Started By
Message

re: Rolling Stones or Beatles?

Posted on 10/15/14 at 8:52 am to
Posted by Baloo
Formerly MDGeaux
Member since Sep 2003
49645 posts
Posted on 10/15/14 at 8:52 am to
quote:

This is the reason (an example, at least) for the proliferation of "Are Beatles Overrated' threads

Well, it's also the fact the Beatles are considered by consensus to be the greatest band of all time. That means, by definition, they can't be underrated. there's nowhere higher for them to be placed in the pantheon. If you do not agree they are the greatest band ever, which let's face it, is pretty likely, it means you think they are overrated. Also, no one has ever gone broke trying to topple idols. It's a rite of passage.

I still say the Stones are better, and now I need to read that book, but also, the two bands were doing something a little different. They weren't exactly direct competitors.
Posted by CBandits82
Lurker since May 2008
Member since May 2012
54292 posts
Posted on 10/15/14 at 9:02 am to
quote:

the two bands were doing something a little different. They weren't exactly direct competitors.



This is where I fall on the argument.

Both are all-time great bands, but are also very different bands.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram