2014 Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Nominations

8 years 3 months ago #470 by Dr Clayton Forrester
Figured we could use a discussion thread about it.

Nominees

Cat Stevens
Chic
Deep Purple
Hall & Oates
KISS
Linda Ronstadt
Link Wray
L.L. Cool J
The Meters
Nirvana
N.W.A.
The Paul Butterfield Blues Band
Peter Gabriel
The Replacements
Yes
The Zombies



I am surprised that Nirvana was actually eligible but they're surely a lock. I'm thinking Peter Gabriel and Deep Purple have a good shot.

With Public Enemy going in last time I would suspect N.W.A is a favorite this time.

A sympathy vote could easily get Linda Ronstadt over the top.

If I was to pick 2 more I might go with Yes and Hall & Oates.

I want KISS to get in but I've been groomed to the notion that they are the Halls red headed stepchild.

Is Cat Stevens even allowed in the U.S.A?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

8 years 3 months ago #471 by Committee Chairman
Agreed on Linda...... many of the articles discussing the Nominations have her as the headliner. This would not have happened, without the sympathy card.

Predictions: Nirvana, NWA, Ronstadt, Cat Stevens, Gabriel & DP

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

8 years 3 months ago #473 by Darryl Tahirali
Does anyone know of any publicly released results of any of the past ballot results? I've done a cursory search but have not found anything yet.

I ask because I wonder if the reason why a number of this year's nominees who were on last year's ballot have returned is because they polled highly though not enough for election. That might explain why marginal acts such as Paul Butterfield and the Meters have returned this year--perhaps there is a groundswell among voters for them that would merit their returning.

Ballot results would seem to be a basic component to evaluating the eligible acts; however, like most of what the Hall does, this seems to be shrouded in secrecy, further fueling the belief that this Hall, a private entity that has appointed itself the arbiter of the music's legacy, "games" the outcomes in order to have the Hall reflect its conception of that legacy.

On another note, does anyone have any idea what the Hall means by "musical excellence?" It claims that "musical excellence" is "the essential qualification of induction," but without any definition of what that is, it too becomes a vague and arbitrary concept that avoids explaining how [fill in the blank with your favorite undeserving inductee] got into the Hall while [fill in the blank with your favorite snub] is not yet in the Hall.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

8 years 3 months ago #475 by Dr Clayton Forrester
I've never seen a tally from the industry ballots.

But just for reference, here's the tally from last years online votes.

1) Rush 24.66%
2) Deep Purple 16.67%
3) Heart 12.49%
4) Joan Jett and the Blackhearts 8.15%
5) Albert King 5.63%
6) Kraftwerk 4.79%
7) Public Enemy 4.76%
8) Donna Summer 4.64%
9) Procol Harum 3.57%
10) N.W.A. 3.4%
11) Randy Newman 3.36%
12) The Paul Butterfield Blues Band 2.44%
13) The Meters 2.27%
14) The Marvelettes 1.84%
15) Chic 1.33%




2014 Online Voting

Here's the current online tally from this years nominations

1) Nirvana 15.21%
2) KISS 13.73%
3) Deep Purple 12%
4) YES 10.66%
5) Peter Gabriel 9.22%
6) Hall & Oates 7.97%
7) Linda Ronstadt 6.48%
8) Cat Stevens 5.98%
9) The Zombies 4%
10) N.W.A. 3.65%
11) The Replacements 2.93%
12) L.L. Cool J. 2.01%
13) The Paul Butterfield Blues Band 1.84%
14) Link Wray 1.46%
15) Chic 1.38%
16) The Meters 1.33%



So between the fans and the industry, we all agreed that the Marvelettes didn't need to be inducted. But that's about the only consensus we reached. Last year the bottom 4 weren't inducted and this year has 3 of last years bottom 4 lingering at the bottom again. Last year the fans gave Randy Newman 3.36% of their votes and the industry still inducted him. With those standards, nobody below the N.W.A. this year has much of a shot. But we'll see if that becomes the norm given the online voting is so new.

There's certainly a disconnect though. Last year the fans were relatively clear that they wanted Deep Purple inducted and yet they weren't. Thankfully they're back this year. But what about Joan Jett and the Blackhearts? I was thinking maybe they fell victim to a rule that states if they're nominated 2 years in a row and aren't inducted, they must sit out the next ballot, but Donna Summer was nominated 3 years in a row. So as Darryl brought up, maybe Joan Jett just didn't get enough votes last year and somehow the online voting didn't match the industry votes? But if that's the case, is Chic really just that popular within their circles?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

8 years 3 months ago #476 by Committee Chairman
Clayton..... Thanks so much for coming up with that!

What screams out at me, is the high percentage of "Traditional" rock bands. I guess i am not surprised by it, but i wonder how much that matters in the eyes of the committee.

Agree with you Darryl..... Just what is rnr excellence anyway? Same thing as when they want bands who are influential..... so subjective!

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

8 years 3 months ago #481 by Darryl Tahirali
Thanks, Committee Chairman, but where are those online vote percentages from? Are they from the RnRHoF site, indicating the fan voting that made up one of the ballots? Or are they from this site?

And speaking of this site, and the discussion forums in particular, what does the "Karma" indicator indicate? I can't find a description of what that means.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

8 years 3 months ago - 8 years 3 months ago #482 by Dr Clayton Forrester
The percentages I posted are from the RnRHoF site. They're not the industry ballots, but the online fan vote tally that made up one of the ballots.


The karma indicator is basically a reputation meter. A person can positive rep you or negative rep you based on a post you've made. For example I just clicked the plus sign on yours and you've gone from a 1 to a 2.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

8 years 3 months ago #483 by Darryl Tahirali
Clayton, thank you for the clarifications and for the links.

The way I understand it, the fans' voting will produce the top five choices, which are then put onto one ballot that is then included as one of the potentially 600+ due back from Hall voters. So, really, the fans' voice will still be lost in the avalanche of ballots--we just have that fig leaf of actually making a difference.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

8 years 3 months ago #484 by Committee Chairman
Clayton is correct....

Our webmaster thought it might be a fun add on......

Once we get more traffic in the forum, this could really be a fun add on!

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

8 years 2 months ago #487 by Dr Clayton Forrester

Clayton, thank you for the clarifications and for the links.

The way I understand it, the fans' voting will produce the top five choices, which are then put onto one ballot that is then included as one of the potentially 600+ due back from Hall voters. So, really, the fans' voice will still be lost in the avalanche of ballots--we just have that fig leaf of actually making a difference.



Oh I agree. I just thought it was worth noting the disconnect between what the fans approved and what the industry ballots thought. Chic apparently isn't getting anywhere close to being inducted from the fans and obviously they haven't been inducted by the industry, yet they keep making the nomination list. So one has to assume they're polling better within the industry ballots or getting a minimum percentage of some kind that allows them to be brought back for another go right away.

Of course that would make one wonder about Kraftwerk. On this site they were ranked number 1 this time last year. The fan polls put them at around number 6. Then of course they weren't inducted and aren't back for a second shot this time.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.178 seconds