Marc Bertrand: The Bruins set-up Jim Montgomery to fail
On Wednesday’s edition of Zolak & Bertrand, Marc “Beetle” Bertrand explained why Jim Montgomery was set-up to fail before being fired yesterday afternoon.
It goes back to him not being extended…
Marc Bertrand:
In his first year, his team had 135 points.
Tim McKone:
Not bad.
Marc Bertrand:
In his second year, his team had 109 points. Also, not bad. And this year his team is 8-9-3. Not terrible when you look at the record. Most guys in Jim Montgomery’s spot don’t get fired. Most don’t get fired in that spot just based on the record of the first 2 years and the start to this season being mediocre and disappointing in a lot of ways. It’s a team that has looked lifeless on a lot of nights. Most guys that put together the two previous seasons would survive a rough start 20 games in. This guy did not. And it was telegraphed by the Bruins when they let Jim Montgomery start this year as a lame duck coach. Jim Montgomery, based on the previous two years, arguably deserved a contract extension and he never got it. That to me, is the story about this guy. Why didn’t he get it? Why was he not extended in the offseason coming into this year? I think the answer has to be that the Bruins brass didn’t love him as their coach because if they did, he would have had a contract and he would have been established as the guy. But he came into the year without it, which tells you there was something about Jim Montgomery that they just didn’t like. There’s something off about him that they didn’t like, and that’s why they didn’t reward him with the deal. We talked about that at the start of the year. We talked about that at that press conference when it was being discussed that, yeah, we love him and we like him and we’re going to get a deal done and we’re working towards it. Turns out, no, they never worked towards it. They maybe had conversations, but they were not productive… a part of this story is they set him up to be a scapegoat and fail with his players.
Listen to the full segment!
6 thoughts on the Bruins firing Jim Montgomery
As was always going to be the case, Bruins general manager Don Sweeney, and with the blessing of Bruins president Cam Neely, got to fire his third coach in seven years Tuesday afternoon.
And his authority to do exactly that was something that never once appeared to be in doubt.
In 2022 and in the wake of firing Bruce Cassidy, Bruins CEO Charlie Jacobs stuck to the facts when it came to the Neely-Sweeney tandem being allowed to move on from Cassidy. Jacobs noted that the Bruins had been to three Stanley Cup Finals in 11 years under Neely’s leadership, and that the team had posted a .600 winning percentage since switching from Peter Chiarelli to Sweeney in 2015. And two years later, speaking after Boston’s second straight playoff exit at the hands of the Panthers, Jacobs ditched the facts but made it clear that he was standing by his braintrust.
“Well, there was a change, we let go of our coach [and] we have a new one sitting here,” Jacobs said when pressed as to why the Bruins were not making any changes with their leadership. “This is unfortunately a second playoff exit, a little further this year than last year, but we have had change.
“They have my utmost confidence, and I feel like we haven’t necessarily found our ceiling yet, in terms of the opportunity of this team. I believe in them to find that ceiling. And hence, they have my confidence and therefore no change. I don’t foresee a change in these personnel for this upcoming season.”
That was until, again, Sweeney (and with Neely’s blessing) decided that yet another change had to come. And yet again, that change had to come below them, with Jim Montgomery the latest Jack Adams-winning head coach to be fired by the franchise.
And, again, this was a decision that was only a shock to those who had not heard the anvil whistling from the team management suite on the ninth floor of TD Garden and making a Spoked-Beeline for Montgomery since the moment camp opened and closed without a contract extension to his name.
If there’s one thing I’ve learned from a near-decade of covering Sweeney, it’s that everything said is extremely calculated. Sometimes to a fault when it comes to the delivery. And the Bruins’ answers on questions regarding talks with Montgomery were always extremely surface level.
The last we had heard from Sweeney, he merely confirmed that there had been talks between the sides. That, after adding a finalist for Montgomery’s then-current job to the staff and promoting another, was never a promising sign for Montgomery. It always felt like an unspoken acknowledgement that they preferred having the easiest exit plan possible at their disposal should things not have gone as planned.