Three of the four major professional sports leagues have collective bargaining agreements which will expire later this year. In the NBA and NFL, discussions between management and labor have been contentious for at least the last year, with threats of work stoppages all too real and quite likely. That makes MLB an outlier, as there has been little tension in its ongoing labor discussions, even though its CBA will run out only a few months after the other two leagues’. The NHLPA authorized a one-year extension of its current agreement in the fall, allowing its CBA to expire after the 2011-12 season, but under the terms of the agreement, no further extension can be negotiated between the union and league. With Donald Fehr brought in to helm the NHLPA’s side of future talks, the players there aren’t looking to go soft at the table.
Before we get into the details, I’ve put together an overview of each league’s current CBA, sans drug testing details. Next week, each league will get its own post and in depth analysis. For now, take a look at the table and if any questions or corrections come to mind, throw them into comments. Every effort has been made to verify all of the data in the table, including each league’s CBA documents when possible. Still, there may be some issues with what’s reported, so here’s your chance to fact check. It’s also your opportunity to steer the discussion in a certain direction if you so choose.
I look forward to your questions and comments. Until then, enjoy the rest of the football weekend. My thoughts are with those who were senselessly hurt or killed at the Tucson atrocity today, and their families.
newballpark.org 
re: With Donald Fehr brought in to helm the NHLPA’s side of future talks, the players there aren’t looking to go soft at the table.
If the players want to “get tough” again, Bettman will let them sit for a year again. Owners will want a greater percentage of revenues and maybe a longer wait period for unrestricted free agency. Players can either take it or leave it or go play in the KHL and hope they don’t get injured.
pjk; The NHL somehow managed to recover and get to almost credibility when it comes to professional sports. I think a strike or lockout would kill all of that.
Reading a post on Lookout Landing got me thinking. Do we have a comparison, somewhat like this one, for the TV Contracts for the AL West?
Zonis: The NHL knows two things: Its players have an average of only 3 years to make NHL money, and NHL fans are passionate and loyal and have already proven they will come back in droves after a year without NHL hockey. Fehr holds none of the cards here.
@pjk – The NHL knows one other thing. Its grasp over its emerging markets (Sun Belt) is rather weak while its traditional Northern markets keep the league afloat. It’s not the old teams they need to worry about, it’s the new ones.
@Zonis – If I had concrete numbers for what the A’s were making I could make a comparo.
@ST – The NFL has tried it on multiple occasions, the most recent being last summer. They failed. It’s more a matter of there being too much inertia behind MLB’s exemption than anything else.
ML – Curious your thoughts on why other sports institutions like the NFL doesn’t go through litigation to get an AE similar to MLB?
Marine Layer(Quote)
re: @pjk – The NHL knows one other thing. Its grasp over its emerging markets (Sun Belt) is rather weak while its traditional Northern markets keep the league afloat. It’s not the old teams they need to worry about, it’s the new ones.
…the league put teams in Atlanta, Phoenix, etc in hopes of gaining some sort of large US “footprint” for a so-far mythical Big $$ US TV deal. The time might be nearing to move teams like Fla, Atlanta, Nashville, for starters, to places like Quebec City, WInnipeg, Hamilton.
@pjk- I agree why is the NHL is cities in “non-traditional” markets like what you mentioned above while Canadian cities would make the NHL far more $$ overall….so strange.
Even the NBA is in terrible markets (Memphis, Sacramento, Minnesota, New Orleans, Milwaukee, Indiana, Charlotte) Instead of being in (Bay Area-2nd team, New York-3rd team, LA-3rd team, Chicago-2nd team, Baltimore, Vancouver-Seattle)
Instead of carving up bigger markets that have fans with $$, corporate sponsors to go around, large television network deals, and are generally popular basketball markets.
One could argue well those markets have thriving franchises (Warriors, Bulls, Lakers, Knicks) but the NBA is bleeding so much money in those other markets that it is an unequal system. The rich get richer and the poor keep losing money.
The NBA knows they have to make radical changes such moving a few teams or contract teams as their current rev-share system does not work at all.
That is why I think San Jose will get an NBA team in the future, Chicago should add another team, and LA/NY can easily support a 3rd team each.
I say this from a purely business perspective and not a “fan perspective”. Of course Lakers, Knicks, Warriors, and Bulls fans will “scoff” at the idea and say people will not just start rooting for another team all of a sudden.
My response is there so few “hardcore” fans and so many “casual fans” you have to play to the majority and economics of these kinds of fans. Not to mention the low # of corporations in these small markets kill the main stream of revenue for their teams. While there are under served big markets like San Jose with corporations willing to spend $$ on basketball.