Big Ten to Consider Renaming Legends and Leaders

Donate To GopherHole
Iceland12

Iceland12

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
24,758
Reaction score
2,421
Points
113
A decision could be made by June. It would be for the 2014 season when they add Rutgers and Maryland. Looks like that BTN survey may have struck a little nerve. :cool:

When deciding on division names in December 2010, Delany said the Big Ten "didn't have great options."

"We weren't going to go with 'Bo or Woody,' 'Black or Blue,' or 'Plains or Lakes,' " Delany said. "Obviously we got some acceptance [with Legends and Leaders], but not as much as we would have liked."

Delany said he was a "little surprised" by the backlash when the division names were announced.

"I'm not sure it was a national survey [of people that didn't like the names], but people who hit the 'send' button," Delany said. "I don't take umbrage to negative reaction. I don't necessarily change when I hear it. I think on the other hand, we said we would test-market it, and we have for a couple of years. We have the opportunity to look at it again. I'm sure we will. Whether or not we change or not is to be determined. I don't have any presumption that we'll change on it, but that doesn't mean we're not looking at it.

"I don't think when you try to build something, lead some organization, you don't want to be tone deaf. But it's not up for vote every week."

http://espn.go.com/college-football...ing-legends-leaders-divisions-jim-delany-says
 

Oh, thank goodness. Icons and instigators will be so much easier to remember.
 

Good. They better change them. Those names are just awful. Half the time, I forget which division we are in and who is in which one. It's just terrible overall. Not sure who was in charge of naming the conferences. But whoever came up with the names should get canned. Just my opinion. :)
 

I think they need to change the Big Ten name to reflect the fact that there are more than 10 teams now. But then again, I don't follow football as closely as basketball and the divisions are primarily a football thing. I like "The Big Fourteen Universities" just for the acronym.
 

East/West: finally do the sensible thing and make a geographic division, which is what should have been done in the first place.
 


Minnesconsin fan said:
I think they need to change the Big Ten name to reflect the fact that there are more than 10 teams now. But then again, I don't follow football as closely as basketball and the divisions are primarily a football thing. I like "The Big Fourteen Universities" just for the acronym.
Click to expand...

How about The Really Big Ten, The Big Ten + Four More, The Super Sized Big Ten. There are unlimited possibilities. I am just having a hard time letting go of The Big Ten.:cry:
 

Minnesconsin fan said:
I think they need to change the Big Ten name to reflect the fact that there are more than 10 teams now. But then again, I don't follow football as closely as basketball and the divisions are primarily a football thing. I like "The Big Fourteen Universities" just for the acronym.
Click to expand...

Highway already figured it out with B1G4 and somebody (I forget who?) already eloquently said, B1G4 as in "That's a big 10-4 buddy."
 

MNGoldenGophers1 said:
Highway already figured it out with B1G4 and somebody (I forget who?) already eloquently said, B1G4 as in "That's a big 10-4 buddy."
Click to expand...

Thanks! I like it. I knew with all the talent here somebody would come up with something a lot better than I did.
 

I could live with East-West, but I wouldn't mind something a little more creative. Problem is, it's Monday, and creative is more than I can handle today.

As far as the name of the Conference, I think they're stuck with Big Ten - unless they want to also rename and re-brand the Big Ten TV network, which would be a fairly expensive proposition.

How about B1G+?
 




Minnesconsin fan said:
I think they need to change the Big Ten name to reflect the fact that there are more than 10 teams now. But then again, I don't follow football as closely as basketball and the divisions are primarily a football thing. I like "The Big Fourteen Universities" just for the acronym.
Click to expand...

THE BIG TEEN

Very flexible
 

"Obviously we got some acceptance [with Legends and Leaders], but not as much as we would have liked."

No sh!t Sherlock

Delany said he was a "little surprised" by the backlash when the division names were announced.

No one else was.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
I could live with East-West, but I wouldn't mind something a little more creative. Problem is, it's Monday, and creative is more than I can handle today.

As far as the name of the Conference, I think they're stuck with Big Ten - unless they want to also rename and re-brand the Big Ten TV network, which would be a fairly expensive proposition.

How about B1G+?
Click to expand...

I always thought B1G+ was probably best. This way we don't have to change it no matter how many teams are in the conference.
 



station19 said:
"Obviously we got some acceptance [with Legends and Leaders], but not as much as we would have liked."

No sh!t Sherlock

Delany said he was a "little surprised" by the backlash when the division names were announced.

No one else was.
Click to expand...

+1
 

Wilbon/PTI says good, do something simple like East and West.
 

Minnesconsin fan said:
I think they need to change the Big Ten name to reflect the fact that there are more than 10 teams now. But then again, I don't follow football as closely as basketball and the divisions are primarily a football thing. I like "The Big Fourteen Universities" just for the acronym.
Click to expand...

The brand name is too strong, that's not going to happen.
 

The Conference Formerly Known as the B1G Ten
 

Minnesconsin fan said:
I think they need to change the Big Ten name to reflect the fact that there are more than 10 teams now. But then again, I don't follow football as closely as basketball and the divisions are primarily a football thing. I like "The Big Fourteen Universities" just for the acronym.
Click to expand...

The Big FU ! Nice !
 

Whomever came up with Leaders and Whatevers in the first place should be fired an the rest that agreed with it flogged.
 

I liked the Legends part of it, and understood that Leaders also started with an L, and wasn't condescending. I mean, if the guys in the other half of the conf get to be "Legends", you couldn't get away with calling the other half of the conf, the "Leftovers" or something, lol.

But when I say that phrase, "Legends & Leaders" its like I start out strong, and then flop. "Leaders" seriously? How about "Legends and Losers" hey, they both start with L.

It's simple, gotta go with East and West. How hard is that, now pay me my 50 grand for my consulting fee, lol.

BUT, all kidding aside, Delany is only stalling, because he knows that Legends and Leaders is only going to last another year or two, and also, they'd never go with the B1G4 or the Big Teen, either, partly because even the Big Teen won't work when we have 20 teams. Might as well start calling ourselves the Big 20, or for branding purposes, the Big 10+10 or the Big 10x2 or the Big 10/10.
The biggest issue is going to be which of the 10 original Big Ten teams, gets placed in the Eastern half of the Big 10 & 10? Because if they sent Nebraska over to the Eastern half, I'm sorry, it will be the biggest joke and its not fair to Nebraska, and it will make the Big 10n10 look pathetic and old and stale and retarded and desperate to hold onto past glory, etc.. So what if over 100 years ago these 10 teams were once called the Big Ten. Actually, it was ten teams 100 years ago, but not 110 yrs ago, it was then only 9, then it was 9 again 90 yrs ago, but back to ten 65 yrs ago, then eleven 20 yrs ago, and twelve just a year ago, but 14 now, and 16 next year, but really, in 2 yrs, it will END, hopefully, for at least a couple decades, or until I am dead, at 20.

But that might be hoping for too much, because why stop at 20, when we can go to 24, or 32? We can absorb the Pac-whatever or the Big um? 12? 8? South? and finally, we'll have enough teams that we can tell the NCAA to puck off. Its about money and power and influence and branding and very little about team work and sportsmanship and ethics and honor. And I guess I am ok with that, to a point. But please, just get to 20 and then stop, stay there, let there be some semblance of competition left between conferences, the few that are left by that time.

And as for who gets moved over to the eastern half of the conf, I say friggin Purdue. They suck, at everything or Indiana, Indiana with their soccer might fit in well with UNC and Maryland, and there is a bit of rivalry there with IU and ACC teams because of bb.

So, we'd have 4 divisions
West Division
Nebraska-Minnesota-Iowa-Wiscsonsin-NotreDame
Gives them 2+ Fb powers & 3 potential bb powers

Mid-West or North Central Division
Michigan-MSU-Illinois-NW-Ohio St
Gives them 2+ Fb powers & 3 legit bb powers

Northeast Division
Penn St-Maryland-Rutgers-Indiana-Purdue
Gives them 1 FB power w/ 2 potentials & 2 BB powers

Southeast Division
Virginia-Georgia Tech-Florida St-North Carolina-Duke
Gives them 1 FB power w/ 2 potentials & 2 BB powers

Nice even distribution across the board, while keeping it fairly regionally based.

I placed Notre Dame out in the West, because its not that far of a distance, and ND doesn't really have the strongest connection with anyone. It helped keep MSU-Mich together and OSU-Mich as well. If Oklahoma got in, instead of ND, just switch em out. If they got in instead of Duke, then send ND to the Northeast and Maryland to the Southeast.
 


Just for the record:

"The conference’s official name throughout this period remained the Intercollegiate Conference of Faculty Representatives. It did not formally adopt the name Big Ten until 1987, when it was incorporated as a not-for-profit corporation."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Ten_Conference
 

station19 said:
Just for the record:

"The conference’s official name throughout this period remained the Intercollegiate Conference of Faculty Representatives. It did not formally adopt the name Big Ten until 1987, when it was incorporated as a not-for-profit corporation."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Ten_Conference
Click to expand...

If that's not just a "wikipedia" note, that's very interesting.
 

#1nHkyCfbBsbDncSolarDebat said:
I liked the Legends part of it, and understood that Leaders also started with an L, and wasn't condescending. I mean, if the guys in the other half of the conf get to be "Legends", you couldn't get away with calling the other half of the conf, the "Leftovers" or something, lol.

But when I say that phrase, "Legends & Leaders" its like I start out strong, and then flop. "Leaders" seriously? How about "Legends and Losers" hey, they both start with L.

It's simple, gotta go with East and West. How hard is that, now pay me my 50 grand for my consulting fee, lol.

BUT, all kidding aside, Delany is only stalling, because he knows that Legends and Leaders is only going to last another year or two, and also, they'd never go with the B1G4 or the Big Teen, either, partly because even the Big Teen won't work when we have 20 teams. Might as well start calling ourselves the Big 20, or for branding purposes, the Big 10+10 or the Big 10x2 or the Big 10/10.
The biggest issue is going to be which of the 10 original Big Ten teams, gets placed in the Eastern half of the Big 10 & 10? Because if they sent Nebraska over to the Eastern half, I'm sorry, it will be the biggest joke and its not fair to Nebraska, and it will make the Big 10n10 look pathetic and old and stale and retarded and desperate to hold onto past glory, etc.. So what if over 100 years ago these 10 teams were once called the Big Ten. Actually, it was ten teams 100 years ago, but not 110 yrs ago, it was then only 9, then it was 9 again 90 yrs ago, but back to ten 65 yrs ago, then eleven 20 yrs ago, and twelve just a year ago, but 14 now, and 16 next year, but really, in 2 yrs, it will END, hopefully, for at least a couple decades, or until I am dead, at 20.

But that might be hoping for too much, because why stop at 20, when we can go to 24, or 32? We can absorb the Pac-whatever or the Big um? 12? 8? South? and finally, we'll have enough teams that we can tell the NCAA to puck off. Its about money and power and influence and branding and very little about team work and sportsmanship and ethics and honor. And I guess I am ok with that, to a point. But please, just get to 20 and then stop, stay there, let there be some semblance of competition left between conferences, the few that are left by that time.

And as for who gets moved over to the eastern half of the conf, I say friggin Purdue. They suck, at everything or Indiana, Indiana with their soccer might fit in well with UNC and Maryland, and there is a bit of rivalry there with IU and ACC teams because of bb.

So, we'd have 4 divisions
West Division
Nebraska-Minnesota-Iowa-Wiscsonsin-NotreDame
Gives them 2+ Fb powers & 3 potential bb powers

Mid-West or North Central Division
Michigan-MSU-Illinois-NW-Ohio St
Gives them 2+ Fb powers & 3 legit bb powers

Northeast Division
Penn St-Maryland-Rutgers-Indiana-Purdue
Gives them 1 FB power w/ 2 potentials & 2 BB powers

Southeast Division
Virginia-Georgia Tech-Florida St-North Carolina-Duke
Gives them 1 FB power w/ 2 potentials & 2 BB powers

Nice even distribution across the board, while keeping it fairly regionally based.

I placed Notre Dame out in the West, because its not that far of a distance, and ND doesn't really have the strongest connection with anyone. It helped keep MSU-Mich together and OSU-Mich as well. If Oklahoma got in, instead of ND, just switch em out. If they got in instead of Duke, then send ND to the Northeast and Maryland to the Southeast.
Click to expand...


I will use brevity...Another too damned long comment from #1neilurchypeuiaghcfdhifduh;. :)

But, whatever you tried to say, it made sense.
 


I'm crushed! Which division are we in again?
 

I find this division name talk amusing. I personally don't care if they call them Bumf*ck and FlyOverLand. I care which teams are in which division.
 


#1nHkyCfbBsbDncSolarDebat said:
...

So, we'd have 4 divisions
West Division
Nebraska-Minnesota-Iowa-Wiscsonsin-NotreDame
Gives them 2+ Fb powers & 3 potential bb powers

Mid-West or North Central Division
Michigan-MSU-Illinois-NW-Ohio St
Gives them 2+ Fb powers & 3 legit bb powers

Northeast Division
Penn St-Maryland-Rutgers-Indiana-Purdue
Gives them 1 FB power w/ 2 potentials & 2 BB powers

Southeast Division
Virginia-Georgia Tech-Florida St-North Carolina-Duke
Gives them 1 FB power w/ 2 potentials & 2 BB powers

Nice even distribution across the board, while keeping it fairly regionally based...
Click to expand...

The Northeast Division, as you have it, would likely take years for its champ to have a conference record above .500 in football. The other 3 Divisions/pods are much tougher...

Also, gotta integrate the SE Division into the Conference. I would not leave them out on their own...
 

If you are saying that about the NE Div, because of PSU's troubles, well, I guess I wasn't thinking short term, since this all is not going to come to its final stages for anywhere from 2-10 years? From what I've heard, bringing Notre Dame into the conference isn't going to happen overnight, and some of the projections for when they come in totally, seemed to be pretty far off in the future. Personally, I hope we nab Oklahoma instead, get to 20 much sooner and leave frigging Notre Dame out in the cold. I hate Notre Dame, but I would not let my hatred of them spoil my love of the Big Ten, and if bringing in ND is the best thing for the Big Ten, then I guess I'll be fine with it and just accept it.

Also, Rutgers has done well in the Big East, so there is no reason to believe that they wouldn't be a regular Div Champ in the NE, until PSU gets back on track. Also, Purdue has been decent in the past, and could do ok, and Maryland as well as Rutgers are going to have at least a one year head start in the Big Ten, meaning an extra year of using being in the Big Ten to their advantage in recruiting. So although I am not in any way a person who makes the decisions or influences those decisions in any way, that is how I'd group them together.

As for integrating the SE into the Conf, I am not sure I know what you mean by that completely? How would you go about doing that and I'd be interested to read your thoughts as to why we should do that or why not doing it would be bad, etc..
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom