I'm going to take a detour from the standard "updates on married life" course to geek out about college football. If you haven't already heard, Jim Delaney, Commissioner of the Big Ten Conference, recently unveiled the names of the two athletic divisions beginning in 2011, as well as the new conference logo. Yesterday, they were broadcast for all the world to see...and ridicule.
If you haven't seen it before, here's the new logo and the division names:
I'll start with the logo...bear with me.
Aside from the powder blue and white scheme (since when did North Carolina join) one of my biggest gripes is its simplicity. Don't get me wrong, simplicity is not necessarily a bad thing, but the logo lacks any hint of creativity, inspiration, and just plain doesn't represent anything the Big Ten has come to signify over the decades of its existence. Give a two year old a box of crayons and five minutes and he would come up with something better than this. Many hoped the new logo would include a cleverly hidden number like the "11" in the old one, but they decided to go with a hidden "10" in the I and G. This was apparently an attempt to pay homage to the ten members before the addition of Penn State and Nebraska. The logo already acknowledges them because the name of the conference is the "Big TEN", what's the point of the hidden 10 then? Nothing! It makes no sense! Marketing companies get paid millions of dollars to come up with this!? Give me a break.
Secondly, the division names also lack any logical reasoning. Sure, they tried to be creative with "Legends" and "Leaders" trying to portray the conference as a trailblazing pioneer both on the field and off. But much like the ACC's Coastal and Atlantic divisions, trying to place the schools in their respective divisions is like trying to draw the outline of Azerbaijan on a map with no key or reference points. I was a fan of the "Plains" and "Lakes" division names myself, heck even a straight up "East" and "West" scheme would have been fine. At least these ideas make sense and tie the conference together geographically. Instead, Delaney claimed geography was not important, and nit-picked at the little details in drawing division lines. Sure, Wisconsin and Michigan would have been kind of sore thumbs in an East/West split, but I thought we had given up on nit-picky details the day we continued calling it the Big Ten with 11 (soon to be 12) members.
Stupid names, stupid logo, and it will all help contribute to the current perception of the Big Ten: slow, stupid, stuck in the past, and just lacking ingenuity and inspiration. Jim, sorry but you dropped the ball big time on this one, and I truly hope somebody in Chicago slaps you back to your senses, and quick!