Next in Line ... Milwaukee

To some, Garry Howard is a hero. To some he's an asshole. To others he's an opportunist. But one thing is clear. He is still working. He is still in the business. And many of those downing him on these threads, would give anything to interview with the guy if it meant getting a gig.
Just sayin.....

 

wfw

 

To last that long as a SE in a major market is an amazing feat under any circumstances.

I'd like to meet the poor sap who thinks Garry is a hero though. I know a lot of people who like him, but I think they might stop a few miles short of considering him heroic.

 

The people I know on here who are downing him are all gainfully employed.

 

Since when did being employed or not being employed -- in this business, of all industries -- give one the right or not to criticize the performance or comportment of another?

I know a lot of class acts with years of journalism experience who currently are on the bricks or severely underemployed. I know a lot of horses' asses who still are drawing paychecks. Just because a lot of the former would accept a job offer from the latter doesn't change how horseshit the latter are.

 

What a touching and heart-lifting story about still-employed sports editors calling to lift the spirits of their still-employed colleague. I'm glad they have each other to get through these hard times.

Now excuse me while I vomit.

 

Is Garry the reason for the cutbacks? No. Is Garry the reason why the business sucks? No. He's not the sharpest knife in the drawer, no question, but he's also not the dullest. I think anytime Garry's name hits the threads, the dogs come out attacking. That's a bit unfair.
I read the piece. Kind of felt a bit like wissportswriter but not to the point throwing up. If you have dealt with Garry, it was what you would expect from him.

 

Which is somewhat the point.

 

I disagree. Many of the comments here were just mean spirited and had no reference to the article. Like I wrote earlier, some people see the name, and they begin attacking.

 

Well, the article wasn't posted until yesterday. So yes, the comments before that weren't about that.

But I also disagree with your second point. To vent displeasure at the fact that a man who has shown himself to be a not-very-good SE keeps his job while others lose theirs is completely within the realm of this discussion, IMO.

 

So what is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to quit because many of his staffers were fired? I couldn't see Garry or many others doing that.
He's not a good SE, OK but it's not right to attack him because he still has a job. Hell, there are a lot of not so good reporters still working. It's just the way things have gone.

 

Venting displeasure is not saying he should quit in a sign of solidarity. It's more a questioning of the higher-higher-ups at the Milwaukee paper and the choices they make in terms of value to their newspaper.