Big Ten President Jim Delany Wavers on Division Names, Why Not BCS Stance?

Big Ten Commissioner Jim Delany is starting to realize the err of his ways in the trio of unsightly decisions regarding the expansion of the Big Ten Conference.

After coming out with the revamped logos, division names and Big Ten trophies earlier this week, Delany is unsure of whether to stick with the division names that he and his team decided upon, after a huge negative reaction.

The division names, "Legends" and "Leaders," were meant to express the long and storied history of the conference, but have been met with the most negative criticism, as they have been called overly cheesy and arrogant sounding.

The commissioner said in a recent interview with an ESPN affiliated radio station in Chicago, "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, but to get a 90 percent non-approval rating was, you know, really surprising."

Delany said that the names could be reconsidered as early as the first of the year.

So, we learned one thing about the commissioner through this: He does indeed have ears.

People complained about the division names, and he heard them. He has expressed the fact that he does indeed bring in the input of the people of the region which he governs, for lack of a better word.

We also know, from the expansion of the Big Ten twice during his reign, and his aid in the creation and implementation of an instant replay system for college football, that he is a forward thinker.

Why is it, then, that he has taken the opposite stance on the BCS?

If there is one thing in sports that is more regressive-thinking and against the will of the fans, it is the BCS' way of crowning a national champion.

He has defended the BCS by claiming as recently as December 10th that his conference, along with the ACC, SEC, Big 12, Big East and Pac-10, have already given up so much to include the five non-automatic qualifying conferences.

He laments his conference's role as the giver in college football, having given up (sort of) their automatic bid to the Rose Bowl each year, and the fact that the getters (non-AQs) are doing all of the getting and none of the giving.

Delany said at a conference in New York, "Now some of the people who've received the most have put in the least," and added, "Others were included, but they never had access to any of this before. You have to understand who brought what to the table, who is continuing to give and who's continuing to get."

In other words, he doesn't want to give up any more of his conference's money opportunities.

But, with the fans clamoring for a playoff in college football, why not at least take a look at a solution to the glaring problem that leaves an undefeated TCU team with a Rose Bowl bid that is a mere parting gift at this point, instead of allowing them to prove their worth in a playoff.

He finished off his defense of the BCS at the conference by saying, "I'm just saying we've got fatigue of defending a system that's under a lot of pressure."

Is it not possible that the way to end that fatigue of defending a broken system is to put your energy into fixing it, instead of defending it?

The Big Ten's reach contains 25 percent of U.S households, giving the man huge amounts of power; and where his opinion goes, those of the other big conferences follow.

I have to implore that you listen to the people on more than just the menial, aesthetic issues of the conference Mr. Delany, they want more change than just that of the lame names that you and your cronies found so amusing.