What is wrong with this picture?  The resurrection occurs only after two days in this scheme.  Also there are only two nights in this senario.  The traditionalists keep coming up with rationalizations to explain "after three days," and "three nights," but do they ever question the origin of their tradition?  They think that it must be true because so many people believe it, and because so many pious and respected teachers teach it.
    Well, I've done a bit of research into cults and pious teachers recently.  First the human race is incredibly naive.  You can teach an empty headed child to believe anything given the proper environment and emotional support.  I have a maxum: "A novel idea in an empty head has the time of its life."  Second, there is no shortage of pious pretenders looking for a following, and no shortage of stupid deceived followers to follow them.  Third, as world knowledge increases, so does the education of the pious pretenders and the stupid followers.  But basic human nature does not change.  The deception just becomes more sophisticated.  It mutates to adapt to the new environment.
    So what happened?  Well there were a lot of empty headed Gentile Christians around at the end of the second century.  Were they empty headed for lack of good teachers?  Not at all.  They were empty headed, because they did not wish to learn much more about the Jewish origins of their faith.  Such an attitude is par for the course.  It is what we logically expect from human nature.    Human nature also takes the easy way out of any hard situation.  Along came the test, and many left the Sabbath day.  They would rather live comfortably than endure a little hardship and persecution.  Along came the pious talkers to justify their choice, and predictably they believed them when they came up with a new an novel theory of Passion Chronology.   In the end, the majority followed them.
    First they exploited the Gentile Christian lack of observance of Passover, which in turn meant they were ignorant of the meaning of "preparation of the Passover."  The Pious talker came along and with smooth words and an aura of wisdom said that the preparation day that year was on Friday.  And then, of course, the Gentile Christians did not count Sabbaths between Passover and Pentecost (cf. Lev. 23:15-16, KJV) as the Law required, so they were also ignorant of the meaning of "first of the Sabbaths" (Mt. 28:1; Mk. 16:2; Lk. 24:1; Jn. 20:1, 19).  Who knows what the pious talkers said next?  They are still saying it today.  You can make Greek say any number of things if you ignore the context and previous usage.  But it is not hard to construct a hypothetical theory of how they sold the deception.  Remember that pious talkers are in the game for the wordly gain, not because they themselves believe the truth.  They do manage at times to believe their own deception.
     Perhaps they said it meant "first day from the Sabbaths" or "first day from the Sabbath."  Did they know that the Jews did not count days 'from' the Sabbath? Perhaps, but they did not pass this along to their followers, or perhaps they were just as ignorant as their followers.  But they were good at pious manipulation.   The next stage was fooling themselves into thinking that the word "sabbath" meant "week."  This they did by equating the "seven weeks" to Pentecost with the "seven sabbaths" to Pentecost.  Not knowing that the Jews counted both Sabbaths and days to Pentecost, they foolishly thought the two words were equivalent.  They probably pointed to the LXX translation of the word "shabbatot" as "ebdomados" to prove their point.  So they ended up with "first day of the week."