This afternoon, on the 32 Thoughts Podcast, Elliotte Friedman revealed that Jim Montgomery's firing in Boston involved more than the team's on-ice performance. Earlier this month Boston Bruins GM Don Sweeney made the difficult decision to relieve head coach Jim Montgomery of his duties. <div align='center'><blockquote class='twitter-tweet' data-lang='en'><a href='https://twitter.com/espn/status/1858986042000277872'> </a></blockquote></div> While the Boston Bruins struggled this season to find consistency, many fans and media attributed the problem more to roster construction than coaching. As a result, many fans were confused by the move from Don Sweeney to fire Jim Montgomery despite his overall success in previous years. <div align='center'><blockquote class='twitter-tweet' data-lang='en'><a href='https://twitter.com/frank_seravalli/status/1858984719561748827'> </a></blockquote></div> Most coaches who show a track record of success build up a bit of a buffer for their team to struggle and keep their job. This was not the case for Jim Montgomery which led many to believe there was more to the story than the Bruins bad record. <h3>Elliotte Friedman confirmed several factors led to Jim Montgomery's firing</h3> This afternoon during his new episode of the 32 Thoughts Podcast NHL insider Elliotte Friedman addressed the firing of Jim Montgomery. As many expected it seems there was more at play than the Bruins' lack of wins and Jim Montgomery's expiring contract at the end of this season. The one thing that I look at from everything that happened this week is, I hope there is a day where we get a chance to hear what kinda happened in those negotiations between the Bruins and Montgomery, said Friedman on the 32 Thoughts podcast. Because I don't think it is as simple as they made him an offer and they couldn't come to a deal.... I think it was deeper than that. According to Elliotte Friedman, he seems to think that the overall future of the team and what direction they should go in was a major point of contention between Don Sweeney and Jim Montgomery. I think it was more than just they couldn't reach financial terms, I think there was some talk over direction of the team, revealed Friedman. I don't know if Sweeney and Montgomery saw the future the same way. He continued and said that beyond the contract and overall future, there was just not a synergy between Don Sweeney and Jim Montgomery and ultimately the GM stays while the coach is let go. I think it's not as simple as the obvious, I think there were some deeper philosophical disagreements there and I think at the end they kind of realized that maybe they just weren't compatible with each other. This provides a ton of clarity and context to a situation that at first glance didn't really seem to make sense. With Jim Montgomery gone and out of the way it will be interesting to see if Don Sweeney takes the Bruins in a new direction or if Jim Montgomery was the one pushing for change. Either way the Bruins will continue on with Joe Sacco and likely have a new voice leading the squad next season.