Guide-accurate framework recall to pass the screen, plus the facilitation and conflict scenarios that decide the offer.
Say yes if it is true, give a stage and a rough timeline without naming companies, and use it to set a decision date rather than to imply a bidding war. Inventing a process you do not have is the one answer that can end badly.
Change what the meeting is about rather than how it is run: inspect the board against the Sprint Goal instead of polling individuals, stop being the person addressed, and push detail into a follow-on conversation. If the Sprint has no real goal, no format will save the event.
Agree the business meaning and the grain of each entity before touching field names, profile the real data to find the overloaded and sentinel values, then write a mapping where every target field has a source, a rule, a default and a decision for records that cannot be mapped.
Give the reasons in one pass so the pattern looks like a sequence of decisions rather than a habit, then name what you have changed about how you choose a role. The answer that works is a filter you can state, not a promise to stay.
Split vertically, so each slice goes end to end and delivers something demonstrable, using patterns such as workflow steps, business-rule variations, happy path first, and data or interface variants. Splitting by layer or by half a Sprint is not splitting - it produces work that cannot be reviewed or shipped.
Answer no, and give the non-money reason you are leaving as the evidence. If a real counteroffer arrives later, judge it against what your employer did before you threatened to leave, not against the number on the paper.