If you've been paying attention to the baseball labor scene for more than 15 minutes in the last six months, it shouldn't come as a shock to anyone that the players are talking about setting a strike date.

For that matter, if you've been paying attention to the baseball labor scene for more than 15 minutes in the last 25 years, it shouldn't come as a shock.

Like Darth Vader and Obi Wan Kenobi, like the Hatfields and McCoys, like Al Davis and the NFL, these two sides have been having the same fight for so long, they don't know any other way to make peace -- besides making war. Or, at least, threatening to make war.

Ever since the owners replaced the now-departed Paul Beeston on their negotiating team, they've made a series of proposals which -- regardless of their merit or lack thereof -- they should have known the Players Association would never accept. They also had to know exactly how the union would react to those proposals -- namely, with anger and suspicion. Which is exactly what happened. And that's where we are now.

Since the formation of the union, not one baseball labor deal has been made without either a work stoppage or the setting of a date for a work stoppage. So this step is all part of a very screwed up process -- and a step we could, or should, have seen coming for months.

"This isn't big news, really," says one prominent baseball man whose optimism about avoiding this step faded long ago. "It's totally expected. It's almost ridiculous that it has to get this far every time. But it always does. It's nothing new, unfortunately."

Still, we need to remember this:

Setting this date doesn't mean there will be a strike. It's just a warning that that's the alternative if these two sides don't send out a search party real soon to look for some common ground.

What should worry everyone is that right now they couldn't see that common ground with the Hubble Telescope. So until one side or the other drastically changes its negotiating tact, there is no reason for optimism.

There's no point in regurgitating all of the issues right now. Either you know them too well or you don't care.

But essentially, ever since the owners replaced the now-departed Paul Beeston on their negotiating team, they've made a series of proposals which -- regardless of their merit or lack thereof -- they should have known the Players Association would never accept. They also had to know exactly how the union would react to those proposals -- namely, with anger and suspicion. Which is exactly what happened. And that's where we are now.

Negotiations getting stormy
What's dangerous, beyond the issues, is that the negotiating climate is as bad as it has ever been -- and that's saying something.

The union team -- still headed by Donald Fehr -- doesn't trust management's team, now led by Bob DuPuy. The owners are busy sending spokesmen around the country telling newspaper editorial boards that the union is stubborn and unwilling to acknowledge the competitive-balance problems that plague the sport.

And essentially, our longstanding rule of thumb on these matters is that the more time either side spends trying to spin public opinion means the less interested it is in trying to negotiate a real, constructive, creative solution.

But the only good part about those rumblings of a strike date is that they ought to serve as a reminder to everyone -- negotiators, owners and players -- that this time, they have no choice but to find a solution. For many reasons.

"I'll say this very honestly: We can't take a strike," says an official of one club. "We just can't afford it. And I know we're not the only ones. I don't know how the Phillies could afford it. I don't know how the Giants could afford it, with all their stadium debt. I don't know how all the clubs with new stadiums or new stadiums on the way could afford it. I don't even know how the Yankees could afford it."

Can the players afford it? They've been setting money aside, so many of them can handle it financially. But if there's another strike that wipes out another postseason, will most Americans be able to look at these players in the same way again? How many Nike commercials will baseball players be asked to do if there's another strike, regardless of who provoked it?

And Bud Selig can't afford another strike, either. Not unless he wants to go down in history as The Commissioner Who Canceled Two World Series. Selig's standard response to that legacy is that the players went on strike, so he had no choice. But the public rarely seems to remember that.

So a strike date forces everyone to the realization that crunch time is approaching. That's good, actually.

We know the players won't cave. That ought to be a given. But all those owners who know their teams can't go down this road will have to do a lot of thinking between now and August.

The owners showed last winter they can lower salaries if they just use their own system better. So now it's all about a revenue-sharing system both sides can live with and a minimum payroll. Get that settled, and the other issues -- from contraction to a worldwide draft -- can fall into place.

That leaves two choices: make a deal or make a war.

If they choose war, the national attack of indigestion that erupted after the mere threat of another strike date will pale against the ugliness that will follow a path that just might kill this sport, once and for all.

Jayson Stark is a senior writer for ESPN.com.