I'm saying the league keeps talking about their need to come together and that is disingenuous. Forget that you and I are in law and look at it from a lay perspective. That's what I am talking about. I can appreciate a good tough negotiator, I just want to clear up what is exactly going on in these negotiations.
You're right, the NHL is playing hardball. They have every right to do so. In terms of coming to a middle ground like the media is talking about (different than sticking to your guns), the blame for not coming to the middle lies with the owners right now.
>>the blame for not coming to the middle lies with the owners right now<<
That may be true, but again, that doesn't mean they are negotiating in good faith. Its just as true that the players aren't negotiating in good faith by refusing to allow a cap, as the owners aren't negotiating in good faith by refusing to allow one. Further, as referenced earlier with the house analogy, if the owners believe that the only system that they will work under includes a salary cap, then the players must either accept that in principle and demand other concessions, or its going to be a long time before we see the NHL.
But I'm also not that the owners aren't "coming to the middle". Granted they haven't come off their salary cap demand, but do you know for sure they haven't made other concessions? In other words, don't assume that because they have stuck to one issue (a major one, granted) that they haven't conceeded other things.
You don't know for sure that the players aren't playing hardball as well, holding out as long as possible to deny a salary cap, then jumping on whatever offer comes after a salary cap is dead.
The owners argument is that they are losing less money now than they would if play is going on. Whether that's true or not, they seem to be acting like it is in their negotiations. If it is true, the players have no other choice than to give in, or go play in Europe.