DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum Big 10 names its divisions for football

oops!

I wanted Mich and tOSU in the same division because I like the game at the end of the year. Yes I know it will still be there....for now. They didn't guarantee it would stay forever. Just let it happen once that one of the teams miss out on a BCS bowl game because they lost back to back weeks and there will be a push to move it. It's all about money and if the set up costs them they will take action.

Eventually the tOSU vs Michigan regular season game will be at the end of October.

Besides that I actually do like the set up. It's not too bad and I don't think there were many senarios that would of made it too much better (as in balanced).

The division names are stupid. The logo.....could have been better as well. I actually liked this person's Logo

I really don't see a problem with the divison names.

That logo does suck though.

The Big Ten may be in for a lawsuit. I think i9 uses those names for the divisions in their 1st grade flag football league.

Quote:

---

The division names are stupid. The logo.....could have been better as well. I actually liked this person's Logo

---

I agree if it was done professionally it wouldn't look half bad,,I like it!

As for the division names, they really couldn't think of something better than that? I understand somewhat their reasoning behind it but it seems like outdated logic, or just,,just I don't know it is dumb.

I understand they did the realignment without using geography like everyone else which would make naming divisions easier, but there HAS to be something better. I do like someone's idea of the "black" and "blue" divisions since Big 10 football is known as smash-mouth, grind it out football. That would fit IMO.
I also kinda dig OSU/mich in opposite divisions b/c it has the opportunity to make the game mean so much more and can possibly set up another chance for one at redemption, or a chance to rub salt in the wound

I agree that I don't see us meeting for two times in a season... but in 06 we would have... OSU and UM both undefeated... OSU beats UM but that would mean UM would have still won their division, OSU wins their division and they'd meet again for the Big Ten Championship game...

but overall I agree that I don't think it'd happen all that often...

web page

Michael Arace commentary: Hey, Big Ten, the nation is laughing at you
Wednesday, December 15, 2010 02:52 AM
By Michael Arace

The Columbus Dispatch

It has been a mere two days since the Big Ten announced, in a television event, that it was naming its football divisions "Leaders" and Legends." Not since Geraldo Rivera opened Al Capone's vault has a Chicago happening so transfixed the nation. The joke writers already have writer's cramp.

Fans are going to be talk-talk-talking about this until the Big Ten wises up and sheds their silly nomenclature. In the interim, there is but one local benefit to Monday's announcement: Discussion of the Blue Jackets' new mascot, Boomer, has ceased.

Yes, the Jackets can tell the Big Ten a few things about the vagaries of re-branding. New third jersey? Fairly well-received. New tubular, blow-up cannon? Boom! The message boards went crazy with anatomical jokes.

And so they did all over America yesterday. Big Ten fans were asking, "What about Great Lakes and Great Plains, or Lakes and Plains, or Central and Midwest, or East and West? Wouldn't A and B have been better?"

Good questions, all.

Michael Wilbon on the ESPN show Pardon the Interruption said: "This is so dumb. It's so pretentious. I'd expect that out of the Ivy League. I wouldn't expect that of the Big Ten."

Wilbon is a proud Northwestern alumnus. He's on the inside of the angst.

From the outside, the Big Ten has long been perceived as at least a bit arrogant, and at least a tad overrated. Now, just as Big Ten football is regaining some strength and legitimacy, especially with the addition of Nebraska, its brand is now pumped with more flatulence than ever.

Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany obviously has a sense of humor. How else does he explain the Carolina blue utilized in the new logo, which includes the number 16? Oops. Those who can laugh at themselves can have a fine time surfing the comments sections of different websites, including that of this paper.

From Dispatch.com:

"Should have named them Hope and Change."

"After sleeping on it, it's worse than I thought."

"They must have the same PR department the Blue Jackets do."

"How about Dungeons and Dragons?"

"Sadly, to be a Legend, you also have to be a has-been."

Chuck from Hilliard offered a number of alternatives, including, "Dumb and Dumber, Fat and Slow, Rust and Belt, Delany and Fired."

And someone from Cincinnati going by the handle "Maruice(sic) Clarett" offered "Gator Bait and Tiger Treats."

Not bad.

It should be said that there was a minority that actually liked the division names.

From Deadspin.com:

"In unrelated news, the ACC has renamed its two divisions from Atlantic and Coastal to Northern Liberals and Southern Crackers"

"Why name your divisions after strip clubs in the metropolitan areas of the fair cities in which the Big Ten universities reside? Is this some kind of skin sponsorship deal?"

"Where's the 2?"

From ESPN.com:

"If you are still going to be calling it the Big Ten, then you need to embrace the fact that you have twelve teams. Call the division with (Penn State) Eleven and the one with Nebraska Twelve.(That's actually an interesting proposal, playing on the conference's past, present and future.)

"Then it's the Big 10-11 and the Big 10-12, which flows well."

"Legends or Leaders, the LOL divisions."

Referring to the new trophy for the conference quarterback of the year, someone sniffed, "Nice to be downwind of that Griese-Brees."

And a Nebraskan wrote, "Maybe we should have just stayed in the Big 12 and had the better logo."

Lastly, this from CBSSports.com: "As an active Dungeons & Dragons Elf Lord, I am offended to be lumped into this article about the Big Ten! I cast a spell on Ye All!!!"

Until the conference comes to its senses, it's going to be a hard go for the fans of the Leaders and the Legends. I might suggest a healthy sense of humor - one greater than Delany's, even - is an ironclad requirement.

All one can do is nod, smile, laugh and wait.

Michael Arace is a sports reporter for The Dispatch.

marace@dispatch.com

i know it's a blog, but it's from a recognized ESPN blogger. If it gets deleted, oh well.

http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/21173/big-ten-to-reconsider-division-names

ESPN - Adam Rittenburg

The reaction to the Big Ten's unveiling of its new football division names -- Legends and Leaders -- has been almost universally negative.

The outcry about the names has been substantial from fans, media members and casual observers. After reading dozens of e-mails from passionate Big Ten fans, I can say that most of you simply don't like these names.

The good news? Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany hears you.

Delany on Thursday acknowledged the negative reaction in an interview with WGN Radio in Chicago. The commissioner also for the first time acknowledged the possibility of re-evaluating the names and changing them in the near future.

"We've had enough experience with names and expansion and development of divisions that we know that you rarely get a 90 percent approval rating," Delany told WGN AM-720. "But to get a 90 percent non-approval rating was really surprising. It showed that we didn’t connect with our fans in a way that we wanted to. It’s humbling, to say the least, because we’re trying to build fan bases, not push them away.

"I've been around this business a long time, and I would say it’s one of the more surprising things. There’s a sensibility there that we did not connect with, did not read well."

So what happens next?

"We want it to breathe a little bit," Delany said. "I don’t think you make a judgment in 48 hours or 72 hours. Eventually, we’re going to have to address the issue of whether or not it’s sustainable, but I don’t think that’s a decision for today. We have to listen and we have to be humble about the reactions we’ve gotten.”

This is certainly an encouraging sign. The Big Ten is open to change, and in this case, it should be.

The Big Ten tried to show who it is with Legends and Leaders -- "It was an effort to recognize the past," Delany said -- but in the process failed to resonate with its fans. As a few users have suggested to me, "Legends and Leaders" is a good slogan for the league, but the terms don't work for division names. It's important to note that the Big Ten reached out to fans for suggestions, and a lot of folks felt misled when the names came out.

You want to keep it simple and not confuse the public with similar-sounding, overly general terms.

Delany seems to get that now, and while the division names remain in place for now, he's leaving the door open for change.

"We’re still listening and trying to figure things out," Delany said. "We'll probably make an assessment about whether or not it’s sustainable. We’ll try to do a little education, let it breathe a bit and then probably revisit it after the first of the year.”

Very interesting stuff from the commish. Stay tuned.

I'm actually surprised he admitted that most people didn't like the new names. I fully expected him to pat himself on the back at how great the names were received.

I suppose the Big Ten and Jim get points for admitting it was a failure. More bonus points will get added on when they rename the divisions in January/February (hopefully).

I really liked "Great Lakes and Open Prairies" (or something to that effect). I would have fully accepted "Black and Blue", "Dirt and Grass", or "Hayes and Schembechler" (even though that would have probably pissed the other 10 teams off).

And change the logo while you're at it Jim. Ugh. Heck, I would have changed the name of the conference too.

No way do they ever change the name of the conference. They have too much name recognition, with the corresponding monetary value, to ever do that.

here is the non-blog form of the article

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5930029

Associated Press

CHICAGO -- Jim Delany has spent more than two decades as commissioner of the Big Ten, overseeing two conference expansions and the formation of the Big Ten Network.

None of it prepared him for the overwhelmingly negative reaction to the conference's new division names.

Delany said during an interview with WGN AM-720 in Chicago on Thursday that the names Legends and Leaders were picked to highlight the conference's rich history, and that "to a great extent it's fallen on deaf ears." Many fans have instead mocked the names and asked officials to reconsider, which Delany said could happen after the first of the year.

"I think we have enough experience with names, and expansion and development of divisions, to know that you never, rarely, get 90 percent approval rating," Delany said during the interview. "But to get a 90 percent non-approval rating was, you know, really surprising."

The league will be split into two divisions beginning next season, when Nebraska becomes the 12th member. The Huskers will be joined by Northwestern, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota and Iowa in the Legends Division. Illinois, Indiana, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue and Wisconsin will comprise the Leaders Division.

At least, assuming those are still the names by then.

"We want to breathe a little bit," Delany said. "I don't think you make a judgment in 48 hours or 72 hours. Eventually we're going to have to address the issue of whether or not it's sustainable, but I don't think that's an issue for today."

Delany said the conference chose the divisions based on parity, rather than geography, which made naming them East-West or North-South impractical. The Big Ten also considered using names of historic players or coaches, but Delany said that would have been "too limiting."

The commissioner also said there was little consideration given to changing the conference name from the Big Ten, unlike in 1990, when Penn State became the 11th member.

Delany said university faculty, presidents and alumni supported keeping "Big Ten" and that it represents a brand rather than the number of institutions. The name change also would have affected the branding of the Big Ten Network, which launched in 2007.

"It's humbling, to say the least, because we're trying to build fan bases, not push them away," Delany said of the uproar caused by the new division names. "I was surprised. I've been around this business a long time, and it's one of the more surprising things."


Copyright 2010 by The Associated Press