There is apathy, certainly. There is also anger, although how much isn’t entirely clear.

Oh, and there’s a deadline involved. It is approaching fast.

Or is it? As with most things associated with hockey’s labour situation, the picture is somewhat fuzzy.

According to the collective agreement that binds the NHL with the NHL Players’ Association, the league must provide formal, written notice by Sunday as to whether it wishes to opt-out of the final two years of the CBA, which is currently set to expire in the fall of 2022.

Should the league decline its option to re-open the agreement, the union will have until Sept. 15 to make a call on whether to terminate the deal in 2020, setting the stage for a possible work stoppage in 12 months time.

The parties have had ongoing talks for months; they met again this past week. There are suggestions those dates could come and go without a definitive resolution, by mutual consent.

“The parties have basically stopped operating under those deadlines,” said a source close to the talks.

What might that mean? Is it positive? Does it mean anything at all? Those are all good questions. Shame about the lack of answers.

Deputy NHL commissioner Bill Daly used the words “cautiously optimistic” in Europe 10 days ago to describe CBA talks and said this weekend the tone remains “cordial and constructive.” It’s a mood the league and PA have been telegraphing since January.

I’ve talked to a couple of dozen players, agents, and team executives over the past two weeks. I’m still not convinced I have a great read on what’s actually likely to happen – just a sense that the further one gets from the table where Gary Bettman and Don Fehr are negotiating, the more caution trumps optimism.

While some hockey people believe the league could surprise everyone and decide to re-open the CBA on the weekend, a far greater number are convinced they are perfectly content to maintain the status quo through the end of the current contract term. Call the latter position the broad consensus view.

So all eyes are locked on the NHLPA.

From the players’ side, it would seem from the outside looking in as if the incentives are lining up to ratchet up the pressure. The NHL’s national U.S. television deal is up for renewal in 2021, which happens to be the same year the league’s 32nd franchise begins playing in Seattle.

And yet multiple sources on the players’ side indicate the PA isn’t agitating for a fight – not yet anyway.

The non-bellicose approach from the players would be understandable. Re-opening the agreement would provide another opportunity for the league to take a run at the Holy Grail: eliminating guaranteed contracts – and likely reducing the maximum contract length, too, for good measure.

As an agent was quick to note, if the players opt-out with a view to gaining ground on a series of demands, they can expect the other side to show up with a lengthy shopping list as well.

That’s not to say some players aren’t feeling militant.

San Jose Sharks defenceman Marc-Édouard Vlasic said recently he wouldn’t mind if there was a work stoppage.

Quite the contrary in fact: He’s hoping for one.

“We’ll wait and see what the league will say on Sept. 1, but of course there’s a lot of stuff that I’d like to change,” Vlasic said. “If the players aren’t satisfied on certain fronts, then we should rethink the CBA.”

The main sticking point for Vlasic, and for a great many other players, is the escrow mechanism. In order to ensure a 50-50 revenue split with the owners, players see a portion of their salary withheld each season in order to compensate for any shortfall in revenue growth.

It can take years to get a reimbursement, and often it amounts to pennies on the dollar, partly because the players have not shied from exercising their annual escalator option to increase the salary cap. (The cap increasing more quickly than revenues = more escrow. Roughly half of the increase in the NHL’s escrow-retention percentage is due to the rise in the upper limit.)

“Escrow should be eliminated. It should be zero,” said Vlasic, who was involved in the last labour talks in 2012 and plans to play a role in the coming negotiations. “I mean, players sign a big contract, and they get 15 percent taken away immediately because of escrow. It’s not our fault. We’re the product, and it’s our job to ensure people watch our league. It’s not our job to take care of (equalizing revenues). Players keep saying year after year that they don’t like escrow. Now’s the time to put on the big-boy pants.”

(Photo: Kevin Sousa/NHLI via Getty Images)

Though the ‘E’ word is always quick to come up in the list of player grievances, it’s probably better to consider it a symptom rather than the actual disease.

“What they’re really talking about is the revenue split,” said a player agent who, like many sources for this story, insisted on anonymity in exchange for candour.

Players realize just how constraining and narrow the definition of hockey-related revenues (HRR) is. For one thing, they’ve received a cut of zero percent of the $1.15 billion (U.S.) in expansion fees the league has raked in since the last deal was signed.

The owners’ argument is the benefit to the players has been 46 new NHL roster spots in perpetuity, which is true. But is that add worth $575 million to the current crop of players?

Many of the significant concessions won by the players in the last negotiation – like increased benefits and a better pension plan – effectively come out of their piece of the revenue pie. HRR is a net number, and things like employer pension contributions are counted as expenses that can be deducted from the gross revenue amount.

One source who is well-acquainted with the numbers said the players are also footing both the employer and employee portion of payroll taxes. According to that source’s back-of-the-envelope calculations, the players’ actual share is likely closer to 46 percent when all is said and done – and that’s of a whole that represents something short of 100 percent of league revenues. (Other sources dispute that contention, saying the league has plugged multiple sources of “leakage” over the past six years.)

“The players basically didn’t get anything in the last lockout,” Vlasic said. “We gave in on something like 7 percent of revenues because players wanted to play. If I’m the league, ‘Hey great, we were able to get that much, how much more can we get (next time)?’ But, look, every player has his own way of thinking. Some guys make $700,000 a year and just want to play. Some guys are 35 and don’t have a lot of years left. You have players like me, who have long-term contracts and can afford to not play for a year. Other players can’t. It’s harder to get the players to agree on something than 30 owners.”

Vlasic is just one player, and as such represents only himself. He’s right to point out the wide diversity of opinion in a collective counting more than 700 members. But you don’t have to look for very long to find others who feel similarly aggrieved, at least in private.

“We got screwed pretty good last time around, and I want to see at least some of what we lost addressed,” said a player who preferred that his name not be used in part because he has yet to voice his opinions internally in the dressing room or with the PA leadership. “I know I’m not the only one.”

Is it more than a fringe element? Probably not. But who really knows at this point? The NHLPA surely has a handle on what the membership is thinking, but they’re not saying much other than reiterating the fact that talks are ongoing.

Summer poses a challenge to attempting anything more than an unscientific poll of players, but in canvassing a raft of agents about their clients’ feelings, a sense emerges that the current contract, which has driven salaries upward, is more than good enough for much, if not most, of the membership.

“The players want a deal, and they want one without a lockout,” said an agent with a sizable client stable. “If there was a mechanism to reduce escrow in the next CBA, my guess is it would be supported overwhelmingly.”

That basically scans with what Vegas Golden Knights forward Paul Stastny said at a charity event in Quebec City recently.

“Both sides want to tweak certain things, but at the same time, the game is growing and it’s in a good spot. So why shut down something that’s going well?” he said. “But it’s the business of the game. As a player you have to take a step back – there’s 700 of us – and we need to talk about what’s best for the game.”

Stastny was drafted into the league immediately after the acrimonious bloodbath that was the 2004-05 full-season lockout and has the first-hand experience of living through the 2012 work stoppage, like Vlasic.

“Some good things came out of it. Some bad things came out of it. But, obviously, the league grew,” Stastny said. “Both sides are never 100 percent happy, but a lot of things are going good.”

(Photo: Brad Rempel-USA TODAY Sports)

On the league side, Daly said in an email: “Our discussions are ongoing. They have been cordial and constructive. I think both parties recognize that we are in a good place and want to continue the momentum we think the sport has been able to generate. Our talks now are focused on whether we can see if we can accomplish that, understanding certain aspects of our agreement may have to be adjusted.”

Multiple club sources indicated the owners see no urgency in departing from the status quo (with some possible exceptions we’ll get to in a minute). There is scant appetite for flipping over a smorgasbord that mostly satisfies everyone in the ownership club’s tastes.

“It’s hard to argue with the current model, frankly; it might not be perfect, but it’s making a lot of money for everyone – players included,” one Eastern Conference executive said recently.

But since the dawn of the Bettman era 26 years ago, not one CBA renewal has been achieved without a labour disruption.

Could the league really be heading for an amicable agreement on a new deal? It may look that way right now, but as always, the situation is subject to change. And change has a habit of happening quickly.

So what are the elements that will either get this thing across the finish line or set the cat among the pigeons? Let’s take a look at a few.

Fixing escrow

Players hate it and the owners aren’t interested in taking on the financial burden of unmet revenue projections and currency fluctuations. It’s not going anywhere, at least not anytime soon. That doesn’t mean there aren’t ways to fix it.

For one thing, the league and the players could drop the notion of annual cap-escalator options and agree to set the upper limit of the salary cap ahead of time. That would provide certainty and could be set up in such a way as to track more tightly to the growth forecasts.

The risk is it could also trap some teams in cap hell; the players remember what happened in Chicago, where a championship team was quickly broken down and sold for parts. A corollary to that would be more buyouts.

There might be ways to fiddle with the administration of the CBA and allay those concerns; it’s also surely possible to make escrow repayments less plodding. As one player pointed out, if the NHL can set the next year’s salary range within a few weeks of the season ending, surely they have an idea of what the revenues were.

But based on multiple discussions with team and other sources, it would appear the league’s remedy of choice there is simply to increase revenues.

According to one source, the NHL’s hope is the new national U.S. television rights deal, which may well be shared among multiple networks, could triple the take it currently receives from NBC Sports Group.

That 10-year deal – negotiated while late Philadelphia Flyers owner Ed Snider was chair of Comcast Spectacor, whose regional sports networks were folded into NBC by its parent company Comcast in 2011 – brings in an estimated $200 million each year. (Vlasic called the arrangement “a joke.”)

Boosting that number to $600-$700 million wouldn’t be transformational in the way the NBA’s new megabucks broadcast contract was, but it might goose revenues on the margin to a point where the need for escrow is alleviated, if not entirely obviated. (It would help if the Canadian dollar picked up steam at some point, too.)

Bettman is also said to be bullish on eventual revenues from digital streaming deals – akin to what other leagues like MLB and the NFL are doing – and legalized sports betting in the U.S.

“Gary thinks there’s a pot of gold there,” a source who is familiar with Bettman’s thinking said of the gambling piece of the equation.

Ownership’s ask

There is no sense cracks are appearing in the owners’ resolve (on the contrary), but that doesn’t mean everything is tickety-boo either.

Multiple sources report widespread annoyance at the way the Ottawa Senators will skirt the spirit, if not the letter, of the CBA next season by spending $15 million on contracts being paid to injured players in order to reach the cap floor. Roughly 80 percent of those salaries are covered by insurance.

It’s not a popular tactic, particularly among teams that are paying into revenue sharing – Ottawa has been a regular recipient in recent years.

What if there’s a move to try and close those sorts of loopholes? Can it be done without creating problems elsewhere? The PA would surely be willing to sign off on a proposal that will make teams spend more actual money on actual active players, but the association is also a firm believer in the law of unintended consequences.

This is all hypothetical for now. It could become very real, however.

Other teams are unhappy with the current provisions for restricted free agents. The Athletic’s Craig Custance tapped into that discontent recently; the main issue from the owners’ perspective is to find a way to avoid big-time overpays for players on second and third contracts. The Maple Leafs have been unafraid to use their financial clout to lock up their youngsters; teams with less wherewithal are understandably dischuffed at what they’re seeing.

What if, for example, the league wanted to fiddle with the RFA rules or change the requirements for arbitration eligibility as a way to constrain salary inflation, essentially imposing term limits on second and third contracts by funneling more RFAs towards arbitration?

That possibility is being mooted by some within the industry; it’s not on the table as far as I’ve been able to establish, but what if the idea, or another like it, was dropped in there at some point in the talks?

The players would freak, for one.

There are also carrots for the owners to dangle. There are reports, for instance, that the two sides are haggling over a framework that would see a World Cup staged in 2021; it’s not impossible to imagine the league finding a way for NHL players to participate at the 2022 Olympics, although some of the sources canvassed on the players’ side view international competitions mostly as a side issue.

Sometimes side issues have a way of sneaking to the centre of the table, however.

NHLPA demography

The league is turning over quickly, and the membership of the PA is skewing younger. This is not news, but the reality might be a little more stark than it first appears.

According to Hockey-Reference.com, of the 906 men who played at least one NHL game in 2018-19 a grand total of 131 were over the age of 30 (28 of them were 35 and older). That’s down from 170 out of 839 (60 of whom were 35-plus) when the last lockout ended in 2013.

In fairness, the number of teenagers who played in the league last season (22) is not exactly an order of magnitude larger than in 2013 (it was 18 that year); it is also well short of the high-water mark of the past decade, which was 33 in 2016-17.

But take a look at the top-30 scorers from last year and you’ll find a majority (16) were 25 and younger, and nine were 23 or younger. Not only are players, in general, getting younger, but a growing share of the NHL’s upper-echelon players are still on entry-level deals or second contracts.

As one agent highlighted, the maximum base salary for a rookie is $925,000 for 2019-20; to a young player playing a prominent role on his team, that figure won’t feel like a massive premium over the league minimum, which is set at $700,000.

The PA’s membership demographic is shifting, which presumably will mean a commensurate shift in priorities at some point.

“The young guys don’t give a shit – they’re just trying to figure out how to stay in the league and hit their bonuses,” said a source who works with multiple NHL players on entry-level deals.

To hear agents tell it, younger players are woefully undereducated when it comes to labour squabbles past. (This was corroborated in my discussions with members of the under-22 crowd.)

It’s trickier to whip troops into a fighting frenzy for the latest chapter of the greater conflict when they haven’t read the previous ones.

If there is one aspect of contract negotiations that Fehr knows a thing or two about, it’s building and consolidating support for the cause. His illustrious track record speaks for itself. But how is that cause going to be defined, exactly? What might the rallying cry sound like?

Maybe there will be an unforeseen flashpoint.

For instance, last week’s news that Washington Capitals centre Evgeny Kuznetsov will serve a four-year ban from international hockey for a positive cocaine test at the most recent World Championships may stir unhappy memories of the 20-game penalty handed down to Golden Knights defenceman Nate Schmidt last year for violating the league’s performance-enhancing drug policy by testing positive for a trace amount of a banned substance.

The circumstances are completely different, of course, but the automatic nature of the sanction doled out to Schmidt rankled many within the PA rank and file. It seems unlikely at this point Kuznetsov will face further punishment from the league, which appears to be treating the affair as a behavioural health matter.

As for the mechanics of what happens next, it appears at this point the decision to opt-out (or not) from the CBA will belong to the NHLPA’s executive board. That body includes the player representatives from all 31 teams and their alternates; Fehr also has a seat but does not get a vote. It’s at least notionally possible the executive will decide to consult the full membership in the next few weeks as players finish filtering back to their NHL homes.

The opt-out was a topic of summer conversation in some player circles. Well, the crowd Boston Bruins forward Brad Marchand runs with, at any rate.

“We do (talk about it), for sure, more now than ever because we need to make a decision,” Marchand said. “But it’s a lot tougher because guys are spread out in different time zones. Obviously now we need to talk about it more and look at it a lot more closely.”

As to the central concern, Marchand said: “(Escrow) is probably the biggest point. But there’s a lot of things that go into escrow. (The league) may have different views. There’s a lot of different stuff we need to talk about.”

Those conversations are ongoing. So are talks between the league and PA, which are expected to continue this week. It’s safe to assume that if the situation were either tense or irreconcilable, there would be public-relations jockeying underway to seize the high ground; there is no such maneuvering.

Perhaps the parties will succeed in sticking to the path of labour peace, but given the structural issues involved and the incentives at play, they’re seldom far from straying off it.

Summer’s not yet over. It can be hard to see through the haze.

(Photo: Graig Abel/World Cup of Hockey via Getty Images)