In response to Bookboy007's comment:
SanDog, if people are going to suggest bringing in Michalek and Stastny, two overpriced underperforming players with big names, I can start hating now.
The actual number of the cap doesn't matter - the cap would always be 7% of eligible revenues higher under the pre-lockout deal than the current deal. Basically, take the current cap amount, divide by .5, then mulitply by .57. If the revenues justify $71M under this deal, they would have sent the cap to $80.9M under the old deal. If the cap rises to $81M under this deal, it would be $92.3 under the old deal. Every year of a $10M gap = $300M league wide. So after two years, the owners have at least recouped the money they lost to the lockout by not paying it to the players.
Factor it at $300M/yr over ten years of the deal and yeah, the lockout looks really smart to me.
You and Bostonfan are on a different page then, then I believe Sandog and I.
Of course, if the league had merely extended the old deal, the lock-out makes perfect sense. Certainly not what I'm inferring though. The current revenue split wasn't really that tough a negotiation. By anyones standard, a split virtually the same was a walk in the park. This thing should have wrapped up by the 2nd week of Oct at the latest.