Should Girls Aloud have been bigger?

blueface2222blueface2222 Posts: 2,990
Forum Member
✭✭✭
I'm a big fan so maybe i am biased...?

I know Girls Aloud had huge success especially for a girl band. They sold out so many arenas and sold out tours when not many girls bands can do that right now....21 top ten singles...six platinum albums...four number 1 singles...two number 1 albums....nine million record sales...20 consecutive top 10s record...a million selling greatest hits...5 brit awards nominations performance...brit award win for best single...their own itv special ha...dolls...endorsements..cheryls career etc - its a huge success and for ten years which is almost unheard of for a girl band.

But...
I still think they should have been even massiver...
It stuns me that amazing records like Love Machine, No Good Advice, The Show etc have ONLY sold 200,000!? copies each!?

I guess i think they deserve the sorta 1D Level of international success too - selling stadiums etc - they really were that good in my eyes. They had so many incredible unreleased singles too...Graffiti My Soul, Watch Me Go, Girl Overboard, Rolling Back The Rivers, Fling, etc etc! i could go on...They really were special that band. I think what everyone always said was you could get any five females and it would work and The Sats have proven that actually thats not true...

What does everyone else think did they deserve to be even bigger than they were!??? They had some INCREDIBLE OUTSTANDING singles and all the albums had NO FILLER. There tours were must see. Even the B Sides are amazing...

I wanted them to break Europe USA. Sell stadiums in the UK they could have done it in their OOC peak.
Why did bar Cheryl non of their solo careers take off?
«1

Comments

  • blueface2222blueface2222 Posts: 2,990
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Found some album sales....

    SOTU 360,000
    WWTNS 600,000
    Chemistry 380,000
    Tangled Up 500,000
    Out Of Control 800,000
    The Sound Of Girls Aloud 1,200,000
    Ten 160,000

    Not too shabby:cool: but Chemistry should have been bigger, so should have Ten.

    Why do boybands have it so easy it's ridiculous. Gary barlow and Westlife can fill stadiums despite being average...
  • BRITLANDBRITLAND Posts: 3,443
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I think they should of cracked America, did they even try? With their looks alone would of got them some form of success there?
  • blueface2222blueface2222 Posts: 2,990
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
  • Rip the TV EyeRip the TV Eye Posts: 1,687
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I thought the thread title was odd before I entered because I thought they were THE biggest girl group of the past few years. But then I saw the numbers and was a bit surprised. I thought they would have sold way more. I'm not a fan but they did have some good songs and a huge profile. I'd be expecting The Saturdays to be posting those kinds of sales, to be honest.
  • Rip the TV EyeRip the TV Eye Posts: 1,687
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    BRITLAND wrote: »
    I think they should of cracked America, did they even try? With their looks alone would of got them some form of success there?

    I wouldn't have thought it'd have been down to looks. I reckon they had material strong enough to make a good go of it in the USA.
  • dodger0703dodger0703 Posts: 1,957
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    but teenage boys don buy records tbh
  • brumiladbrumilad Posts: 1,467
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    BRITLAND wrote: »
    I think they should of cracked America, did they even try? With their looks alone would of got them some form of success there?
    From a purely selfish point of view I couldn't care less about them going to America.

    They gave us in the UK a record and a concert a year... pretty much functioning continuously.

    If they'd have gone to the US that would have interfered with what I in the UK was getting from them.
  • AdzPowerAdzPower Posts: 4,861
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    They were fantastic, they should have been much bigger. But I have a feeling if they had toured the whole world they may have burnt out quicker.
  • blueface2222blueface2222 Posts: 2,990
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Their USA debut should have been Fling/The Promise/Love Machine
    they should have done it in 2009 instead of going on the break....
  • dodger0703dodger0703 Posts: 1,957
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    we all think the bands we like should be bigger
  • MicknsivMicknsiv Posts: 187
    Forum Member
    To be fair I think they were as big as they deserved to be. Don't get me wrong, I like a number of GA songs - Rolling Back The Rivers In Time is fantastic - but they were probably as successful as they were ever going to be given the lack of genuine talent amongst the five of them.
  • Eric_BlobEric_Blob Posts: 7,756
    Forum Member
    It stuns me that amazing records like Love Machine, No Good Advice, The Show etc have ONLY sold 200,000!? copies each!?

    200,000 sales was very good by mid-00s standards (even today that's good sales tbh). Sales were lower them, songs that big if released today would probably be selling twice as much.

    Girls Aloud were very successful anyway, so I don't think they needed anymore success. However, I think they should've continued on as a group rather than splitting to do solo careers.
  • ashtray88ashtray88 Posts: 1,531
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    "Something Kinda Oooh" was popular at cheerleading camps apparently. They probably could have had a few hits in America, then maybe Cheryl wouldn't have got fired from the X Factor..:p
  • LathamiteLathamite Posts: 638
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Boybands can release any old tripe and it will sell as Melanie C once said.

    I don't think Mel C is in the right position to class anything as "tripe", but Girls Aloud did indeed have a few Album tracks that deserved a wider audience.
  • mooneusmooneus Posts: 543
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Unfortunately Girls Aloud were a sign of their time. You need to remember in the early/mid 00s people still bought singles on CDs - not as easy as it is today, hence why their sales are a lot lower. You just need to take a look at the sales of Untouchable to see how big their sales could have been. It's a bit annoying to be honest because bands like the Spice Girls and Atomic Kitten will be considered to be more successful sales-wise but in my opinion (and probably most others) Girls Aloud were the better group.

    I think one of the reasons Girls Aloud were so critically acclaimed is that they made good pop albums - unlike most other pop groups. You just need to listen to The Saturdays albums - the singles are the only good songs and the rest are all mediocre at best. It is a shame that songs like 'Graffiti My Soul', 'Real Life', 'Swinging London Town', 'Close To Love', 'Miss You Bow Wow' (I could go on for days) were never released but in my opinion their record company wanted them to appeal to a young audience (especially in the early days), hence why songs like Love Machine were chosen over Graffiti My Soul.

    What baffles me the most is that Girls Aloud could have had so many number ones if they had released the single in a different week. In most cases they were beaten by a completely naff single that they ended up out-selling in the long run. Songs like 'Love Machine', 'Biology', 'Something Kinda Oooh' and 'Call The Shots' should all have been number ones in my opinion.

    I just hope that in 10 years time, the Girls Aloud legacy isn't forgotten about. Their sales may be easy for other bands to overtake in this day and age but the quality of their music and longevity of their career needs to be admired.
  • Luner13Luner13 Posts: 2,968
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Girls Aloud were only so good because of Xenomania and that is fact not opinion, Brian Higgins crafted them into what they become without his production half of their singles would have been very average pop songs.

    Why do boybands have it so easy it's ridiculous. Gary barlow and Westlife can fill stadiums despite being average...

    Because women buy records just as much for the fact they fancy the males in those bands over liking the actual music. Again that is fact not opinion.

    On the flipside not many straight men will buy a record by a female band however they will leer over their videos/calendars.
  • Doghouse RileyDoghouse Riley Posts: 32,491
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    They're probably all a bit bigger now, at least a size and in some cases, maybe two.
  • Eric_BlobEric_Blob Posts: 7,756
    Forum Member
    Luner13 wrote: »
    On the flipside not many straight men will buy a record by a female band however they will leer over their videos/calendars.

    This is very true. As a straight male, I can say listening to female pop music is social suicide.
  • cnbcwatchercnbcwatcher Posts: 56,681
    Forum Member
    They were one of the most successful acts to ever come out of a reality TV show. It would have been cool if they had tried to crack the US, but they did quite well really. I liked their music and I still listen to it now.
  • mgvsmithmgvsmith Posts: 16,452
    Forum Member
    ✭✭

    But...
    I still think they should have been even massiver...
    It stuns me that amazing records like Love Machine, No Good Advice, The Show etc have ONLY sold 200,000!? copies each!?

    What does everyone else think did they deserve to be even bigger than they were!??? They had some INCREDIBLE OUTSTANDING singles and all the albums had NO FILLER. There tours were must see. Even the B Sides are amazing...

    It's hard to answer that when I'm not sure what you're quality framework is, i.e. what makes an Outstanding Single in your estimation?

    I think GA made a number of original singles 'Sound of the Undergroud', 'No Good Advice', 'Sexy! No, No, No', 'Biology'. These included some interesting structures and sounds. I think they should have given more prominence to Nicola in the singing (and maybe the writing?).

    I think their female sensibilities were good, they could be sexy and assertive at the same (a bit like the Sugababes). Although I'm not sure if male audiences always appreciate that side of girl groups.


    I much prefer the Sugababes
  • jrajra Posts: 48,325
    Forum Member
    mgvsmith wrote: »
    I much prefer the Sugababes

    Same here, but I have about 10 CDs from both the groups.
  • Brummie Girl Brummie Girl Posts: 22,342
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Sound Of The Underground is, IMO, the best ever winner's single from a talent show. It's because of this great start that they had the success that they had.
  • noelw1969noelw1969 Posts: 936
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Certainly, Cheryl could have done with being a size 12 but the rest were okay.
  • Sweet7Sweet7 Posts: 599
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    The biggest mistake they ever made was having a break in 2009. I believe Cheryl's solo success was always destined for Girls Aloud if they had released an album in that year, they would have been so close to stadium sized tours, they were selling out the O2 4 or 5 times over, it was ridiculous.
  • Charlie_TrenchCharlie_Trench Posts: 981
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    It's funny that I have always loved Girls Aloud but it is only now that I truly appreciate them.

    In terms of girlbands, I personally (in my own opinion - not saying its factual) are the best girlband to ever come out of the UK.

    Little Mix is coming a very close second for me atm because I think their new album is perfection.

    Watching the Tangled Up Tour, Out of Control Tour and Ten Tour, I am just in awe at how amazing their shows are. Not only did they have amazing tunes, but they also knew how to put on a proper SHOW.

    I like The Saturdays music but they have never wowed me when I've seen their tours. Girls Aloud are on a whole other level.
Sign In or Register to comment.