I'm wondering whether there is one rule for one act and another rule for another here. Alabama Shakes have got a right kicking here of late and that's presumably acceptable? They sound OK from what I've heard, but their main crime seems to be that they're not doing something that hasn't been done already and something which hasn't been done better.
I think they are over-rated on the available evidence and I spent my own money reaching that conclusion. I was part of a discussion that centred on the fact that they are over-rated and that we have a right to expect critics to be more knowledgable of the pre 1977 world than many are and more circumspect before handing out the garlands. Alabama Shakes aren't shit but they aren't the shit either and no one involved in that discussion AFAIK said that any one on this forum would be a shithead for liking them.