I don't think it's a typographical error but a deliberate hint that such lenses are in testing with select photographers.
In my opinion the 200/2 and 300/2.8 are both due updates. I find the 70-200/2.8 for example to have more consistent AF than the 200/2 (II), and both the focusing motor and VR system have become more sophisticated in the newer lenses (less jitter and audible noise, more precise) there is also the question of weight reduction and image quality with TCs which tends to improve with the FL designs. The 300/2.8 tripod foot should be made more rigid. Canon's versions of both lenses are significantly lighter and I believe these things affect system choice and via system choice, substantial revenue for the manufacturer. As for mirrorless, I don't think Nikon have the technology to make a top professional sports mirrorless body at the present time and suspect this might not appear for another four years. Also Nikon seems to regard the delay in the EVF substantial enough that it affects the best sports photographers and therefore they are likely to continue to develop DSLRs for these applications, along with appropriate lenses. Notice that Canon recently produced ultra light weight 400/2.8 and 600/4 and they too are DSLR lenses, so the development and competition in this sector continues.
