an increase in cap is just an illusion as long as the escrow is in place. The system always makes a 50/50 split in revenue, so all that new spending just gets taken out of escrow later, and that number has been growing. I have to wonder if players with older deals have just about had it.
As for negotiating escrow, I don't see the owners and Bettman moving off of the principle of a 50/50 split. The cap was supposed to go up and down to reflect the economics of the league, but the NHLPA has abused that system by always using the escalator in all the bad years. Why would the owners feel sympathy for them in that? This strategy seems to be only good at bailing out teams with cap problems, but it's all but guaranteeing we lose another season to a lockout once the CBA runs out, as the players assaulted the most from escrow become that disgruntled about it, and every year there are more of them.
Imo the new CBA has to take a bigger proportion of escrow from newer contracts than it does now, and maybe the league should go to a system where players get paid in a percentage of the cap instead of a hard amount, just so escrow is fairer. There should also be more disincentive to use a cap escalator.
