DAVID LEE ROTH TEES OFF ON PAUL RODGERS ON HIS SHOW

And listen to classic Van Halen (1978 - 1984).

Queen + David Lee Roth?
Imagine THAT one, hmm.

[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Bryans Permed Pants wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Bryans Permed Pants wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Of course David Lee Roth is correct. Paul Rodgers is a prat can't sing been in bands no one has heard of and sold no records.[/QUOTE]

Um... Paul Rodgers is the only person to have led three bands to multi-platinum success.

Maybe you haven't heard of Free, Bad Company, and The Firm, but millions of others have.

Free was a huge voice and influence on the late 60s blues-rock movement in the UK. Bad Company sold millions of records, and The Firm was a supergroup including Jimmy Page.

Get with it.
[/QUOTE]

I have heard of the FIRM. You see good ol Jimmy Page thought it was inappropriate to come up with a name like Led Zep + Paul Rodgers. Even when Page teams up with Plant they call themselves "Page & Plant" not Led Zep. Brain and Roger should be taking note. I hate what Brian and Roger have done to the name Queen and our beloved Freddie
[/QUOTE]


I agree.

David Lee Roth has got to be the biggest douchebag rock has seen since Ted Nugent.

[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]jcrawford79 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]David Lee Roth has got to be the biggest douchebag rock has seen since Ted Nugent.[/QUOTE]

Um...Axl Rose, anyone? At least Dave and the Nuge are all for fun. They're not actually assholes. And they both can, at times, be very insightful, intelligent, and wise. Axl...never.

[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Ray D O'Gaga wrote: [/QUOTENAME]I think the Permed Pants is an intentionally cartoonish parody of the Permed Poodle.

This assumes I have my Sarcasm Detector on and in good working order.[/QUOTE]

No doubt.

The real BPP had a way of getting under the skin.

This guy is just silly..lol

[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Music Man wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]jcrawford79 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]David Lee Roth has got to be the biggest douchebag rock has seen since Ted Nugent.[/QUOTE]

Um...Axl Rose, anyone? At least Dave and the Nuge are all for fun. They're not actually assholes. And they both can, at times, be very insightful, intelligent, and wise. Axl...never.[/QUOTE]

While at the same time respecting your opinion, I stand firm in my belief that they are both douchebags of the cheapest variety.

as much as we all love Queen, how can anyone forget that PR was a megastar before Queen started at the turn of the 70s.
Respect due even if you hate him.

"You see good ol Jimmy Page thought it was inappropriate to come up with a name like Led Zep + Paul Rodgers. Even when Page teams up with Plant they call themselves "Page & Plant" not Led Zep. Brain and Roger should be taking note."

This is where I agree with BPP. Sorry!

[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Serry... wrote: [/QUOTENAME]"You see good ol Jimmy Page thought it was inappropriate to come up with a name like Led Zep + Paul Rodgers. Even when Page teams up with Plant they call themselves "Page & Plant" not Led Zep. Brain and Roger should be taking note."

This is where I agree with BPP. Sorry![/QUOTE]

Gilmour / Mason / Wright was still Pink Floyd- even without Waters

Hetfield / Ulrich / Hammett / Newsted was still Metallica- not 3 Guys From Metallica + Noob

Collins / Banks / Rutherford were still Genesis- even though before many could say Genesis=Gabriel

And so on and so on... There are many examples on BOTH sides...

Yes, Tom, but there are diffent kind of examples. "Queen without Mike Grose is not Queen", or "Queen without Freddie and John Deacon is not Queen" - are not the same. It's up to them how do they call themselves, it's their band, not mine, but I feel a little discomfort about that.

(When Brian says "Queen are: me and Roger!" - I can't agree with that)

Who cares.

Got to admit that I was never really happy with Brian and Roger using the Queen name with only half the band, not just for this tour but the collaborations with others over recent years, but at the end of the day it's up to them. But all the same it didn't stop me going to see them. Why would anyone deny themselves a fab night out just because they disagree with the name? Brian and Roger aren't the only ones using a classic band name without half the band. I should imagine there'll be several Who fans with similar feelings. I've said it before, Paul Rodgers is a dammed good singer in his own right with a tremendous back catalogue. Very different to Freddie, but that doesn't make him bad. Freddie was a one off. Many off us may be unhappy that they aren't touring under their own names like Page and Plant but there's nothing we can do about it. We can't twist Johns arm to tour and bring Freddie back. Just enjoy the shows and try not to dwell on the name thing too much.

[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Serry... wrote: [/QUOTENAME]"You see good ol Jimmy Page thought it was inappropriate to come up with a name like Led Zep + Paul Rodgers. Even when Page teams up with Plant they call themselves "Page & Plant" not Led Zep. Brain and Roger should be taking note."

This is where I agree with BPP. Sorry![/QUOTE]

Page and Plant are iconic and legendary.

May and Taylor are more esoteric.

That's about it in a nutshell.

[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Serry... wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Yes, Tom, but there are diffent kind of examples.[/QUOTE]

I disagree. Queen without Mercury is the exact same thing as Genesis without Gabriel and Floyd without Waters. Phil Collins and Dave Gilmour are much bigger names now than they were in the early 70s.

Do you think Phil Collins would be so huge today had Gabriel remained in Genesis? I honestly don't think so. Dave Gilmour got the spotlight once Waters left in '83, so it's the same thing for him.

[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Music Man wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Page and Plant are iconic and legendary.

May and Taylor are more esoteric.

That's about it in a nutshell.[/QUOTE]

Agreed.