Here Today... Gone To Hell!

This thread is not about Axl vs. Slash, or New GN'R vs. Old GN'R or GN'R vs. VR, it is merely a hypothetical "what if?"

This thread is also not about whether Axl should've continued to call the band GN'R, that's been argued to death, this thread's only purpose is to ask you, the fans, what does the name Guns N' Roses mean to you?


What impact, in your opinion, has the name Guns N' Roses had on Axl's career since 1996?What has it meant for the forthcoming album "Chinese Democracy"?

What if, when Slash and Duff left, the band had broke up, I mean formally? Would the interest have been as big had Axl been working under a different band name for the past ten years and not GN'R? Could the Axl Rose Band have sold out these European dates? Would there have been put as much pressure and expectations on him by the fans and the media? Would there have been less negative press over the years? Would there have been so much scrutiny and critique leveled at Axl's choice of people to play music with? Would they have been able to secure all these headlining gigs at festivals etc.?

What does the name Guns N' Roses mean?

I'm hoping this will be discussed in an interesting and friendly manner. Be cool.  :smoking:

Not a chance.
Axl is nothing without that name.

pay no attention to da_pope, we purposely trained him wrong... you know, to be a negative whore.

Do not start insulting other members. 

Axl would still have a lot of shit flung at him over the old GnR even if he abandoned the name.

Axl IS gn'R get over it. Also, Axl sold out those NY shows not the other guys.

Axl Rose is GN'R...you can replace guitars/drums/keyboards/...but you CAN'T replace a vocalist...especially AXL ROSE.

Kind of like the VR guys?

he is the HEART AND SOUL, the main ingredient  :hihi:

There would not be nearly the ype surrounding this had Axl dropped the name. Think about it. ?If Bono were to release an album under the solo name Bono there wouldn't be near the hype or scrutiny as ther would be if he were to call the band U2. It's just common sense. Say the names to yourself and tell me which one ignites more excitement, Axl Rose or Guns N' Roses? Axl would have all eyes on him with or without the name Guns N' Roses but by useing the name it's simply magnified a million times.

Axl is the Gun of his own Rose. He's loaded like a Gun, it's true. Axl Rose Is indeed
GUNS & ROSES   
 
                   He's The Loaded GUN With The Last Name ROSE
                                                                         We call him AXL   

No offence but that was pretty bad :rofl:

Well, it's kind of obvious that Axl is Guns N' Roses now, because he's the only original member left (sorry Dizzy). But like I said, this is not about whether or not he should've kept the name or who really is Guns N' Roses, because without Slash, Duff, Izzy and Steven, Guns N' Roses wouldn't mean what it means today. It wouldn't have the same legacy behind it. So, to say Axl is Guns N' Roses, really is beside the point of this post.

What does the name mean? What if GN'R had died in 1996 and we were not thinking of Chinese Democracy as the new Guns N' Roses record, would people still care to the same degree they do now?

Nah that was Terrible

im sure the name Axl Rose would have still had a huge impact!!

the name GUNS N' ROSES is a BAND, it is nothin' without the lead singer like MOST bands, but it is a band :beer:

A band that doesnt just do what the singer says n' writes, otherwise it would be workin' for a solo artist, they have there own input n' creativity, which makes this a band, in other words.......GUNS N' ROSES!! :drool: :drool:

Off Topic - it was GNR when Izzy n' Steven where out, what makes people think it cant be GNR without Slash n' Duff?????????(which makes them hypocrits for sayin' its not GNR)  thats why is see this as GNR!!

So it doesnt matter thinkin' what if Axl had called it Rose or whatever, it was GNR before the members from AFD n' its GNR NOW!!!                     

The name GUNS N' ROSES is alive for the right reasons and is real, NOT FOR SHOW!!! :beer: :beer: :beer: :beer:

i believe that if you are a fan of the new gnr, you are a big axl rose fan, personally im not a big axl rose fan and therefore not crazy about the new gnr, im sure u could guess where i stand with him using the name, but thats not suppossed to be in this thread....

if he didnt use the name gnr tho, he still would get publicity and everything come on hes axl rose, but not as much, it wouldnt be as big a deal, its because its "gnr" that everyone is psyched about.......if axl were to join some other band, he would still get publicity but it wouldnt be as big as gnr

on the other hand, i believe vr only made it bc the members were known from gnr, if vr was just some random group, they wouldnt have been as big....but what if they got to keep the name gnr?  :o   would they be bigger than the axl rose band? hmmmm ........

axl rose is not gnr. he needs people around and he can't write songs all by himself. he can't come up with all the riffs and solos.
axl wouldn't get that much attention if he would've let go of the name. we'd probably not spend our days on this board talking all kind of stuff about the band if they would've called it a day back in '96.
sure if he released cd under the name axl rose he wouldn't get as much attention as he is now. cd wouldn't be considered the most anticipated rock album. people would just let the guy alone to finish his "solo" album without pressuring him. but the album probably would sell like vr sold because of the gnr fans that support the original members.
and to say a band can't survive without it's singer let's take a look at ac/dc. i think they survived pretty well : ok:
so... i think keeping the gnr name got a lot more attention to axl, but he isn't gnr. gnr is all the members thet come and gone over time. i'm sure that people turned to buckethead after hearing him with gnr, but it works two ways. i'm sure there were bhead fans that didn't listen gnr but they started listening to it after bhead joined. and that goes for all the others, they brought some fans with them. i don't think every single person is at the shows just to see axl. so he's not gnr.

At best, pathetic.  Just kidding with ya bro.. good try.  :peace:

Are you seriously saying you don't understand what "Axl is GNR" really means/implies? No one is saying Axl can do it alone. That's just moronic.

In short, it's the other way around. No one can do it without Axl (be GNR, that is).

The AC/DC reference is also totally irrelevant. Ever heard about the exception...? Besides they still had their original writers (Young & Young) in the band unlike GNR. Izzy's departure was probably the biggest blow to the (future) music of GNR that ever happened. Can't take both Axl & Izzy out of the GNR equation and call it GNR. Image-wise it was always an Axl & Slash thing, but at a deeper level it was an Axl & Izzy thing. No one complained about the name of the band when Izzy quit. Thus the essence of the band is the same as it has always been in the post-Izzy period.

so you say that axl has the right to call it's band gnr but the others don't. and only axl and izzy wrote the songs. funny cos on my cd's the other guys are listed too. and maybe izzy should've called his jujuhounds gnr and sue the others because it was him who wrote most of the songs alongside axl :nervous:

and i made the ac/dc reference just for the people saying a band cannot pass the loss of their frontman. :beer:

considering that after 93 nothing happened anyways i don't think it matters who left. and it's not about axl or slash or izzy, it's about the music. and whichever member would've owned the name i'd still be supporting all of them with their sideprojects.
and i bet axl didn't write the songs all by himself

No. It's just a fact.

Guns N' Roses sells the tickets. If it was just called Axl Rose as a solo artist with a band then he wouldn't sell nearly as much. And I doubt that will change any to at least a album comes.

The difference is when people start talking about new band and old band, or newGnR and oldGnR. Even Axl and his supporters refer to NewGnR and OldGnR. Therefore they are two different bands.

I think the easiest way to answer the question of Axl as a solo artist compared with GNR is to compare to other bands.

Robert Plant is touring on his own with a new band playing some Led Zep songs and some new songs. It's popular but nothing amazing. Now, If Plant called that band Led Zeppelin and released his solo albums under that name, the difference would be huge. Page and Plant (the equivalent of Axl and Slash) toured together and even though they were the two most important guys and playing LedZep songs, it still wasn't near as big as if they called it Led Zeppelin, which they could of and would have got away with, but Plant refuses to use the name Led Zeppelin without John Bonham.

Another interesting comparison is to Zack De La Rocha. He, like Rose has been working on an album since his band broke up, but this time a solo name, rather than Rage Against The Machine. Does it keep up as much interest as if he was working as Rage Against The Machine? I'm not sure, maybe some big RATM fans can help us.

No, but the same could be said of Slash. I know lots of people not going to upcoming GnR gigs coz he isn't there.



You bet? Why do you have inside information?I would have bet that about the old stuff until I read the song credits and realised Izzy wrote more than anyone. In actual fact he wrote the Blues with Dizzy, Madagascar with Pittman, Better with Finck and I'm sure all the others had strong contributions from the other members, especially as Axl doesn't write riffs or solos!

the difference here is GNR never broke up (if ya know what i mean), if Robert Plant decided outta the blue to call it Led Zeppelin it would be a kick in the guts, he's just usin' the name for show, that was never Axl's intention, members quit in GNR, they didnt break up all together.

Same with RATM, they broke up officially, Zack doesnt have the right to use the name.

Paul McCartney sells tickets just fine!

And has been an established solo artist for how many years?

And if the original Beatles could reform (rip John & George) then what would you think would sell more, Paul McCartney or The Beatles (name).

Jesus.

GN'R is simply a band with Axl Rose, Robin Finck, Dizzy Reed, Richard Fortus, Brain, Chris Pitman, Ron Thal and Tommy Stinson. End of story.

Those people in the band write and play songs.

In the past, GN'R had some other members that came and left.

Originaly, there was Axl Rose, Duff McKagan, Slash, bla bla bla.

Some left, some stayed, almost from day one. Axl wanted GN'R to continue. He had differences with Slash and other people. Some of them left. Some others came.

This we have now is simply : Guns N' Roses

Accept it or leave the subject alone. It's the same discussions since, well ... I can't even remember since when :no: it's kinda boring now.

i thought the name came from
tracy GUNNS
axl ROSE
duff 'ROSE' mcgagebeban

pure and simple.

The name comes from Tracii GUNS and Axl ROSE.

The real original lineup was:

Axl Rose
Izzy Stradlin
Tracii Guns
Rob Gardener
Ole

The "Appetite" lineup was about the 3rd lineup of Guns N Roses

i like to compare GNR with a soccer/football team. players come and go but the name stays the same. sometimes the soccer/football team sucks some other times they are great. GNR were great,the best...now i dont know what to say about them! i have only heard some half ass demos and i wouldnt even dream of comparing them with the old material, not until i listen to the cd(this autum hopefully). pending new GNRs album GNR means AXLs project.

That sums it up quit nicely.. Axl was the heart of the band and from him everything starts. You can just think about VR and why isn't it as great as GN'R was even when it has Slash, Duff and Sorum? Because they are missing the magical vocalist and well this is just my oppinion but Scott Weiland isn't anything that sensational.. In the end how good the band is and how great the other members are it all comes down to the vocals. That's why Axl was/is so important.

Without Axl you get VR which is a great band but is still missing the most important factor that made GN'R the "last" big rock band.

It's funny how people say that this new GN'R isn't really GN'R because it doesn't have Slash, Duff, Izzy but in reality from those 3 only Izzy is part of the orignal line up along with Axl. Now that is an irrelevant fact but people just seem to think that GN'R = Axl + Slash + Duff (+Izzy).

Simply IMO Axl is the only member you can't replace his vocals create Guns N' Roses and without Axl it's just Velvet Revolver.


Oh and btw if you think about it the name properly spelled would be Guns' and Rose's so basicly the name just means that it's Tracii Guns' and Axl Rose's band nothing else.


Just my 2cents..


Don't damn me
When I speak a piece of my mind
'Cause silence isn't golden
...
An I know you don't wanna hear me deny
That your satisfaction lies in your illusion
But your delusions are yours and not mine
We take for granted we know the whole story
We judge a book by its cover
...

 :)

They are called Guns N' Roses because in the very original band there was Duff (Rose) McKagan, Axl Rose and Tracii Guns.

But to look into more closely, I think "Guns" represents the band's aggressive side and "Roses" represents the band's sensitive side. "Estranged" or SCOM are the Roses, WTTJ and "Coma" are the Guns.

I see old GN'R and nu-GN'R both being GN'R.

It's like Classic Star Trek and Star Trek: The Next Generation.

aaahhhhhhhhhh, thats hit the nail!!   spot on!!

nice one dude!! : ok: : ok: :beer:

What about Deep Purple?
Or The Who without Pete and John?
Hell, even Bruce Dickenson isn't the "real" Iron Maiden singer...

what if VR got this guy...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tL8nSn8wm6U&search=EL%20PRESIDENTE ?? :hihi:

I think Gun n' Roses is just a cool name to have for a band. ?I think we are all interested in it because they have many so many great songs in the past, and the promise of future material has us all hooked for what could be. ?I think Axl should use the name, simply because he owns it. ?I dont really think it is that big of deal, thats just what it is bottom line. ?I think theres alot of interest in the current band members as well. ?Would Axl still draw as much interest without the GNR name no, but no one will. ?the VR hype really died down, but GNR has a mystery about it that can draw people in. ?The only unfair part of the whole thing is WTTJ, SCOM, PC ... are classic songs, there will never be another song like those, however TWAT, Better, Blues .... are amazing, and just as good in a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT way, but they'll be compared to the original bands songs, and forever be told theyre not as good, therefore the current GNR is a joke. ?Which is totall bullshit.

great post, but i don?t agree with the "duff "rose" mckagan" part...

Here's one for you all who say "It was still Gn'R when Izzy and Steven were gone so why can't it be Gn'R without Slash and Duff?" fair enough. But suppose Axl left the band and signed over the rights of the name to the new guys and they got a new singer is it still Gun N ' Roses? According to your philosophy it's all about the music right and not who's in the band. Guns N' Roses is a feeling and attitude not about members right? Or does that only apply as long as Axl's in the band. If it were Slash, Duff, Izzy and Steven minus Axl is it still Guns N' Roses? It should be but alot of you would say no and that's ridiculous.

Well VR seem to do just fine without the GNR name they will probably never be as big as they were when in GNR but they still released a debut album that sold well by todays standards- the main reason for that is Slash. To most people the core ingredient in GNR was Axl/Slash so if people are this interested in Slashs new band they would be interested in Axls probably just as much, the only slight difference is Axl is seen as whingy, power hungry, loon by a lot of music fans whereas Slash is seen as a cool guitarist. It is hard to say if that would hurt sales for Axl.

My point is if Slash can get this much interest with VR so can Axl even if he didn't call it GNR, the difference is Axl couldn't do things how he is now if it was a solo album. With the name GNR he can just about carry a sell out tour after 13 years of nothing, as the Axl Rose band he would need a new album to tour with before he hit the road. I personally don't think that's why he kept the name but it's an added bonus for him.

For me it wouldn't be GNR until 3 of the original 5 were in the band. It would probably need Slash as 1 of those 3 and then another member as well as obviously Axl. The band that is about to tour europe as GNR is not really GNR for me I'm afraid, they're certainly a kick ass band and I'm hoping to see them this summer but it just won't be GNR for me.

Only problem is that no one can convey that feeling and attitude "the GNR way" except Axl. That's why there's so few good cover bands for one; It's just fucking difficult to sound like Axl. Anyone can do Bon Jovi, but not GNR! Slash has an unique sound, but he's several levels below his GNR-period without Axl. Whereas Axl probably can bring any guitarist a couple of notches up. At least songwriting-wise.

So... Slash without Axl --> Not considered greatest guitarists ever --> GNR /w Slash but /wo Axl --> GNR /wo one of the greatest guitarists ever and /wo one of the greatest frontmen ever --> GNR not a great band by anyones standards (OK, Izzy might save something, but still.... no.)

I've been reading here for quite some time now, but haven't posted until now...

The way I see it, you'll always have Axl fans and Slash fans. On a GNR board, you're gonna have mostly Axl fans; on a VR board Slash fans will prevail... that's very simple to understand I think, no...?

What threads like this one (and the gazillion others) boil down to (again, IMHO), is wether Axl or Slash is better. Plain and simple. Some people will say Axl, some will say Slash. Most of this is a matter of opinion, but there's a very objective way to settle something like this: who sells more records.

Contraband sold approximately 2.5 million copies in the US alone (even though it was actively boycotted for containing stringent DRM software...) That's 1/2 of Use your Illusion 1 (or 2), 13 years after Guns N' Roses was the worlds biggest rock band. Not bad. They might even sell a few more once Libertad is out and they get some new fans... who knows...

Axl has however killed of our only chance of ever making a fair comparison between the popularity of the two... He's still using the name Guns N' Roses, whilest Slash had to use a new name. Chinese Democracy is bound to sell 5 million copies or more, just because of the name. So in that respect I find it a pitty that he's still using the name. On the other hand, a big-name comeback may rekindle interest in rock music, so I'm happy about that.

As for my own opinion: the new leaks can't rival the old material (anyone who says it does is probably to excited about the fact that there's new material to make good judgement), neither does contraband. Axl needs Slash as much as Slash needs Axl... together they're magic. I mean no disrespect to the new bandmembers; I guess it's a chemistry thing.

Although if they would come together now, I doubt they would outsell Appetite either way... times have changed too much for that...

I agree 100%  :beer:

Come on people I was fucking around with it, give me a break!  LOOK AT THE TOPIC

I'm the fact guy here I think... and Both Use Your Illusions sold 7 million copies each. They were both certified that in 1997. I would guess they are very very close to 8 million each now. That is just in the U.S. please get your facts straight.

CD will never compare to AFD. AFD is great it really is, but lets face it. It was the right album at the right time. It was great, but not the best album ever as we all put it.

CD will sell about 3-5 million within 2 years of its release. Quote me on that.

this new gnr will be Guns n Roses after CD comes out.  They have what.... 3 ablums worth of material done?  If they release all of that over the next few years they will be The real guns n roses without a second thought.  Especially since the new material sounds so fuckin amazing. and Axl seems to be on top of his game now.  I mean, AFD was one of the best cds of all time...but the illusions should have been 1 cd.  There's a lot on there that they could have left off (so fine) CD and whatever they release after it can easily be more productive as far as song quality than a lot of the old gnr material.  Then there is no question of what Guns n Roses means.  Axl and a group of good musicians is Guns N Roses.  Any group of good musicians Axl Works with will produce amazing music.  A group of good musians working with a different singer is VR.  VR does not stand up to any old GNR.  VR will not stand up to the new music.  Wasnt it Rolling Stone that said the leaks were already BETTER than the VR cd?  I forget what mag it was but i think RS...Axl is gnr.

thats right

Serious question, what do you do for a living... this isn't a set-up, nor is it a flame. Honest question. I ask because your post was, IMHO, quite good.

no true GNR fan would say that. AFD, Lies,UYI 1,2 and TSI if i remember well is not just AXL on a piano singing i believe there is also 3 guitar players and drums.
its a pitty that old GNR had a great chemistry to write music, but couldnt get along has human beings. i remember an old MTV cribbs when Bazz said " I was surprised that those guys stayed together that long".

what does it mean to me?

to me its the music-as sung by axl rose and whoever he's performing with--and while i'll say axl alone didnt make guns what it was, it's his voice that is the lynchpin of the music, IMO---put another singer up there and you get, well, VR-which isnt neccesarily a bad thing, but it aint guns.

Anything Axl touches is GN'R for me. FACT: Don "fucking" Henley was in GN'R for a little while, but he went quietly.

Yea of pal. FUCK YOU! :rant: Axl can do just fine with out the name he doesnt need it. But it is his and he can use it anyway he wants. Axl can call it what ever he wants but the shows did not sell in less then 3min so ppl can see a name. The went for the entier group axl, finck, richard, dizzy, and bf

The nail who's head you just squarely hit is smarting.  :)

As evidenced largely by this thread, the GnR name is both a blessing and a curse.

It's a blessing because of the name recognition it brings, and the installed fan base that follows it (though I'd venture that THAT part can be a curse, too....but I digress).  You have some built in audience and album sales, for sure.

It's a curse because you will forever be compared to "the old band".  Those are big shoes to fill, and big moutains to climb.  It's gotta be stressful to constantly be living in the shadow of what once was.  I give the guys credit for doing that...

The fact is...Slash and Duff left.  You can argue, til you're blue in the face, they were "forced" out due to whatever differences they had with Axl, they couldn't live/work under the conditions that existed, they were undercut, etc but the fact remains...they quit.  They CHOSE to quit.  Axl, on the other hand, did not.  He has, for whatever reason, chosen to "live" the GnR life.  Sure, I'm sure that has SOMETHING to do with the fact he "owns" the GnR name.  But, for me, I think it's more than that.  I think GnR's "rebirth" is almost a mission for Axl.  Maybe not an QUITE an obssession, but .....something close to that.  And I, for one, sort of respect him for that...for that kind of dedication.

like someone said, the new Guns will really become GNR after a couple albums and tours.. right now is just the beginning..


P.S. can anyone tell me what is the origin of Duff "ROSE" McKagan ??? i never knew this!

The name GnR is like brand recognition......

but Axl is probably the most charismatic live front-man out there (though Weiland is damn good as well) 

personally I think Axl would do just as well if he called it something other than GnR  as he will always be associated with being the Lead Singer of GnR

Allright, you got me there... I looked up the figures on wikipedia (where it says +/- 5.4 million each) before my previous post. It also says 7x platinum which should equate to 7'000'000; I just wasn't sure if the platinum certification is done on US figures alone or is counted worldwide, so I decided to stick to the figures on the page... Not trying to overtake your position as 'the fact guy' or anything, sorry about that... ;)

The point I was trying to make remains however: by today's standards Contraband was a pretty succesfull rock album.


Thanks, I'm a software engineer. May I ask why you want to know?

Axl is part of the wheel that is GNR. He maintains the position of GNR. He bears the weight of the vehicle plus any cargo, also any acceleration forces between him and the ground.....................Get it?................................Axl........wheel?.........um.....right......"kicks dirt"

it wouldn't be the same without the name, even though gnr and axl is one in the same today there is a big difference..

If steven adler owned the name gnr he could sell out places.. gnr is now pop culture..

have you never seen any of the original line up concerts when axl introduces all the band members?

Axl by himself would not sell half the albums he will under the GN'R name. Why?

a)It probably cause of the way the media portrayed the break up but 90% of Casual Rock Fans took Slash's side in this battle. (Like it or not, it's the truth.) So if they saw a "Axl Rose" album chances are they'd say "He's nothing without Slash." or "Nothing that lunatic puts out can be good".
b) There is so much hype around that name it's unbelivable. They were one of the biggest bands of all-time. I could go release an album under the name "Guns N' Roses" and it would go platnium.
c) 99.9% of people still think Slash is in the band. The media still uses pictures of the original lineup when talking about Guns N' Roses. A good chunk of the people who buy the CD will think Slash is still in the band.

Someone in this thread said that Hammerstien didn't sell out that fast just cause of the name... Yes it did. I can 200% Garun-Fucking-tee you that if it was "Axl Rose" playing that the place wouldn't even sell out at all.

This is the way I look at the whole GNR experience. . . for anyone who cares.

I am from Boston and I follow both the Patriots and the Red Sox.  When I was a kid both of those team looked completly different from what they look like today.  Nobody in Boston says, Drew Bledsoe isn't with the Patriots so they shouldn't call them the Patriots.  People follow the name Patriots  - the same with Roger Clemens.  When he left Boston, nobody said, Rogers not on the team, their not the Red Sox.

My point - since 1985 the band Guns N' Roses has had many different people come in and out of the band - but they're still Guns N' Roses.  When Izzy and Steven left, it was still GNR - When Matt and Gilby cam on board it was still GNR.

Anyway - to answer the original question - The fact that Axl kept the name GNR gave me something to look forward to - the name Guns N' Roses and Axl Rose give me hope that if someone like Axl wants something bad enough he/she can do it, or acheive their goal.  I look at what Axl has had to go through over the years, not buckling under pressure, doing what he thought was best and it makes me feel that I can achieve any dream I have regardless of what anybody tells me.  Axl said that the 2002 tour seemed forced and look how that turned out.  Axl wants to do this in 2006 and look how this has started.

Anyway - my two cents. . .

-illusionone

I can be cooler now about this. 8)
GNR is in one sentence "The embodiment of the human spirit"
A spirit that is both fragile and bold, happy & sad etc etc...
Its reasons like these that bring us all to the boards - GNR songs speak to some element of our volatile lives at one point or another. If you need patience, there's a song for that (Don't Cry & Patience), if you don't have patience there's songs for that as well (You Could Be Mine & Double Talkin Jive).

After watching Hammerstein 5/14 and seeing what he's been up to off stage, he's beginning to earn the name and his old stripes. ?His band looked great for the 1st time and there's definitly a hunger in their performances & to prove themselves under the GNR name. However, the new music and its standing to the old music remains to be seen and I'm still not fully impressed by these songs. I guess portions of IRS & TWAT and even oldies like Oh My G-d get me going, but nothin yet like a 6:46 headbanging Paradise City or a mellow, contemplative 9:49 Estranged or the short but hard rockin 4:34 "WTTJ". Ultimately this Chinese Democracy record is gonna have to stand on its own two feet for the transition to be fully justified.

Im still holding out for a reunion. Seeing Duff & Slash & Matt looking energized last year with VR and the newly energized Axl Rose makes me hold hope for a GNR reunion that still has the spirit of old.

MNW

"Im still holding out for a reunion. Seeing Duff & Slash & Matt looking energized last year with VR and the newly energized Axl Rose makes me hold hope for a GNR reunion that still has the spirit of old"
---------Maybe if they stopped sueing each other.

well since your quoting me, i'll answer!! : ok:

Yes, if Axl had left i really dont see why Slash, Duff Izzy n' Steven couldnt continue, i'd be all for it,  thats my whole point dude : ok:

give us a chance to answer before you call us ridiculous man :P

Yes i have but i have no idea why he got that nickname. did he explain it once? i never have seen that....

AWESOME post man!!! this is the way i look at it as well, but i didn't have that team analogy spring to mind.

the fact that Axl wants this so much and he believes in the new Guns makes me believe in Guns N' Roses today more than ever before!

Actually nobody who bought tickets knew Bumblefoot would be there.

Most fans, (other than the most hardcore fansand the people on boards,) went to see Axl and the old songs, not the new members or the new songs.

Unless you're AC/DC.


Just ask Skid Row.  They're ass without Baz, I dont care how good Snake Sabo is.