Is the hall of fame anti-prog?

Hmm, dont hear much Crimson influence on Floyd but i might be wrong.

Traffic have been inducted, so they are not completely biased against prog.

Frank Zappa is a bit of an anomoly!  I would have thought him the last artist to end up on that list.

The Hall of Fame is crammed with all sorts of crap. A difficuly genre like prog only has a few offerings that the masses are even allowed to hear with any regularity. Pink Floyd was the prog band 'for the people' Much of their fan base dont even know what prog rock is. Floyds music is uncomplicated and simply structured, so they get to represent the genre as a whole in the hall.

Although why Genesis were not entered after selling over 80 million albums, AND being accessable even in their prog days, I'll never understand.

Prog needs its own Hall of Fame

Zargus wrote: Ofcourse they are like every crapy punk band that ever existed are there, and how many prog bands? Pink Floyd and...

^ Ignorant posts like this give prog fans a bad name.

Chicapah wrote: After reading today about the most recent induction of bands into the rock and roll hall of fame I have to ask....  Is freaking Blondie more deserving than Genesis?  Or Lynyrd Skynrd more deserving than Yes?  Both Genesis and Yes get constant airplay on the classic rock stations and they've certainly been around longer than the required 25 years so what gives?  As far as I can tell Pink Floyd and Zappa are the only proggies in the hall.  Come on, the musicianship of the Sex Pistols in comparison to that of Jethro Tull?   Don't make me laugh!

First thing, the rock n roll hall of fame has squat to do with technical skill, its all about importance, impact and influence, which is something The Sex Pistols had a hell of a lot more of than Jethro Tull, regardless if you think Tull are better or not.

Blondie were major pioneers of the new wave movement, in doesnt matter if you dont like that genre, impact is impact, and Lynyrd Skynyrd though not to the same extent as The Allman Brothers were very important in the sound and development of southern rock, and c'mon, Genesis and Yes get nowhere near as much airplay as Lynyrd Skynyrd, Lynyrd just appeal more to the public, a tons of their songs get played on the radio while Yes have maybe 4 or 6 songs that are played from time to time such as Roundabout, I've Seen All Good People and Owner Of A Lonely Heart, hardly anything beyond that, and the only Genesis they play is the Phil Collins stuff.

I agree they have a bias against prog rock, i certainly think Yes should have been there before The Pretenders and Tom Petty, but on the other hand theres a lot more than just prog to take into consideration, and the fact of the matter is, all of those that are being inducted probably have more influence and impact than Yes, Genesis and Jethro Tull, and thats really what the hall of fame is measuring, not technical chops, if they did, they would induct guys like Michael Angelo Batio, Rusty Cooley and other technical w**ker guys who havent contributed to music in any way.

You seem to be biased towards prog the same way they are biased against it.

I suggest you be more open minded and accept that there is a lot more music out there than just prog.

Besides, im pretty sure bands like Yes and King Crimson will be inducted eventualy, once they run out of other bands to induct. ;)

Ridge wrote: I don't care for the rock and roll hall of fame any more that I would care whether a Prog artist receives a Grammy. They are just popularity contests IMHO. Anyways do we really want to see Yes or Genesis next to the Bee Gees? C'mon!

What if they were next to Green Day?