[Edited 9/20/09 11:17am]

diamondpearl1 said:

The Ramones are right.

carlcranshaw said:

Van Halen been inducted.

Todd should've BEEN IN.

Timmy84 said:

I forgot about that. I guess because only Mike and Sammy showed up. LOL!

carlcranshaw said:

Yeah don't forget the drama, lol. Eddie and Dave and Alex refused to be there, lol

Timmy84 said:

I remember Velvet Water Pistol messed up two VH tunes and the lounge version Mike and Sammy did with Paul Schaffer wasn't kewl.

Well the Hall is even tougher to understand than award nominations. But the Hall is overseen by alot of "writers" and that is why you see alot of this "eric clapton" type voting and favortism. Meaning it seems that certain eras get respect, and certain dont, certain bands from certain eras, if they continued into other eras get penalized for their longevity.

Right now i have a list of should be in's that is almost bigger than the members already in, and for the most part i dont think i am overestimating any of them, especially when you consider that Percy Sledge and Del Shannon got in first try while Queen missed 3 times and John Mellencamp 4 before getting in. And dont say its about "influence" because if anyone can tell me who del shannon influenced that is relevant than i will take back my comment.

Should be in but wont get in unless forced in
Hall and Oates
Moody Blues
Chicago
Heart
Joan Jett
Pat Benatar
Doobie Brothers

other 70's bands that get no props mainly because they had "ballad" hits at times

Journey
Boston
Kansas
Styx
Genesis (arent they in?)

And most likely in on the next shot
Bon Jovi though i know some dont think they deserve it, at the end of the day, they were really the only survivors of a "rock phase" that they were part of but not on purpose, kind of like how the "bee gees" were penalized for "disco" though they had nothing to do with it.

And as the years go on it really doesnt look like you will be getting an easy 12 to nominate with the current state of whats out there. But with that said i think one day U will see the following in.

Ryan Adams
Lucinda Williams
Alison Krauss
Norah Jones
Lenny Kravitz
Pearl Jam
Nirvana

carlcranshaw said:

Yeah that was the most corniest shit I ever seen.

Um.....*cough*



And them too:

Don't you qualify after 25 years have passed since you first recorded?

2009 means we are now 25 years since The Smiths were formed. How they aren't nominated instead of the usual old bollocks is laughable.

Were the Velvet Underground ever inducted? The Fall? The Undertones?

Tired old Rolling Stone hacks and 1960s hippie bores inducting their favourite music year in and year out.

The Hall of Fame like Rolling Stone magazine should be put out to pasture.

Cliched choices.

If they're not in next year, I'm gonna be pissed.

Timmy84 said:

I thought it was funny that Michael gave a shout out to "Gary Cherone" for the one album he was on, if ever there was an odd group, it was when Gary was the lead singer. Dont get me wrong i love Gary, and Extreme are probably one of the most underrated bands ever, especially for playing funk! But Gary in Van Halen was nothing more than a scam to fufill a contract with WB. Eddie's issues destroyed this band the last 20 years of it.

lastdecember said:

Eddie Van Halen definitely fucked things up.

Timmy84 said:

I think they will get in first shot, i know somewhere i saw that people thought Duran Duran should go in, and though i wouldnt fight it, i also wouldnt push it. Im torn with them because they were more of a "visual band" that stumbled alot with growth, but, with that, were also the biggest band in the world for a few years. So in reality they probably should go in for that.

lastdecember said:

True, I would love for Duran Duran to get in too.

Timmy84 said:

Oh he truly did, we all know that Dave is a goof ball and all that, but Eddie is a power freak to say the least, though now he may be mellowing in his older age and clean living, Van Halen is pretty much a done deal. I feel with Hagar and of course Michael Anthony (whos importance was never recognized) they still were producing solid music, now they are traveling novelity band that probably has nothing new to offer.