It's September 03, 2025, 04:28:03 PM
J. Cole managed to make a name for himself while staying true to himself, in 1 year.On tour with Jay-Z and featured on his album, Wale's album, Reflection Eternal's album. Soon on tour with Drake, ghostwriting for big names like Diddy and respected by ALL his peers and even hip-hop pioneers.Bishop for example (after all these years in the industry) releases a badly mixed mixtape ruined by inconsistency. And this is coming from a huge Bishop fan, just being honest.
IMO his latest mixtape had less to do with his demise as him leaking unauthorized tracks and being shelved for so long. If Dre would have done a full length project on him it would have been all forgotten.
I don't think it's fair to compare Bishop Lamont's situation to J. Cole's. The legit critique would be saying Bishop Lamont signed with the wrong power house and should have sided with Kanye West (I do believe in a past interview Bishop claimed he had the chance) or Jay-Z. In the time Bishop was coming up he was "hating" a lot and preaching what hip-hop is and isn't which is never good when people want to have fun. Plus, add a label that doesn't know what to do with hip-hop when it's major artist aren't doing anything (Dr.Dre = M.I.A; Em = druggie; and 50 = struggling). Additionally, add the rapid change of the industry where most people were afraid and scared of the changes instead of being used to them (as they are now during J. Cole's time). The times were drastically different.I'm pretty sure this wasn't a one way street but very little of the other side has spoken on Bishop Lamont. In house producers have made it known they don't comment on artist negatively and bureaucrats don't want to risk their position so unless Dr.Dre or Jimmy Iovine speak on him, it won't matter. 50 did say Bishop couldn't create that hit song which I disagree with. I think he did create plenty of hits but the label never pushed him properly. Evidence is the fact 50 took Still Will Kill and used it himself.
You expect me to download an album that isn't real? Sorry, but I can't sign this.
Quote from: Action! on November 13, 2010, 11:24:13 PMI don't think it's fair to compare Bishop Lamont's situation to J. Cole's. The legit critique would be saying Bishop Lamont signed with the wrong power house and should have sided with Kanye West (I do believe in a past interview Bishop claimed he had the chance) or Jay-Z. In the time Bishop was coming up he was "hating" a lot and preaching what hip-hop is and isn't which is never good when people want to have fun. Plus, add a label that doesn't know what to do with hip-hop when it's major artist aren't doing anything (Dr.Dre = M.I.A; Em = druggie; and 50 = struggling). Additionally, add the rapid change of the industry where most people were afraid and scared of the changes instead of being used to them (as they are now during J. Cole's time). The times were drastically different.I'm pretty sure this wasn't a one way street but very little of the other side has spoken on Bishop Lamont. In house producers have made it known they don't comment on artist negatively and bureaucrats don't want to risk their position so unless Dr.Dre or Jimmy Iovine speak on him, it won't matter. 50 did say Bishop couldn't create that hit song which I disagree with. I think he did create plenty of hits but the label never pushed him properly. Evidence is the fact 50 took Still Will Kill and used it himself. I agree with everything you said bro, and you're right bishop just never had the commercial appeal, even if he had 50 or em on a track i don't think it would have done anything.Still Will Kill was ass though IMO, one of khalil's weaker productions
50 did say Bishop couldn't create that hit song which I disagree with. I think he did create plenty of hits but the label never pushed him properly. Evidence is the fact 50 took Still Will Kill and used it himself.
I think these are two completely different cases.Bishop was suppose to follow up Eminem, Dr. Dre & 50 Cent & be the future of Aftermath, but had to wait until they were done; while Cole was just brought up as the next name sponsored by Jay-Z.Clearly being on Aftermath is just a fail to gain exposure, just ask Joell Ortiz, Obie Trice & Ca$his.Plus, Cole is far better rapper than Bishop.
Quote from: Chamillitary Click on November 14, 2010, 01:30:13 PMI think these are two completely different cases.Bishop was suppose to follow up Eminem, Dr. Dre & 50 Cent & be the future of Aftermath, but had to wait until they were done; while Cole was just brought up as the next name sponsored by Jay-Z.Clearly being on Aftermath is just a fail to gain exposure, just ask Joell Ortiz, Obie Trice & Ca$his.Plus, Cole is far better rapper than Bishop.dont ask obie...he got 2 albums out with them
Clearly being on Aftermath is just a fail to gain exposure, just ask Joell Ortiz, Obie Trice & Ca$his.
Quote from: xzibit444 on November 14, 2010, 01:32:47 PMQuote from: Chamillitary Click on November 14, 2010, 01:30:13 PMI think these are two completely different cases.Bishop was suppose to follow up Eminem, Dr. Dre & 50 Cent & be the future of Aftermath, but had to wait until they were done; while Cole was just brought up as the next name sponsored by Jay-Z.Clearly being on Aftermath is just a fail to gain exposure, just ask Joell Ortiz, Obie Trice & Ca$his.Plus, Cole is far better rapper than Bishop.dont ask obie...he got 2 albums out with them98% of Hip Hop fans today cannot name three songs by him.