It was a year ago at the NFL Players Association in Hawaii that DeMaurice Smith was elected as the executive director to follow in the path of Gene Upshaw.
Now, players are huddled in Hawaii bracing for an unknown future with the possibility of a work stoppage in 2011 looming closer.
Linebacker Hunter Hillenmeyer, the Bears' player representative, is attending the meetings hoping that the NFL will soon find a sense of urgency to move toward an agreement that will put the game, the league and its players on solid footing for years to come.
"We, as players, are getting pretty frustrated with the owners lack of urgency," Hillenmeyer said. "While it's a virtual certainty that this league year will start with all the poison pills in place on both sides, it's my sincere hope that we don't wait 51 weeks from right now to make any substantive progress towards an agreement."
"The owners' first proposal would have taken us back over two decades in terms of players' percentage of revenues. They know the offer is ludicrous, and they know that we know that. Rather than leaving that as their only offer for the next year, and trying to anchor us at some unrealistic number, I wish we could move on to real, substantive, interest-based negotiations.
"They cited higher risks on the cost side in terms of growing the game through stadium deals and things like that. To acknowledge that real concern, our counterproposal made huge strides in terms of cost sharing like the G3 for capital investments that would grow the game. However, the owners' proposal would have players pay for everything from tape in the training room to travel costs to the rent for our practice facility. Literally, they asked players to pay rent to come in to work every day."
It's a delicate matter with the interests varied on both sides, as Hillenmeyer has said in the past. Not every owner has the same specific interest in mind, just like there are varying priorities depending on what player you speak to about the issues.
Nothing substantive has happened, and the damage right now has been done for the more than 200 restricted free agents who would have been unrestricted under the previous system. Perhaps the players can come up with some fresh ideas while meeting in Hawaii. From their standpoint, the owners haven't shown a desire to really tackle the issues at this point.
"Obviously, players and owners will not agree on everything, but both parties are certainly aligned in wanting to grow the game," Hillenmeyer said. "Players are willing and eager to help sew the fabric of that future given that our sacrifices today will continue to benefit players in the future."
Register with Chicago Tribune and receive Bears, Bulls, and Blackhawks newsletters for free. 
When sports news breaks, be the first to know. (To get alerts on a mobile device, text CHISPORTS to 31286.). 
Get our updates on 
@idc
It is people like you with you mentality that makes companies leave for places such as Singapore, Taiwan and China.
And when those companies leave where will you find work? You keep shouting out "oh I can't believe that you support the owners" mantra. However if the NFL were just to disappear where will the players get their money? Will there be another football league to pay them top dollar for their services. Think Arena Football pay that kind of money to its players. How about CFL and the IFL?
Look you need a lesson in simple economics. Right now there are more people than there are jobs. Now I'm not saying that players should work for lower pay, no pension, and no benefits. I'm not saying that at all. However, with what players make, there is no reason to complain and threaten a strike/lockout. They can take some concessions and still make way way more than the average person. They can still buy that big house and fleet of luxuary cars.
The players are not poor. I know the owners are not poor either but common sense tells you that business owners will ALWAYS be richer than its employees. That is common sense.
Nobody owes anybody anything in life idc. You seem to forget that.
If the NFL has a work stoppage either by lockout or strike, I am done. The games are over priced and the majority of the players are jerks in public or have sub standard seasons of performance. You can make a valid argument for both sides. The owners have to market, build the stadium, provide training facilities, arrange travel, etc. The players, it is up to them to perform on a high level week after week. With that being said, there is enough money for both sides, no one has the upper hand. The players on the average make enough money to get by after playing and the owners turn a obscene profit if they decide to sell the team.
The dinosaurs died from drug overdoses?
You learn something new every day.
ldc on March 14, 2010 8:52 PM
______________
I thought all you clowns already died from drug overdoses. Go away dinosaur, your kind isn't wanted anymore.
All of you going against the players are exactly why we are in a financial crisis.
No American should just be happy to have a job, when corporations earn money hand over fist, then look to the government to protect themselves from their own corruption.
At a time when these companies were cutting salaries and telling people they needed to sacrifice, each was still cooking the books and making investments as a means of maintaining high profits.
You want to defend them, but bark against people who call them out for their B.S.?
People deserve to earn a fair share of profit based upon their labor. If that is 2 million per year, its 2 million per year.
Stop letting these corrupt business owners get away with literal murder because you are jealous over what someone else makes.
Labor is labor, and exploitation is exploitation.
Big fan of the NFL.
Not really interested in who is right or who is wrong.
If they strike I will have no sympathy for either side and I will find other things to do. When they come back, I will to.
If either side wants to strike or lockout, you will lose a ton of $$
If you don't like your job, leave it. There are a ton of qualified guys waiting in line for it and you will be forgotten within weeks.
I would have no problem with these guys being fired and a new more energized and appreciative group of players put in to replace them if they are unhappy with the life they are privileged enough to lead isn't enough for them.
Right, I'm supposed to feel sorry for Mike and Virginia. What the heck is wrong with you people?
To Big Bob in SC:
The player who Vince Lombardi was dealing with was Pro Bowl C Jim Ringo. The trade was to then doormat Philadelphia.
I feel absolutely no sympathy for Hillenmeyer or the players in this "dispute", if they don't like the offer they are free to get another job, they already received a free education that will help them more than the rest of us.
Players won't be getting any more money because there isn't any more to go around. Advertiser and TV revenues are LESS than they were a couple of years ago. That is why the major networks are hurting badly. Companies finally woke up and realized they could no longer afford to throw away millions of dollars a year sponsoring football. Many of these former sponsors simply can't afford to do it anymore (GM, Ford, etc.). Less money is coming into the league. A players strike would be the end of the NFL as we know it.
I would have no problem with another lockout if it means the players have to be held to a higher standard. The players are interchangeable rentals, the league is the product and if the players continue to try to ruin the league with their selfish demands, out with the old and let the next batch come in.
Been a fan for 70 years. Some of the best ball I ever saw in the pros was during the strike years. They played as though they enjoyed the game, their opportunity and there were no end zone performances to sicken my stomach.
Two major mistakes the owners made over the years are;
1. Allowing a union. I believe in unions and workers rights but the NFLPA has gone way, way overboard.
2. Allowing agents on the premises and giving in to their demands. Where else are their clients going to go?
I never liked Vince Lombardi but years ago he had a player come in to talk about his contract. The player wanted his agent with him. Lombardi asked them to wait in his outer office for a few minutes. When he called them in, he said they were talking to the wrong person. He's just traded the player. He wouldn't talk to agents.
I am sick of people taking the owners side.
All owners do is get paid. They aren't out there risking literally risking their necks every week on the job.
They aren't the reason all of you log onto this site and whine over every single signing, concerned whether or not it will improve the team.
They have created a system which allows ownership to cut players who underperform with little compensation. Yet these same terrible owners still get paid for being terrible owners.
Owners don't even pay for their own facilities. They ask for your taxes to subsidize the privilege of sitting in a luxury box and get paid.
Yet you all will actually sit here and take the side of ownership, because you think nfl players make too much money.
They don't. YOU don't make ENOUGH money probably for what YOU do. YOU allow yourself to work for some rich person who does nothing but make money, and say nothing about it.
That's why I like the Players Union. Whether you like it or not, they are making sure their members take home a significant share of the money made by the NFL.
After all, it their blood, sweat and tears that lead you to watch -- not ownership
BoooHooo....I'm real sad for all of these rich millionaires.
If the players want a share of ownership, then they should start a new league.
Because of the big bucks...the players no longer can associate with the fans. The reason most can't go to see a game with the family is because it is unaffordable.
Hillenmeyer, don't cry on the fans shoulder. We aren't listening.
Bring on the replacement players. No crybabies in this group.
my understanding is that the biggest sticking point is in the percentage of revenue sharing for the players. the way I understand it is that the owners want to give the players a smaller percentage of a growing pool of money. kind of like asking someone to take a smaller piece of a bigger pie.
what the f**k is wrong with you players? the 2007 minimum salary for players was $285K. you a$$ holes really need to realize that there's an awful lot of VERY hard working people out there who don't even make 10 percent of that.
the 2008 AVERAGE salary was about $720K.
the players are a batch of d*ckheads. take the smaller piece of the bigger pie, morons, it'll wind up being more money in the long run, and who gives a rat's aaaaaaaa$$ what the percentage is?
my understanding is that the owners want to put that money into the pension fund, anyhow. what, you f**cking douchebags can't get by on 285 THOUSAND DOLLARS?
your mamas should BITCH-SLAP YOU.
I'd give my left nut to make that kind of money, even for just one year. you a$$ holes.
get a grip, you idiots. you PLAY A GAME FOR A LIVING.
fools.
Does the players' idea of revenue sharing include endorsement deals, appearance fees, books deal, and the benefit their celebrity gives them after retirement?
I take neither players nor owners side. The players are paid far beyond their worth, and the owner's greed knows no bounds. And in all they are used by the Incredibly wealthy beyond imagining nebulous owners of our government, our corporations, our media, and pretty much everything else on this planet.
The entire sport is intended as a distraction. Subterfuge meant to keep us from considering and possibly acting out against the inequities and injustices of our "American" business model. Yes it's important to the people who make their livings from it, but it seems very much to me the same as the gladiatorial games of ancient Rome. A distraction for the "Mob" to maintain their favor.
The Owners probably won't make enough to suit their own greed, but seriously, who cares? They don't step out on that field and risk getting THEIR spines shoved out their A$$E$, so why in hell should THEY take the lions share of the money. As I have always insisted, let those who DO the work, reap the reward.
As for the pencil necked, white collared, bean pinching, mid level managers who merely serve the REAL wealth and power, let them feast on the scraps that are left to those who would elevate themselves at the hazard posed to others.
Then let the games...begin.
Look, I love the NFL, and think it is the best sport out there, hands down. But I find it extraordinarily difficult to take the players' side in this when they are having their annual meeting in Hawaii (Maui no less). It really slaps us fans in the face when they hold their meetings in tropical locales and stay at posh resorts to talk about how sorry their lot in life is right now.
With people out of work all over the country, and a lot more struggling to keep their head above water, a little discretion and moderation would be prudent...
I can see the owners' side about taking all of the risk to grow the game, but they also have to realize that the players have given up guaranteed salaries in a game where your career can be over in 1 play. That is no small risk in playing the game, not just growing the game.
As far as paying for tape in the training room, how is that different from teachers, who are grossly underpaid, being asked to pay for their own supplies if they want to do anything more than the bare minimum? They suck it up and deal with it, and the players should as well.
Again, don't want to see a work stoppage, but somewhere along the line, these guys have lost touch with the reality that their fan base doesn't give a rat's a@@ about their revenue sharing plan. Making it public is only going to hurt their cause, and make more people side with the owners, because employees bearing more of the burden for the business happens all over the country, in all sorts of industries.
This should be simple. The players should have a consistent amount of the revenue sharing that they do today, with a separate pool of money devoted to growing the game (maybe 10-15% of total league generated revenue, both sides sharing equally in the investment, as well as the benefit), where owners and players give a portion of those revenues for the "greater good". For the first 3 years of the new CBA, use those "growth" revenues to find the retiree recovery for the players who are currently without any significant benefits. Put in a rookie salary cap like the NBA, enhance the current retiree benefit plan, and be done with it.
This can get done if both sides take a bit of a reality pill, and stop kicking the fans in the junk while they do it.
Maybe Hunter can find a sense of urgency to play defense or whatever his job description might be?
In net revenue the players take up 65% right?
I don't believe the players have any right to speak of fear, losing costs and etcetera.
I hope the owners ignore the players. Times are tough and like every other employee in any line of work, NFL players have to make sacrifices too.