I was against the move from the start. I kept hearing the kinds of things out of Columbus that, to me, screamed locker room cancer. Accusations that he worked/practiced only when he wanted to practice, and stuff like that. I was worried that he would come over here, after a decade plus of playing in a losing culture, and spread bad habits in the Rangers tight-knit room. I was even more concerned when guys like Feds and Prust followed AA and Dubi out the door. People kept saying that Callahan was the clear leader and that there would be no problems, but last year? I didn't notice the same effort. Not across the board like we saw before. I saw a team that the year before (without Nash) had every player working towards the same goal in the same way.
Enter Nash and suddenly the players are getting the coach fired? Suddenly they show up when they want to show up?
There is no proof to any of this, and I honestly question how much of this is likely due to Nash and his reported bad habits, and how much of this is me just reading things that way because that's what I was worried about. All I know, is that I had a bad feeling that the team would become just like it is now (mediocre, 8th/9th place level--just like the pre-lockout Ranger teams dominated by me-first mercenaries) when Nash came over.
To be fair, though, I know this is my own blind spot, which is why I try not to post about it often.
Although I respectfully disagree with your opinion, I appreciate your post. You make some fair points.