[
Unnuanced. I understand what you are saying, although you apparently had to develop an imaginary word for it. with all due respect, I think your posts clearly evidence that you are a raving pro-PA fanatic. I guess that makes me "unnuanced".
That is a rather ridiculous assertion. To suggest that the PA should have shown better judgment and employed even a basic level of competency in negotiating tactics and strategies is hardly to suggest that the players take what they are offered and slink away. I swear, I have the same types of discussions with my young teenage son. If you ask him to throw out the garbage, he insists that I make him do EVERYTHING!!! It is just like that arguing with a pro-PA twit (not that you are one). Just because you believe Goodenow was a talentless hack who committed colossal blunder after colossal blunder, that automatically means that you think the players should have accepted just what the owners offered. If you have paid even a modicum of attention, you would know that intelligent pro-league posters have said Goodenow should have shown some judgment and negotiated a truce about a year ago when he was offered the chance.
As a side, I would note that, while goodenow is trained as a lawyer, he is really acting more in a business capacity as NHLPA Director. Were he acting in private practice, he might be facing a negligence claim at this point. That is how inept he was. He is lucky he is only going to get axed.
This comment requires no response, really. You surely know how much of a fool you make of yourself when you say such things. If you do not, there is nothing anyone can say or do to help you.
Not necessarily, but when the other side shows you that they have an ace-high royal flush before you start the hand, and billions in chips, you are miscalculating. Especially when that same player offers to split the pot with you.
There you go again. Unbelievable. On second thought, maybe you don't know how riduculous you sound. Sorry.