Big Ten Logo, Divisions: Legends and Leaders? More Like Lame and Lackadaisical
The Big Ten has a new logo, new team and new divisions heading into 2011. We already know who comprises each division, and today we learned what the new logo and division names would be.
But before we get to that, let's look back at what the conference as a whole means to NCAA Division I athletics.
The Big Ten is the oldest conference of them all, with charter teams joining back in the late 1800s. The conference has produced a number of national championships in many sports, including Ohio State in football back in 2002 and Michigan State in basketball in 2000.
The conference is also know for its academics, being the only Division I conference to have every one of its universities be a part of the Association of American Universities.
Now that we have a quick background in the conference's rich tradition, let's look at the debacle that happened with its new alliance with powder blue and poorly named divisions.
To have your two divisions named "Legends" and "Leaders" is about as lame and generic as you can get. When many true Big Ten fans think about athletics, especially in football, they think of black and blue. So how did they get legends, leaders and powder blue?
The bottom line with the naming of the new divisions is that the Big Ten made an epic fail. Why not name them after historic players or coaches from the conference's tradition? A Butkus, Grange, Woody or Bo division would have been a better name than the ones they chose.
Do you like the new Big Ten Division Names?
Heck, many would have even taken a Barry Alvarez or Darnell Autry division over the generics they chose.
The logo is another matter. Powder blue and white? Seriously?
I am sure that there will be an equal number of people that like it as do hate it, but come on! What was wrong with the old one?
Simply put, did the old logo even have to go?
With the bottom line being the bottom dollar, the Big Ten is trying to capitalize on marketing new logos and divisions into their bottom line. The question is, will it work as a whole, and what will the old-school conference fan think?
Most will probably see it as an epic fail. Look for Commissioner Jim Delany to tweak the logos and names over the years to better fit the image of such an epic athletic conference.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?