Quote:
Originally Posted by SmootSmack
Your opinion, but you're entitled
|
It appeared to me to be a reasonable offer, and as BHA said, merited at least a counter-offer. It seemed to be a "split the baby" kind of offer with several concessions to the players.
Am I missing something? Are you of the opinion that it was a bad offer or one that was just being made as a sop to public opinion and, if so, why?
Really, I am just trying to understand why it didn't merit at least a counter-offer. You may have covered it in earlier posts and, if so, just point me to them.