I always marvel at the fact that National Hockey League Commissioner Gary Bettman almost always wends his way to Toronto for a little give and take with we professionals like to call "the hockey media from the centre of the hockey universe" at the start of the season.

After all, it's not as if he's welcome with open arms in The Big Grump and it's a given that if he opted to stay in New York he wouldn't get near the number of questions built around the concept that there is something wrong with The Game and The League.

Now there are reasons for that. Chief among them is that in New York and in the United States for that matter, this time of the year few people care. There's a sense-- enhanced by the lockout season of 2004-05-- that nobody cares about the NHL south of the border because it has been reduced to "in other sports news" status there.

I can understand that argument and I can even acknowledge that in some pockets of media throughout the country, it has an element of truth. But the bigger truth is that while hockey fans care, it's also football season (pro and college) and that the baseball playoffs are under way and that golf is finishing up its lesser championships and NASCAR is running toward resolution of its points championships.

If the Commissioner were to come forward with a state of the league address in the U.S. this week the big questions wouldn't centre on what he had to say. They would centre on whether or not anyone would come out to ask them.

It's different in Canada and especially in Toronto and so give the Commissioner some credit for not just recognizing the obvious, but for wading into what is largely a hostile crowd.

Now there are reasons for that too and not the least of them is that the Toronto Maple Leafs annually offer no hope of success. That seems to keep "da boys" on a relatively sharp edge. If the Leafs were one of the more successful franchises in the league in terms of winning, I've long thought that we in media would tend to be a less inclined to see everything in the NHL's world as a problem.

I can't prove that theory because the Leafs have never really given me a chance to see them in all of their glory (unless of course I watch Leafs Classics in black and white), but nevertheless, the Commissioner comes to town, the media assembles and the problems are addressed so to speak.

Now it needs to be noted that in "addressing" the problems the Commissioner rarely acknowledges there are any. He simply accepts the question, points out that it's not really a problem, just something to be dealt with and then applies the proper spin.

Nashville? Not a problem, just the normal give and take of a complicated purchase agreement, intones the boss.

Rick Tocchett's gambling conviction? It's a wait and see affair, barely acknowledging that it's been over a year since Tocchett took "a leave of absence."

Expansion? "It's a marvel that we're even talking about it."

New York Rangers Marketing Revolt, a clear challenge to his stewardship? "Unfortunate," he says and "we'll deal with it".

Players Union Chaos? A rising tide of vicious hits to the head? The still unresolved issue regards mandatory face shields? Complaints about the ever-rising salary cap and the perceived advantage of big market teams? Issues with poor television ratings in the States? Rumours of a return to ESPN and the demise of a less-than lucrative deal with NBC?

They are all addressed and dismissed with the kind of slips and slides one might see on Dancing with the Stars because it's all good in the NHL. It's kind of like when you go see that black-sheep uncle. You get the "Hey how ya doing, good to see ya" greeting, but never quite get a handle on whether or not you're ever going to see that money he owes you.

It's all understandable and, to be fair, a part of the job. But for once we'd like to hear the Commish put it all on the table. Since he won't, or perhaps can't, we here at Sportsnet.Ca. decided to do it for him.

Our take:

On Nashville: "It's a dog's breakfast, a convoluted deal brought about by going into a market that could likely never support or even embrace the game in the first place. I had my doubts from the get-go, but they put a great lease on the table. (Owner) Craig Leipold jumped at it and hey, it's not like he's going to lose any money in the end. It's complicated. I had to drag in some out-of-town people to fund most of it because I sure wasn't going to let anyone scoop it up and plunk in down in the heart of Maple Leafs Sports and Entertainment's cash grab, but then that's what they pay me the big bucks for.

If this deal falls through we can replay the scenario in Kansas City because everyone knows there's always a sucker with a new building on the line, but my big fear is that the RIM people take another stab at it. If these guys get me or the franchise sale into court, then we've got real problems that I'll never even mention to you guys."

On Tocchett: "Come on, the guy was running a sports betting ring and it was under the nose of the most famous player the game has ever known and it involved his wife, the team's general manager and who knows how many others? I'm supposed to let him skate because Wayne Gretzky left the gate open for him? Look, even a lousy New Jersey investigation managed to wrangle out a plea bargain in which he pleaded guilty, that's guilty, not "no contest" or "I didn't know", guilty. Am I supposed to say it's OK, you pleaded guilty to running a sports betting ring while standing behind the bench of an NHL team. Not exactly video taping the other team's signs now is it? Hell yeah I'll nail him, but not until my guy gives me something more to hang him with."

Expansion: "Look, I've said this before and I'll say it again. As long as there is a sucker out there willing to pony up cash that goes directly to the pockets of the people who pay my salary, I'm all for it. And just to keep you guys off my back I'm going to dangle a return to Canada. Now I'm not going to admit Phoenix was a mistake, but hey, there's a building in Winnipeg and if they ever got their act together in Quebec City, well, I'll just float it out there, you guys will do the rest simply because it's Canada."

The NHLPA: "I said we believe in a strong union, but since the NHLPA doesn't have one at the moment, we'll do what we want. What are they going to do, call Bob Goodenow?"

Visors: "I'm waiting for Don Cherry to get himself fired before I put that one in the rule book. Just one more knock on the French or Euros and I'll be calling Itech."

The Rangers: "This is coming from Jim Dolan. He needs the money to pay off that $11 million sexual harassment suit and maybe needs more if that one filed by the New York Rangers ice girls comes to court. I'll worry about him the day he does one thing right."

Blows to the Head?: "Come on, their hockey players. For every one that goes down I've got a dozen to take their place. Hell, I could just substitute the NHLPA bargaining committee from 2005 and they'd jump at the chance to take another shot to the head. Besides, the fans love it. It's only you weasels in the media who make an issue about it. You guys, honestly, I gotta go. Hey, this isn't going to be on TV is it?" a