if they at least attempted to play zooropa live in 1993 then songs like SUC and FEZ should be no problem.
It is like you said not an issue of a great night out, that is provided. There is just something missing and playing more new songs live instead of dropping them is one of them.
this is by far the tour with the least played songs of a new record for U2 and that is something that is difficult to understand when they kept talking how proud they were of this record. Maybe they are unsure about its quality or the livetransition isn't working in their opinion or something.
Yes, they should definitely be playing more off of NLOTH.
Just by way of interjection, I in no way buy this, the first Boston set list had a tremendous amount of push back from alot of my security co workers. They were saying that people come to hear the hits, like they do for other old bands like AC DC. I tried to explain to them that U2 is not that kind of band, and that while I love AC/DC, their goal is not to make their best, most relevant album every time out. U2's still is, and the numbers prove it, even NLOTH was #1 in every industrialized country at one point.
I am just saying that the above attitude maybe prevails among some casual fans as well, and so U2 is weary of playing more NLOTH. Strange, as its never held them back before, but I have 2 theories:
1.)Lets compare Pop and NLOTH, 2 albums that were not up to U2 standards for sales:
Popmart had a clear concept and stage set that fit in with the decadent, consumer mad world with a disco twist theme that was the album. This was not something you could change mid tour, so U2 had to go out there and play the songs from Pop. This is why leg 1 of Pop was so awkward, they couldn't just drop what did not work as easily.
The Claw, as already noted, is incredibly innovative, no one has done this before, an in the round stadium show in 360 degrees. At the same time, like alot of people have said, there is no real thematic connection from the claw to NLOTH. It is simply the Elevation/Vertigo round with a GA pit concept dressed up very creatively and super sized to allow for lights and PA to be rigged. The tour was designed like this, just have the stage and call it 360, because they will be promoting more than one record with it(SOA). So theory 1 is they find it alot easier to drop or not play at all songs from NLOTH because of this. The album did not hit as big as expected, so they drop UC because it resonates least and they don't bother risking it with Cedars or spending time nailing down fez-being born.
2.)U2 is legitimately worried about their reputation and the hits, real or perceived, it has taken in recent years. I was only an infant when JT came out, so please anyone who has been a U2 fan much longer than me here correct me if I am wrong at all in what I am about to say. I don't remember any time period, either from my own relatively short fan experience or from reading back through U2's history, when I have heard as many negative things said about them by so many. Of course, most of the public and critics still are fans, but less so than before.
Jim Derogatis of Chicago(sp?) Tribune hit them big on Vertigo tour, so much so that Larry had an interview with him to set things straight! Mainstream, widely read columnists and politicians(a serious candidate for US Senate) have been knocking Bono's political activism as hypocrisy, pampered celebrity bull shit, etc. Completely ignoring the fact that Bono devotes alot of his time and money to the causes he believes in, and more importantly, that he knows more about politics, economics, health, etc than any 10 soap box hippies combined and most politicians! U2 also took alot of criticism for doing what every international business does and basing operations in the most tax favorable climate. This move did nothing to set back Bono's causes, did not in anyway represent a retreat from his previous values, as U2, unlike many other bands who do the same thing, have never pretended to be anything other than BUSINESSMEN. This was true even back when they considered themselves punk rockers.
Plus, alot of kids my age, who seemed to like U2 from 2001-2005 about, took a big turn against them the last few years. I don't know if they don't get Bono, or they think U2 is too big/business oriented, too old, or they just can't concentrate and have to be for the next "big thing"(coldplay, killers, etc). In short, it was "cool" to like U2 for a period of time in the 2000's, does not seem to be so true anymore.
They always seemed to be universally loved, now, there seems to be a lot of criticizing, especially related to the 360 tour. Hence-------------
Theory 2: U2 is playing it safe because of this-go with the part of the back catalog that has had success, which means no Zooropa or Pop, and a SHITLOAD of ATYCLB.
I think both of the above are reasonable, though I obviously do not have any more of a clue than the next person here why the relatively minor attention paid to NLOTH on this tour. Could be these, could be anything, really.
What I think is unreasonable, and what I can not understand for the life of me is that, if U2 truly feels for some reason that they can not play 8 or 9 songs per night of Horizon, why they have to play 5 off ATYCLB. You would think they would reach back for songs off better albums like War, UF, JT and AB. Or for proven crowd favorites like I will Follow and Out of Control.
Just imagine, 2 ATYCLB, and the other 3 spots it occupied having cuts from the albums mentioned above! You could hear DM, Surrender, ASOH, Bad, Wire, One Tree Hill, IGC, RTSS, Trip thru, Real Thing, LIB, 2 hearts, it is endless. At least do this if they refuse to play something from POP.
Wow, thats the longest I have gone in a while! Sorry and thanks for reading!
, but I'd like to think that maybe they visit the site every once in a while. Sadly, I'm convinced they don't. Ever. 
over the Dallas and Houston shows this week.
