An interesting point was brought up on a Coheed and Cambria thread regarding the difficulty for a band that starts out as a non-prog/prog-related band to get recognized on PA for their progginess if they later begin to create more progressive music. Such a band is still deemed prog-related or not at all prog. Whereas, our heroes of prog, Rush, Yes, Genesis, Jethro Tull, etc... started progressive and then in their later years, depending on your individual point of view, lost their progginess and yet they will forever be categorized as progressive.
If a bands first 6 albums are prog and their last 6 albums are pop they might still be considered Eclectic Prog, but what if it were the other way around? If their first 6 albums are pop and then they see the light and their next 6 albums are prog can they ever overcome their first 6 albums to become Eclectic Prog, or should they just be happy to even get a mention on Prog-Related?
I am not familar with Coheed and Cambria and cannot comment on their progginess or lack thereof, but to use them as an example, if their next album comes out and it is Tales of Topographical Mountains, or The Lamb Got Up And Went to the Yankees' Game Because It Didn't Want to Get Run Over By A Red Barchetta on Broadway what would the chances be that they would be moved from Prog-Related to Eclectic Prog or Crossover Prog. Any chance, or have they been pigeon-holed to prog related because of their first albums? Just curious. Don't you just love hypothetical questions?
P.S. I don't want this thread to be a bash PA and the Collabs thread or a bash Coheed and Cambria thread. I am hoping that this will help us PA users to better understand what a difficult job the Special Collabs have when it comes to trying to categorize these progressive bands and their tendencies to be all over the map over the course of their lengthy careers.