Upon initially hearing the names of the two Big Ten divisions, I supposed I was probably not unlike most of you when I thought, “What”? Yes, Leaders and Legends brought the words ‘what’, ‘corny’ and ‘arrogant’ to the forefront of my mind. It’s definitely a queer choice that didn’t sit well with me.
The news of the divisional names broke over 24 hours ago, and I’m sure most of you have taken the time to process this information and form your opinions. Maybe your initial thoughts were similar to mine, and then you spoke to some of your friends who also believed the names were not the correct choice, and thus your thoughts were cemented that the Divisional names were garbage and the Big Ten had failed. And now, you’re here searching for a little more affirmation. Based on my opening paragraph, you’ll surely get it, right? No, after spending a little more time thinking about the names, I like them. Here are my thoughts.
First off, it is incredibly easy to hear the names and immediately be displeased. It’s also easy to be cynical and think, “that’s the best these powerful, probably overpaid officials could come up with?” I touched on this line of thinking in my last blog and called it unproductive. I still believe this to be true. Instead of remaining negative about the names, I quickly thought to myself, “well, they probably could have done worse.” I then spent about 3 minutes trying to come up with better names for the divisions. I appreciated Leaders and Legends more after my 3 minutes had elapsed. My best idea was ‘Silver’ and ‘Gold’, which is terrible. This idea is obviously flawed because it implies one division is superior to the other. Thanks a lot, Olympics.
Secondly, I think the names will create great awareness for the Big Ten since it is, in fact, a business. Creating recognition for your conference will only serve to increase visits and applications from incoming college freshmen, which is the ultimate goal. Just ask Gonzaga how business was before it had a basketball team that created national recognition and by what percentage their applications have risen now that everyone knows who they are.
These two names will undoubtedly leave the door open for ridicule during down years of Big Ten football, but that’s going to happen anyway and truthfully, that’s the kind of stuff that really doesn’t bother me. If SEC fans want to make remarks about the Big Ten and their views of the ridiculousness of the divisional names, I think that just speaks to their character. The truth is the Big Ten is first and foremost, an organization of outstanding Academic Institutions and as an OSU grad; I will never be embarrassed about that. The Big Ten is not simply 12 separate football entities; it is so much more. The SEC is the king of football, and that’s okay because I’m not going pro in football.
To revisit something I sort of brushed past earlier, and mentioned in a previous blog, I’m not a fan of hearing complaints from someone who has no idea how to fix said problem. So I ask: What should the Big Ten have named its divisions? Should it have given the divisions directional names because that’s what the SEC and Big-12 did? I think I would have been most upset if the Big Ten had done this. How can the Big Ten expect to be exceptional if it just follows a template everyone else has already laid out? Won’t other institutions deserve the credit then? Sure, the Big Ten could have given the divisions directional names and it wouldn’t have drawn much scrutiny, but that sounds boring to me. Personally, I recognize that the Big Ten represents more than football, and I applaud its willingness to experiment and take the chances that can draw criticism. In the end, isn’t taking chances and experimentation what college is all about?
Well, here is a question I received from Kyle on Facebook:
ReplyDeleteI liked the writeup. I'm curious to see what your thoughts are on changing the name of the conference. You stated the divisional names are good because they're taking chances and breaking the mold. However, all you hear about from the Big Ten is its storied history, which doesn't exactly mesh with these contemporary ideas. As a business, the Big Ten is increasing its market share by adding new products (Penn State, Nebraska). The Big Ten is a name brand so I understand why you wouldn't want to change it due to name recognition. But lots of major companies rebrand themselves when acquiring new companies. So why shouldn't the Big Ten change their name to something that makes more sense?
Thanks, Kyle. I’ve spent a lot of time thinking about the Big Ten possibly changing its name and as a fan of the conference, I would prefer it stay the Big Ten.
First of all, I’m not really offended when supporters of another conference make fun of the Big Ten for actually consisting of eleven teams. I don’t know if these people think they’ve made a groundbreaking discovery, but trust me, I’ve been aware of this inconsistency for a long time, and I just don’t think it’s a big deal. Certainly, it would have been foolish to name yourself the Big Ten if you were comprised of eleven teams when the conference was created, but that wasn’t the case. I just think this complaint is a little sophomoric. Also, when there are mergers in the private sector I think the companies typically change their name to a combination of the previous company’s. So, I don’t think it should be the Big Ten and Penn State and Nebraska. It would be too difficult to say (that was supposed to be a joke).
Ultimately, I think the Economics of the matter is what drives the decision of whether or not to change the conference name. I believe the Big Ten still creates the most revenue from football (or maybe all sports; I’m not sure), so I think completely changing the name would be unwise for recognition purposes, as you alluded to. I doubt ESPN (the worldwide leader in sports) is planning on changing its name to SQTF anytime soon. Of course, there is also the train of thought that those businesses, such as sports conferences, that fail to evolve won’t last, but I think the addition of Nebraska and Divisions is all the evolution the Big Ten is searching for. The Big Ten has released a new logo (which I haven’t looked at yet) so that’s probably a fairly obvious sign that they won’t be changing their name.
I think this is probably precisely why the Pac-10 WILL change its name to the Pac-12, since it lags behind in revenue due to entertainment alternatives in that part of the country and the fact that much of America has already gone to bed when their games air on national television.
Basically, I believe the Big Ten has probably done research that says it’ll make more money in the immediate future if it remains the Big Ten, so that’s what’ll happen.