Patriots finally cut the fat, but their baker's gone, too

The Patriots finally cut Joey Galloway, a few weeks after it became obvious that he's not New England material. On top of not connecting with Tom Brady quickly, Galloway was constantly dropping important passes, which stalled important drives early in the season. After a mental mistake, where he inexplicably stepped out of bounds on what would have been a touchdown catch, Brady showed rare rage on the field, screaming in frustration, and Galloway didn't even suit up the next game. He's been inactive for three weeks and was finally cut by New England today.

Galloway's sinking into the background hadn't had any ill effects on the Pats, though, especially not with former Kent State quarterback and now Patriots rookie Julian Edelman stepping up. Edelman played like a carbon-copy of Wes Welker, catching balls in the flat and cutting back only to plunge forward for hard yards. He made several crucial grabs throughout the past few games and was emerging as a valuable third receiver for New England.

But the Boston Herald reports today that as well as cutting Galloway, Edelman is gone, too, with a broken arm. That's a raw turn for the Pats rookie, who had not only emerged as a New England-type player but also, with a last name reminding us all of pastries and pies, looked like someone who might be baking up touchdowns all season.

Other Patriots Posts

The Phoenix foreshadows the Globe's inner woes

While the situation between the Boston Globe and its remaining union, Boston's Newspaper Guild, continues to drag on and be increasingly frustrating, I have pulled a column run by the Boston Phoenix on April 30, the day before the feverish murmurings began (both by the Globe and the parasitic Boston Herald).

This column provides insight that few in the business were having on the fateful day but that, after the climatic weekend, more people are beginning to realize. The column foretold union leadership problems and also had a juicy paragraph about how the Guild handed out surveys to its members to get suggestions about how the members would suggest cutting costs — but the Guild went ahead with its own cost-cutting measures before the surveys could even be tabulated.

The most interesting part of the column, however, was its details on the "Save the Globe" rally. On the surface, such a rally seems like a great idea, but examples of how the Globe and its employees went about calling to save the newspaper are suspect and ultimately saddening for journalists, for they show that many within the industry are clueless about what is really at stake, and thus they will probably miss the boat and kill what's left of journalism.

At the rally, there were insinuations that the Globe's suffering was a First Amendment issue, which is dead wrong; the Globe is going out of business because the common man has stopped paying advertising dollars, not because the government has done anything. Another employee talked about not liking the Internet; one testimonial was about how a guy didn't think he could find another job.

Basically, the presentation given by the Globe showed it was out of touch with the real issue at hand — preserving real journalism and finding a way to make it viable for generations. Journalism needs to survive on the Internet and with new business models, and that's what Globe supporters are not realizing through all this. They are fretting over details to try to save the paper today, but they're still clueless as to how to keep the paper running for years to come. Hint: it's not by employing a lot of people to make a great product people are loath to buy. And it's not about mislabeling the problem or playing the victim, whether the oppressor is the Web, the job market or the New York Times.

One last note: It's easy to hate the New York Times for giving this ultimatum, but kudos to the Times for thinking ahead. They know serious changes need to be made, and they're making bold moves, even if it's not easy. Let's hope they cut some of their own fat in the next round of progress, but until then, all journalists are in this together. Save the ship for the future, not just for today.

Boston Globe coverage
Boston Herald coverage

Shoot the dinosaurs. Take the canoli.

It's no longer the gray lady disowning her golden child. It's the kid insisting that he be allowed to build a taller sandcastle, with no clue that the tides are due in any time now.

From what it looks like, the Globe has avoided being shut down again. The leadership of the papers got a nice list of concessions from its unions, with the paper currently talking over details with the final union, a 700-member stick-in-the-mud organization that continues to squabble with the paper's leadership. These union members are loath to give up perks such as lifetime guarantees or health care reductions, assuming, of course, that the paper they work for will be able to survive in the coming years without a drastic change in business style.

After the other unions working with the Globe gave up millions in concessions over the past few days, you'd hope this last group could scrounge up enough to give to the Globe, so the paper can please the New York Times. But right now it looks like the union (and mostly the managers, in fact) are fighting for a few marbles as a tidal wave approaches from offshore.

Boston Herald columnist Howie Carr wrote a rather nasty column about the future of the Globe, but while his remarks could have been nicer as the deadline loomed over the weekend, a lot of what he said was right. The news business is changing, and this is just the first step. The Globe is going to have to do some serious thinking about its focus and business practices if it wants to stay alive in the future.

This is not the New York Times' fault; it is merely offering to shoot the horse before it suffers too much.

Still, the Globe has a lot to offer and a lot of resources, which is why anger should be turned to the unions. Workers' rights are one thing; not having a place to work is another. And, for goodness' sake, the union leaders that are still making tons of money while their workers offer to get paid even less (they already have wage freezes) need to stop. They represent everything that is wrong with the Globe, whereas the people willing to sacrifice pay, benefits and cushy bonuses for the good of journalism represent all that is right (and sustainable).

It's a new age. Shoot the dinosaurs. Take the canoli.

Boston Herald news coverage
Boston Globe news coverage