[Ed. Note: Welcome to the first Women's Hockey Notebook featuring the NWHL and CWHL. Every week we’ll feature a main story on one or both of the leagues, followed by a round up of the top news and notes in the women’s hockey universe and preview the weekend games. I fully admit the layout is borrowed from Richard Deitsch’s weekly media column on SI.com.]

Nothing like a little @TimHortons to get the day started right. We LOVE the new cup design. #hockeygirls pic.twitter.com/q3a0GgJ4WA — CWHL (@cwhl_insider) October 21, 2015

When talking about the reasons the NHL has not dipped their mitts into fully supporting a women’s professional hockey league, the WNBA is used as an example. The comparison warranted but not entirely appropriate. It starts at the top.

The WNBA was the brainchild of then-NBA Commissioner David Stern. From ESPNW’s Mechelle Voepel in January 2014:

Part of [Stern’s] vast résumé is the founding of the WNBA in June 1997, thanks to Stern's belief in the concept -- and his ability to sell the NBA's owners on it.

"Without his vision and engagement, the league wouldn't have gotten off the ground," said Val Ackerman, who was the first WNBA president. "He was the mastermind, and the WNBA was really in line with his vision about how sports and society are intertwined.”

Read that last sentence again, “He was the mastermind, and the WNBA was really in line with his vision about how sports and society are intertwined.” Now more than ever is having that understanding critically important to women’s sports.

NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman is a pupil of Stern’s. At least outwardly, he doesn’t share the same conviction of gender equity in sports on many levels. (Too many, actually, but for this purpose of this piece, we’ll focus on the expansion of women’s hockey.)

From ESPN in 2010:

"My own view is it's very important to support women's hockey, to maintain its presence at the Olympics. The way women's hockey will get bigger and better around the world is if there's an inspiration of excellence that people can strive for," Bettman said at the Beyond Sport Summit, designed to promote the use of sports to create social change. "I think it would be a huge mistake for the IOC or the [International Ice Hockey Federation] to consider doing anything that diminishes the role of women's hockey," he said.

To be fair, Bettman is speaking about the women’s hockey in the Olympics and the possibility of the International Olympic Committee removing the games from the lineup. Yet, he opened the door. He knows the growth of the women’s game hinges on the opportunity to strive for something beyond a college title.

At the winter games in Sochi, Bettman was asked about the league’s involvement in women’s hockey by NBC’s Al Michaels. Kevin Kaduk of Yahoo reports:

"We actually had a consultant take a look at this for us," Bettman told Al Michaels Thursday on NBC Sports Network. "The overall development at women's hockey at the grassroots level through the college level isn't at the point where a pro league is viable."

A couple things:

He makes this statement in 2012. The CWHL had been in business for five years by this point with many of the players he’s watching in Sochi in their league. The women are not paid because of the lack of major financial backing BUT they’re still committed to the game while they work. Additionally, the fan base is growing and would see a major bump following the games in Sochi.

Using his reasoning from 2010 combined with his comments in Sochi, if young girls playing hockey need to see success in order to want to play, it needs to happen more than every four years. Making the Olympic roster is a most players goal and it goes to a small select group of players. Men have the opportunity to strive for greatness in the NHL when they aren’t selected for their country’s roster. Without legitimate women’s pro-sports leagues, the dream ends for many in college.

Lastly, he uses the dreaded term ‘viable’ in his response to Michaels. By that, of course, he means a money maker, which in reality, it probably won’t be for a while.

Part of this inability to commit to the women’s game comes from the owners he serves. The NBA and NHL are two totally different entities when it comes to business decisions. The NBA was thriving when the board of governors approved the WNBA business plan in 1996; the league had cemented itself within the Big 3 of American sports. On the other hand, the NHL has had frequent instability as a result of labor battles in the past two decades. The league finds itself having to win its own fans back time after time. It’s the old cliche of taking two steps forward and one step back.