Before there were social handles to claim, an algorithm to please, and a need to optimize a press release for keyword discoverability, there was just… rock and roll.

Back in the day, the only #1 you cared about was on the Top 40 chart, not a Google search results page.

And that was probably a good thing, because as it just so happens, some of the greatest bands in history would be basically unsearchable today.

Some of these bands, revered by boomers and zoomers alike, lit up marquees with the most common of words, the most generic of terms, and in one particular edge case, just the word The. Twice. What. were. they. thinking.

I’ve been thinking a lot about SEO in my day job lately, and while I’m not going to fill you in on what ‘Oingo Boingo’ taught me about B2B sales, I thought we could have some fun by analyzing some of rock’s most iconic bands via a system that is quite possibly the antithesis of rock and roll: Search Engine Optimization.

The scoring system

Here is our highly scientific, completely subjective scoring system based on:

• Keyword Difficulty (KD): How hard is it to rank for this term?
• Search Intent Match: Are people searching for this term actually looking for this band?
• SERP competition: Who else owns this page?

The Beatles

KD: 2/5 | Intent match: 4/5 | SERP competition: 3/5

Sure, The Beatles were pretty good I guess, but never forget: ‘Beatles’ is a pun (and for that reason, we can never truly respect them).

That said, choosing to deliberately misspell ‘Beetle’ was a decent SEO tactic, giving them a bit of differentiation to squeeze through the algorithm. Unless of course the search engine doesn’t recognize the joke and auto-corrects, pulling up entomology blogs covering the mating habits of ladybugs. Don’t act like you aren’t curious.

That said, surprisingly good SEO for a pun band. Also, they were pretty good. Built some domain authority with those na na nas.

The Rolling Stones

KD: 4/5 | Intent match: 3/5 | SERP competition: 2/5

This is a tough one. ‘Stones’ have a tendency to ‘Roll’, given certain conditions, but ‘Rolling Stones’ isn’t exactly a hobby or past-time that people are typically searching for. Yes, The Stones would have had an opportunity to dominate this SERP… until right around 1967 when Rolling Stone magazine was founded.

From that point on, they’d be battling an SEO powerhouse with higher publishing volume and much better backlink strategy. Yes, this is a cautionary tale in brand overlap.

You can’t always get what you want. Especially if you’re trying to outrank a media empire.

Journey

KD: 5/5 | Intent match: 1/5 | SERP competition: 5/5

Journey might as well stop believing they’ll ever rank higher than page 14.

Anyone searching for this term more than likely has intent to land on something like Expedia or Google Flights. Neil Schon can wail all he wants, but trying to rank for this keyword is like a midnight train going nowhere.

Van Halen

KD: 2/5 | Intent match: 5/5 | SERP competition: 2/5

The smartest thing David Lee Roth ever did was be totally cool with going with ‘Van Halen’ for the name of the band.

This is a phrase that isn’t used in any other context, other than maybe Dutch genealogy message boards. SERP is clean, intent is high, and Google will never ask you to Jump to Page 2.

Oasis

KD: 4/5 | Intent match: 2/5 | SERP competition: 4/5

Coming out of the UK, intent might be high. Perhaps in the middle east people might actually be searching for a place to get a drink of water.

Maybe searchers will start appending ‘band’ to the query—but if you’re already qualifying your keywords, you’ve already lost the SEO game. Anyway, here’s Wonderwall (a much more unique term, should have called the band that).

Nirvana

KD: 5/5 | Intent match: 1/5 | SERP competition: 5/5

Nirvana is a terrible band name if you’re going for discoverability. Nirvana is a spiritual state. A Yoga brand. A wellness podcast. Your aunt’s favorite retreat in Sedona. But a punk band? You’d be competing with a thousand wellness grifters on Instagram to even get close to ranking on page 1.

That said, it is fractionally better than ‘Hole.’

The The

KD: 0/5 | Intent match: 0/5 | SERP competition: ???

Here we go. The final boss of bad SEO. ‘The The’ cannot be Googled without triggering anti-spam filters. Sundar might even personally call in a wellness check. Autocorrect just choked on its own vomit.

I’m sure The The thought they were being AWFULLY clever when they came up with that name; the smell of patchouli failing to mask the odor of whatever banana peel experiment led to this idea. But no, there will never be a The The revival because no TikToker will ever find this band, let alone use their tune to remix a longboard meme. There is no programmatic strategy that can save these guys.

Limp Bizkit

KD: 1/5 | Intent match: 5/5 | SERP competition: 1/5

Say what you will, but purely from an SEO perspective, Limp Bizkit is the greatest band of all time. No one else on earth would ever dare try to rank for this term.

Every social handle immediately available; imagine coming up with this band name today and finding out it was taken? You’d dedicate your life to finding out who out there was somehow matching your freak. No, Limp Bizkit gave us a masterclass in the convergence of branding, marketing, and bad taste.

They did it all for the ranking?

It’s only SEO and I like it

The moral of the story is that at the end of the day, if the music is good, the SEO doesn’t matter. If you rock it, they will come.

That said, if you are thinking about starting a band in 2025, it might actually be worth taking your stoned idea to ahrefs and doing a little digging to see if your great band name is also a great brand name.

Because I’m honestly not sure if ‘Cream,’ ‘Bush,’ ‘Live,’ ‘Yes,’ or ‘Heart,’ could ever possibly rank #1 on the (Google) charts today.