In its long and storied history, labour negotiations in the CFL have rarely involved much drama.
In recent collective bargaining sessions with its players, the CFL has had all the leverage it's needed via franchises either dealing with or recovering from financial distress. That would include four years ago, when a new deal was struck less than three years after the Hamilton Tiger-Cats and Toronto Argonauts were in bankruptcy, and just a few weeks after the Ottawa Renegades folded.
Which made it rather peculiar when the league offered something to the players it had never before: a guaranteed share of revenues pegged to 56 per cent.
Four years later, that number has become the primary stumbling block in reaching a new deal. And many within the league are asking why such a gesture was made at a time when the CFL was holding all the cards and should have been able to dictate terms as it wanted.
The CFL may have more going for it than it did four years ago, but it still has its financial challenges, especially in Southern Ontario.
With six of nine CFL cities (including Ottawa, which holds a conditional franchise) due to build or expand stadiums within the next five years, there is expected to be a corresponding boom in overall league revenue. Which would be terrific for the league, were it not locked into a deal where 56 per cent of that has to go to the players - a measure that will drive up expenses across the CFL, without the players having to share in the costs associated with those new revenues.
With what is coming on the horizon, the players' union is, understandably, hesitant to unhook that percentage.
So with the positions staked out, what are the chances of a deal being reached before the start of training camps in June? And what happens if there isn't a new labour agreement in place before the start of the regular season on July 1?
It is quite possible there will be no new deal in place before the start of the season, but that's hardly new territory for the CFL. Five years ago, the league and its players couldn't reach an agreement and thus played the 2005 season on the terms of the expired deal. The sides later signed off on a new CBA before the start of the 2006 campaign.
While CFL Players Association president Stu Laird suggested to players in an e-mail last week that the league appears intent on a lockout this time around, the likelihood of that happening is minimal.
The CFL is aware of its potential fragility and would be loath to offend fans, sponsors and business partners by shutting down for any length of time.
The only other way professional three-down football won't be played this summer is if the players go on strike. And that, depending on who you ask, is either highly unlikely or preposterous.
Since CFL players make wages comparable to those of the general public, players would have the same appetite to strike as any person who hadn't been paid since last November - when most CFL players last received a paycheque.
Football players are the toughest group of athletes to keep united in a labour cause. In any situation, going on strike is about making a sacrifice in the short term for the betterment of the long. But due to the physical nature of the sport, most football players aren't around to see the long - especially Americans in the CFL, whose turnover rate is extremely high.
So unless a labour issue concerns something that is going to affect players in a very real, immediate way, motivating them to strike would be an enormous challenge.
Being a league of such modest means isn't always an advantage for the CFL. But when it comes to avoiding a potential work stoppage, the good news is neither side can afford it.