Jump to content
The Official Site of the Montréal Canadiens
Canadiens de Montreal

Habs Clean house. Bergevin, Timmins, Wilson Terminated


New Contract?  

13 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you feel MB deserves a new contract?

    • Yes,,, he's earned it.
      1
    • Absolutely not,,, he hasn't earned it.
      11
    • Undecided
      1

This poll is closed to new votes


Recommended Posts

21 hours ago, habsisme said:

See I still think he's the best GM we've had in almost 30 years and I'd say like a top 5 GM in the league. I also think its going to be an embarassment if he chooses a different team, it makes us look like a second class organization... and really maybe that's what we are now

How is he a top 5 GM in the league? I'll give MB that he's pulled off some great trades, but his history of hiring coaches has been questionable, player development under him has been brutal, and he has failed to address serious positional holes in the line-up while relying on D men who play like he used to rather than adapting to the current NHL. He's failed to move on from players like Markov, Weber, Price, Plekanec, and others before their value dropped. He's bashed some of his own players in the media and then traded them when their value is at its lowest. And he's had one of the longest stretches of futility in team history as far as missing the playoffs in consecutive years went. Last year's playoff run was a good one, but we also came within one goal of being eliminated in 5 games in the first round, so if Toronto scores there (something largely out of MB's control), does that make him a better or worse GM?

As far as comparing him to other GM's, while MB has made some nice trades, his predecessors also performed well in this regard in some big deals. Stealing a 1st that ended up being Pacioretty along with Gorges for an ageing Craig Rivet? Alex Kovalev for Balej? James Wisniewski as a steal? And let's not forget that Serge Savard actually won a Cup in the past 30 years.

MB hasn't been all good or all bad. He's been decent in certain regards. But I don't care for the way he treats players and I don't like his philosophy on valuing grit and toughness over skill, and frankly I can't see us having prolonged success or winning a Cup with the way he builds a D corps. Take out Carey Price's performance last playoffs and we're dominated on most nights, and Carey won't be around for much longer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, BigTed3 said:

 Take out Carey Price's performance last playoffs and we're dominated on most nights, and Carey won't be around for much longer.

He;ll be missing for 2 months this yr :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

How is he a top 5 GM in the league? I'll give MB that he's pulled off some great trades, but his history of hiring coaches has been questionable, player development under him has been brutal, and he has failed to address serious positional holes in the line-up while relying on D men who play like he used to rather than adapting to the current NHL. He's failed to move on from players like Markov, Weber, Price, Plekanec, and others before their value dropped. He's bashed some of his own players in the media and then traded them when their value is at its lowest. And he's had one of the longest stretches of futility in team history as far as missing the playoffs in consecutive years went. Last year's playoff run was a good one, but we also came within one goal of being eliminated in 5 games in the first round, so if Toronto scores there (something largely out of MB's control), does that make him a better or worse GM?

As far as comparing him to other GM's, while MB has made some nice trades, his predecessors also performed well in this regard in some big deals. Stealing a 1st that ended up being Pacioretty along with Gorges for an ageing Craig Rivet? Alex Kovalev for Balej? James Wisniewski as a steal? And let's not forget that Serge Savard actually won a Cup in the past 30 years.

MB hasn't been all good or all bad. He's been decent in certain regards. But I don't care for the way he treats players and I don't like his philosophy on valuing grit and toughness over skill, and frankly I can't see us having prolonged success or winning a Cup with the way he builds a D corps. Take out Carey Price's performance last playoffs and we're dominated on most nights, and Carey won't be around for much longer.

That's a very fair assessment despite our inherent bias to overly critique, or be fans and be over enthusiastic. I would add that MB's ego sometimes gets the the better of him - failed offer sheet on AHO, drafting Mailloux out of order (for fear of not getting him in the 2nd round, drafting KK for positional need etc.), and as a Players GM, he falls in love with the players with grit (Chiarot, Edmundson, now Savard, Staal) when logic suggests we need fundamental skaters. 

Personally I think his ego is positioning himself by threatening to look elsewhere and it is merely a negotiating ploy to extract a little more money from Molson when he clearly knows there aren't many bilingual GM replacements to be found. Agent Pat Brisson rumoured as a replacement but he would have to take a pay cut based on the contracts he and his sports agency negotiate, and Patrick Roy is probably too temperamental. I am 50-50 on MB staying (perhaps learns some new tricks and his star could rise based on our prospect pool), or going (no big loss).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, claremont said:

That's a very fair assessment despite our inherent bias to overly critique, or be fans and be over enthusiastic. I would add that MB's ego sometimes gets the the better of him - failed offer sheet on AHO, drafting Mailloux out of order (for fear of not getting him in the 2nd round, drafting KK for positional need etc.), and as a Players GM, he falls in love with the players with grit (Chiarot, Edmundson, now Savard, Staal) when logic suggests we need fundamental skaters. 

Personally I think his ego is positioning himself by threatening to look elsewhere and it is merely a negotiating ploy to extract a little more money from Molson when he clearly knows there aren't many bilingual GM replacements to be found. Agent Pat Brisson rumoured as a replacement but he would have to take a pay cut based on the contracts he and his sports agency negotiate, and Patrick Roy is probably too temperamental. I am 50-50 on MB staying (perhaps learns some new tricks and his star could rise based on our prospect pool), or going (no big loss).

His ego is probably behind a lot of his love/hate, take it or leave it, decisions. He wants players with experience, but won't give them the experience. If he would have played Romanov during all of the playoffs, and not benched KK during some of the playoffs, I say we would have a better team today. He's too slow to get with the times. If Brisson is available? I say sign him up.  I don't think he's too worried about money. Some people have plenty. (not me) He would do it more for the prestige, and as a fan of the Habs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, claremont said:

That's a very fair assessment despite our inherent bias to overly critique, or be fans and be over enthusiastic. I would add that MB's ego sometimes gets the the better of him - failed offer sheet on AHO, drafting Mailloux out of order (for fear of not getting him in the 2nd round, drafting KK for positional need etc.), and as a Players GM, he falls in love with the players with grit (Chiarot, Edmundson, now Savard, Staal) when logic suggests we need fundamental skaters. 

Personally I think his ego is positioning himself by threatening to look elsewhere and it is merely a negotiating ploy to extract a little more money from Molson when he clearly knows there aren't many bilingual GM replacements to be found. Agent Pat Brisson rumoured as a replacement but he would have to take a pay cut based on the contracts he and his sports agency negotiate, and Patrick Roy is probably too temperamental. I am 50-50 on MB staying (perhaps learns some new tricks and his star could rise based on our prospect pool), or going (no big loss).

I'll add this about Bergevin and all the other GM's/coaches/players as well: there are things I like about each of them and decisions they've made that have been good, but they each have their faults as well. I get that sometimes, a GM is going to take a risk with a trade or a signing or a draft pick and it won't always work out. Look at Gainey with the Gomez for McDonagh trade. I hated it at the time and I worried we had given up a blue chip prospect for a past-prime star, and that it could come back to bite us, but Gainey recognized a hole in our line-up and took a swing at it. Gomez wasn't awful when he first got here, although he was done in by his bad contact and the pressure that came with it. Rejean Houle made a bad decision to hire Tremblay, chose Tremblay over Roy, and then got painted into a corner having to make a bad trade. Bergevin himself has been lambasted for the Sergachev-Drouin trade, which I also wouldn't have made, but which I thought was completely defensible at the time. Conversely, I thought he bombed on the Subban trade by diminishing his asset's value and not getting full worth for him in the transaction.

In any case, you can find examples of good and bad moves from any GM. What I dislike the most about Bergevin is 3 things:

1. His decision to hire re-tread Michel Therrien and to stick with Therrien and Lefebvre for way too long. Therrien was a bad coach the first time around here and he was a bad coach the second time around, and MB was way too attached to him to make an objective assessment of him. Those two coaches set us back in player development, and while that might not have affected performance right away, we saw a couple of years later how we had an extremely weak D prospect pool and graduated virtually no one from AHL in general for several years. Lefebvre sucked at developing prospects and Therrien sucked at coaching them too and wasn't interested in making them better.

2. Bergevin's treatment of players in the media. Subban was the prime example of this, but it goes on with the likes of Pacioretty, Galchenyuk, Briere, Markov, Radulov, Tinordi, Domi and so on. He was so intent on trying to diminish players' values for contract negotiations that he also diminished their values in trades. You don't like a guy and you want to deal him? The best strategy for a GM would be to actually build them up. In meaningless games, let a Galchenyuk or Domi play center with great wingers and make them look like a true top 6 center. Don't play them on the wing in the bottom 6. You don't want Subban around? Don't talk about how he's not a team player and has a bad attitude, you talk about how great his skill is and how he carries the team on a lot of nights and how that's leadership on the ice. You want to flip Pacioretty? Don't talk about how you don't want to negotiate another contract with him and how have doubts about the leadership group on the team. All these things tell other teams that you don't value your assets and make you more vulnerable to being taken advantage of in a trade. Bergevin did a nice job at finding talent in other organizations, but he did a terrible job of establishing and maintaining value when trading away our own core players.

3. And most glaringly, his view of how to build a D corps. From Murray to Bouillon to Drewiske to Alzner to Schlemko to Nesterov to Folin to Chiarot to Edmundson to Savard... MB has a knack for overvaluing and often overpaying for marginal mediocre defencemen. It would be one thing if he signed a Murray and then recognized it didn't work ou and that this type of defenceman doesn't have a place in today's NHL. It would be one thing if he signed a Chiarot to 2.5M x 3 years to be his #5 D man. But to continually go after this exact type of player over and over and over with no signs of showing any learning from his mistakes and to build his roster in such a way that these guys continually get top 4 minutes and get stacked one on top of the other in the line-up. It's mind-blowing. Even with Weber, who is better than the rest of these guys, there was zero recognition from Bergevin that Shea is no longer a top-pairing guy and doesn't have the right skillset to play with a Chiarot or an Emelin and have success. Meanwhile, it's clear as day that a player like Petry is your stud D man and plays the way that leads to success in today's NHL. It was clear as day that a guy like Subban, despite what you thought of him off the ice, played a game that gelled with what today's game calls for. And yet, MB shied away from going after these types of players.

So I don't fault MB for Drouin or for taking a low-risk chance on a guy like Semin or Kovalchuk or Perry, even if sometimes those gambles don't work out. I don't blame him for being creative and having the courage to offersheet Aho (even though I thought they should have gone after Werenski myself). But I do take issue with his viewpoint on how to build a roster, specifically his defence corps, which I find archaic, and frankly I don't think asset management and player development have been very strong under his tenure. We can certainly do worse than Bergevin, but the question for me is and has always been whether I think we can establish ourselves as a perennial top 5 team in the league for several seasons in a row and give ourselves a clear window for a Cup win, and I don't think Bergevin ever had that type of plan or vision, so what's the point of keeping him around if he doesn't have that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

I'll add this about Bergevin and all the other GM's/coaches/players as well: there are things I like about each of them and decisions they've made that have been good, but they each have their faults as well. I get that sometimes, a GM is going to take a risk with a trade or a signing or a draft pick and it won't always work out. Look at Gainey with the Gomez for McDonagh trade. I hated it at the time and I worried we had given up a blue chip prospect for a past-prime star, and that it could come back to bite us, but Gainey recognized a hole in our line-up and took a swing at it. Gomez wasn't awful when he first got here, although he was done in by his bad contact and the pressure that came with it. Rejean Houle made a bad decision to hire Tremblay, chose Tremblay over Roy, and then got painted into a corner having to make a bad trade. Bergevin himself has been lambasted for the Sergachev-Drouin trade, which I also wouldn't have made, but which I thought was completely defensible at the time. Conversely, I thought he bombed on the Subban trade by diminishing his asset's value and not getting full worth for him in the transaction.

In any case, you can find examples of good and bad moves from any GM. What I dislike the most about Bergevin is 3 things:

1. His decision to hire re-tread Michel Therrien and to stick with Therrien and Lefebvre for way too long. Therrien was a bad coach the first time around here and he was a bad coach the second time around, and MB was way too attached to him to make an objective assessment of him. Those two coaches set us back in player development, and while that might not have affected performance right away, we saw a couple of years later how we had an extremely weak D prospect pool and graduated virtually no one from AHL in general for several years. Lefebvre sucked at developing prospects and Therrien sucked at coaching them too and wasn't interested in making them better.

2. Bergevin's treatment of players in the media. Subban was the prime example of this, but it goes on with the likes of Pacioretty, Galchenyuk, Briere, Markov, Radulov, Tinordi, Domi and so on. He was so intent on trying to diminish players' values for contract negotiations that he also diminished their values in trades. You don't like a guy and you want to deal him? The best strategy for a GM would be to actually build them up. In meaningless games, let a Galchenyuk or Domi play center with great wingers and make them look like a true top 6 center. Don't play them on the wing in the bottom 6. You don't want Subban around? Don't talk about how he's not a team player and has a bad attitude, you talk about how great his skill is and how he carries the team on a lot of nights and how that's leadership on the ice. You want to flip Pacioretty? Don't talk about how you don't want to negotiate another contract with him and how have doubts about the leadership group on the team. All these things tell other teams that you don't value your assets and make you more vulnerable to being taken advantage of in a trade. Bergevin did a nice job at finding talent in other organizations, but he did a terrible job of establishing and maintaining value when trading away our own core players.

3. And most glaringly, his view of how to build a D corps. From Murray to Bouillon to Drewiske to Alzner to Schlemko to Nesterov to Folin to Chiarot to Edmundson to Savard... MB has a knack for overvaluing and often overpaying for marginal mediocre defencemen. It would be one thing if he signed a Murray and then recognized it didn't work ou and that this type of defenceman doesn't have a place in today's NHL. It would be one thing if he signed a Chiarot to 2.5M x 3 years to be his #5 D man. But to continually go after this exact type of player over and over and over with no signs of showing any learning from his mistakes and to build his roster in such a way that these guys continually get top 4 minutes and get stacked one on top of the other in the line-up. It's mind-blowing. Even with Weber, who is better than the rest of these guys, there was zero recognition from Bergevin that Shea is no longer a top-pairing guy and doesn't have the right skillset to play with a Chiarot or an Emelin and have success. Meanwhile, it's clear as day that a player like Petry is your stud D man and plays the way that leads to success in today's NHL. It was clear as day that a guy like Subban, despite what you thought of him off the ice, played a game that gelled with what today's game calls for. And yet, MB shied away from going after these types of players.

So I don't fault MB for Drouin or for taking a low-risk chance on a guy like Semin or Kovalchuk or Perry, even if sometimes those gambles don't work out. I don't blame him for being creative and having the courage to offersheet Aho (even though I thought they should have gone after Werenski myself). But I do take issue with his viewpoint on how to build a roster, specifically his defence corps, which I find archaic, and frankly I don't think asset management and player development have been very strong under his tenure. We can certainly do worse than Bergevin, but the question for me is and has always been whether I think we can establish ourselves as a perennial top 5 team in the league for several seasons in a row and give ourselves a clear window for a Cup win, and I don't think Bergevin ever had that type of plan or vision, so what's the point of keeping him around if he doesn't have that?

Sounds like reason enough to not extend him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
2 hours ago, ramcharger440 said:

Well, it looks like his contract B.S is probably hurting the team! the guys sure look distracted! so how about we just get rid of him and get on with it.

I really doubt that what's going on with the GM's contract is having any effect at all on the players. That would be a lame excuse.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know where I heard or read this but its making more and more sense to me. I think MB doesn't want to be GM anymore and would like to be President and Molson doesn't think he needs one and doesn't want to add the expense. I honestly think he's just exhausted and thinks its not a one person job. 

I mean we're talking about adding a big salary so I could understand Molson not wanting to do that but I would be for that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Graeme-1 said:

The big question is if MB really wants out or this is all a ploy to try and get more money. If that's the situation, this early start sure isn't helping his case.

I think Bergevin is a bit like Danault and simply thinks too highly of himself. I think Bergevin sees himself as an elite GM who just took his team to the finals. He clearly hasn't learned anything about how to build a defence in a decade, so I don't see him as a guy who is looking in the mirror and saying he has to be better. I think he sees himself as elite and wants to be paid. I think he also knows that with the whole French language debacle that the pool of replacement candidates is thin.

If I'm GM, I'd be walking away from him. Not to say there's a clear replacement out there, but I don't see Bergevin as being worth what he thinks he's worth and as Brian Wilde stated, until Bergevin realizes that you need a different style of defenceman in today's game, he'll never win a championship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Daniele Sauvageau on 985 Sports saying that if the ship isn't turned around soon, it's Bergevin and not Ducharme who should be the one to go. She says that Bergevin has had his chance and did a good job once, but that he's no longer the right man to lead the Habs. She said he lacks direction and that the team now has no clear identity. She adds that Ducharme needs someone who will give him a better roster to work with... so mark this down, we're starting to see the media turn on Bergevin here (and rightly so). He's had an easy ride so far and it's time he was held accountable for years of failing to improve the center ice and defence positions and riding Carey Price (a Bob Gainey acquisition) for his periods of success.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/23/2021 at 7:34 PM, BigTed3 said:

Daniele Sauvageau on 985 Sports saying that if the ship isn't turned around soon, it's Bergevin and not Ducharme who should be the one to go. She says that Bergevin has had his chance and did a good job once, but that he's no longer the right man to lead the Habs. She said he lacks direction and that the team now has no clear identity. She adds that Ducharme needs someone who will give him a better roster to work with... so mark this down, we're starting to see the media turn on Bergevin here (and rightly so). He's had an easy ride so far and it's time he was held accountable for years of failing to improve the center ice and defence positions and riding Carey Price (a Bob Gainey acquisition) for his periods of success.

The D looks pretty shoddy right now... And our center position really is quite strengthened. We had a moment there where it looked like the center ice position would be a strength (and I do like Suzuki), but it's not looking like much this season. Sure, Dvorak and Suzuki are competent centers, but neither strike me as a superstar player who can carry a team. Which is, as a fan, what I've wanted to see my entire adult life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jennifer_rocket said:

neither strike me as a superstar player who can carry a team. Which is, as a fan, what I've wanted to see my entire adult life.

We havent had a truly superstar centre since Turgeon - and that was only for barely a season.    Damphousse was excellent and so was Koivu but I would consider both 1st line players but not superstars.  

Ive always wanted a Crosby or a McDavid or Matthews etc. We've had bad luck in terms of getting high picks in weak drafts lately... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, maas_art said:

We havent had a truly superstar centre since Turgeon - and that was only for barely a season.    Damphousse was excellent and so was Koivu but I would consider both 1st line players but not superstars.  

Ive always wanted a Crosby or a McDavid or Matthews etc. We've had bad luck in terms of getting high picks in weak drafts lately... 

Damphousse was probably almost as good as Turgeon. Turgeon had that one season where he topped 50 goals and 130 points, which Damphousse never had, but take that one outlier season out and their production was pretty comparable the rest of their careers. Turgeon was more crafty with the puck but Damphousse had that amazing shot and he also won a Cup with the Habs. It's a bit hard to know how they both stack up against centers that came after them because Turgeon and Damphousse both played in an era where scoring was rampant and players frequently racked up 100-point seasons, whereas that's become more of a rarity going forward. I'd also argue that for the portion of their careers played in Montreal, Damphousse was the superior player in terms of what we got from him here.

Then you have Koivu, for example, who was first in the NHL in scoring when he went down with that serious knee injury and who was clearly a top center in the league but who got stuck on very bad rosters in his time here. It would be interesting to know how a player of his skill would have done playing in the 80's and early 90's and if he got to play with the likes of Bellows and Recchi instead of Higgins and Ryder. For what it's worth, if you adjust their point totals for era, Damphousse would have ended up with 1193 points in 1378 games (0.87 points per game) and Koivu 912 in 1124 games (0.81 PPG). So even without correcting for strength of linemates, Koivu's point totals adjusting for era are not that far off from Damphousse's.

All that to say that I generally agree with the sentiment of your thought - that we haven't had a superstar center in a very long time - although I'd put Damphousse and Koivu closer to Turgeon in terms of overall level of play. I still have hopes that Suzuki can be a point-per-game player and I like the contract they gave him but as a general rule, and I've said this time and again, if you want to get game-changing players, you need to be drafting top 10 and preferably top 5 to give yourself a legitimate shot at them. The Have have picked 3rd twice in recent years and managed to end up getting those picks in years where the center position was extremely weak both times. But absolutely, we're beyond due for getting a real star in the league and a guy who can put up 100 points and/or be in the top 5 in league scoring. We haven't seen that in a long long time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/23/2021 at 12:32 PM, BigTed3 said:

I think Bergevin is a bit like Danault and simply thinks too highly of himself. I think Bergevin sees himself as an elite GM who just took his team to the finals. He clearly hasn't learned anything about how to build a defence in a decade, so I don't see him as a guy who is looking in the mirror and saying he has to be better. I think he sees himself as elite and wants to be paid. I think he also knows that with the whole French language debacle that the pool of replacement candidates is thin.

If I'm GM, I'd be walking away from him. Not to say there's a clear replacement out there, but I don't see Bergevin as being worth what he thinks he's worth and as Brian Wilde stated, until Bergevin realizes that you need a different style of defenceman in today's game, he'll never win a championship.

That's the core problem, Bergevin isn't great but it certainly could be worse. Before he went to Tampa, BriseBois seemed like the natural successor (hiring the young guy doesn't always work out, but at least had the possibility of being an upgrade), no idea what our options now would be.  Were it not for the language issue, Jeff Gorton would be the obvious choice IMO, but the french requirement really limits our options.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, jennifer_rocket said:

Sure, Dvorak and Suzuki are competent centers, but neither strike me as a superstar player who can carry a team.

I see Suzuki as a Koivu-style center: good top-line 2-way forward, who in his prime is probably capable of roughly PPG.  I don't think that's inherently a problem if we have enough depth and strengths in other areas (a superstar center certainly helps, but there's other ways to build a winning team), but right now we have holes throughout the lineup: wing depth is the only position that looked reasonably strong and even that's looking like a problem now.

Unfortunately even with a new GM, Bergevin has locked a lot of money into the current roster, so rebuilding isn't going to be easy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Graeme-1 said:

That's the core problem, Bergevin isn't great but it certainly could be worse. Before he went to Tampa, BriseBois seemed like the natural successor (hiring the young guy doesn't always work out, but at least had the possibility of being an upgrade), no idea what our options now would be.  Were it not for the language issue, Jeff Gorton would be the obvious choice IMO, but the french requirement really limits our options.

That right there is our biggest problem, who the hell cares what language they speak as long as they can put a winning team together

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, 26NCounting said:

That right there is our biggest problem, who the hell cares what language they speak as long as they can put a winning team together

Has anyone seen Patrick Roy at the bell center lately. I’m all in for this, it couldn’t be any worse. He could even coach for ten games until he found a good coach French or English. He could handle any heat from the press. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, tony5775 said:

Has anyone seen Patrick Roy at the bell center lately. I’m all in for this, it couldn’t be any worse. He could even coach for ten games until he found a good coach French or English. He could handle any heat from the press. 

Roy could be coach and GM, this used to happen quite a bit with good success.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, tony5775 said:

Has anyone seen Patrick Roy at the bell center lately. I’m all in for this, it couldn’t be any worse. He could even coach for ten games until he found a good coach French or English. He could handle any heat from the press. 

At this point, you're right... It couldn't be any worse. I just think the Bergevin era is over. Please let it end. Some good things happened, some bad things happened. The team never really achieved much. Let. It. Be. Over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, tony5775 said:

Has anyone seen Patrick Roy at the bell center lately. I’m all in for this, it couldn’t be any worse. He could even coach for ten games until he found a good coach French or English. He could handle any heat from the press. 

I agree at this point, the only thing that could make anything worse would be trading off young players for vets and i dont see a guy like Roy doing that at all. 


He's definitely not my first choice for GM (although my first choices are all currently employed) but I do think he'd be an interesting choice. I think there's a possibility he'd be a huge success... or a huge failure - but I dont think we'd get 9 1/2 years of mediocrity like we have with MB.   You'd sink or soar with Roy.  At least (im pretty sure) it would be exciting. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, jennifer_rocket said:

At this point, you're right... It couldn't be any worse. I just think the Bergevin era is over. Please let it end. Some good things happened, some bad things happened. The team never really achieved much. Let. It. Be. Over.

I was really hoping to wake up this morning and see that MB had been fired, unfortunately he has not. I have no clue why MB is still around other than maybe Molson likes the way he looks in those ridiculous suits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, maas_art said:

I agree at this point, the only thing that could make anything worse would be trading off young players for vets and i dont see a guy like Roy doing that at all. 


He's definitely not my first choice for GM (although my first choices are all currently employed) but I do think he'd be an interesting choice. I think there's a possibility he'd be a huge success... or a huge failure - but I dont think we'd get 9 1/2 years of mediocrity like we have with MB.   You'd sink or soar with Roy.  At least (im pretty sure) it would be exciting. 

Excitement is good. Better than whatever we're getting so far this season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • maas_art changed the title to Habs Clean house. Bergevin, Timmins, Wilson Terminated

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...