Did you read the article?
"In retrospect, Bergevin thinks he could have done it differently.
“Aho was the right player to give an offer sheet to, but I wish it would have been a different offer sheet,” Bergevin said. “Would I take that back? Yes. But honestly, at the time, we thought we would get the player based on the signing bonuses, which (Tom) Dundon matched. It ended up being a good contract for them.
“Lesson learned, honestly. Lesson learned. If I ever become a GM again, that’s a lesson I can use moving forward if it happens.”
That's literally taking accountability.
Like I get it, Bergevin is not a popular guy around here, probably the by-product of spending 10 years as GM of a team, I for one have mixed feelings about his time in Montreal, but damn having read that article and some of the responses in here, not quite sure why people are so upset. Thought it was a honest interview and sober take on his time as GM here, some good, some bad and a lot of in-between.
For me it's not about accountability, but just a re-affirmation that he never really saw the big-picture/long-term window.
He wanted to balance building with competing, and he kind of reiterated that in a subtle way. But at some point, one of those goals needs to be sacrificed.
A core of Price, Petry, Markov, Subban, Plekanec, Pacioretty, Gallagher, Eller was pretty darn good for that era. They needed to sacrifice picks and prospects to get the offensive hlep they desperately needed. Never happened.
Christ, they had the best goalie in the world supported by three top pairing D-men. Two of which were the best offensive D-men in the league.
In the end, he competed when he should have torn it down, and was trying to build while they should have been competing. That will forever be his legacy.
That said, I am thankful for Cole, Suzuki, Guhle, Arber, Struble, Mailloux, and Monty.