It didnt give a strong appeal with grammy voters. To answer the question with TD, the album has been nominated for aoty with only 2 singles but look at how it performed so it really deserved to be there
If Rated R was nominated, it would have been in the same year - 2010.
Not it wouldn't because Grammy submittions end in August 31 or somewhere in September. Rated R couldn't be submitted because it was released by the end of the year.
Not it wouldn't because Grammy submittions end in August 31 or somewhere in September. Rated R couldn't be submitted because it was released by the end of the year.
Quote:
Originally posted by DG1
No. RR would of been 2011
Oh my bad. Just a mistake.
And why some people think that Loud is better than Rated R?????
Because of the rushed release of Only Girl and the release of Loud outshined Rated R.
Her only solo nomination for that year was for "Only Girl" because by then all the buzz was already on the Loud era.
Also there was more competition in the Pop Field.
The Eminem song stole its buzz and she should have been shooting for the R&B field, not the pop field.
It AMAZES me that she submitted a song that was huge on the urban charts to Female Pop Vocal Performance the same year that "Bad Romance" and "Teenage Dream" came out.
Because Grammy nominations aren't just about scores? The ****? You think the Grammy committee is sifting to metacritic before they deliberate? I mean Graffiti scored like a 50 something, none of the critics or general public were here for it at the time, it flopped both critically and commercially and it was still nominated. Y'all give these metacritic scores way tew much.