The rest of the conference is in the MID-ATLANTIC!!! :rolleyes:
So? What’s Louisiana Tech doing in the WAC? Most of the schools in the Ohio Valley Conference are in the Missouri Valley and vice versa, too.
Other affiliation changes in the FCS are pending or strongly rumored: Big East to add Central Florida from C-USA and Villanova, up from the Colonial (they’re already in the conference for other sports). Massachusetts also to move from the Colonial to the Mid-American Conference (officially FBS but not otherwise a move up, and IMHO it’s a bad idea for the school, but they don’t ever ask me for anything but money anyway). Hawaii also considering going independent, which under a special rule could let it play almost all home games. Big 12 (now with 10 teams, unlike the Big Ten with its 12) can’t do without its championship game for long, so look for C-USA to get raided again.
Elvis- La Tech should be in C-USA IMO, and UMASS should join the Big East. I’m surprised the Pac-12 hasn’t/didn’t invite Boise St or Hawaii.
All below the Mason-Dixon Line, at that. Nobody in Boston gives a fuck about playing people like Clemson and Wake Forest, anyway.
I guess that is news to Florida State and Miami.
“That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet”
And Georgia Tech
-
This is all primarily about money. Denver and Salt Lake are much, much larger media markets than Boise and Honolulu. They also have larger fanbases.
-
It is secondarily about overall fit: Colorado and Utah are state flagship research universities. Boise is an urban school with a 32% graduation rate. Hawaii is better, but does not have the academic cred of Utah or Colorado.
Colorado and especially Utah are also top-level competitive in other sports. Hawaii and Boise are not.
Culturally, Colorado fits in perfectly with Oregon/Cal. Utah less so with the whole Mormon thing, but not much different than Hawaii. Idaho is full of people that left the west coast because they hated it.
Honestly, a good football team is the one and only thing Boise has to offer a conference. That’s not enough.
Great points. Also, Despite all the football success at Boise in the last few years, the fact remains their football stadium would be one of the smallest in a BCS conference.
The only thing Boise has to offer the Pac10 is a football team.
Jason Sobel of ESPN is tweeting that “Legends” and “Leaders” will be the division names of the Big 10 conference.
Urgh. Sounds like Boy Scout patrol names.
Pretty lame names, IMO.
Stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid. Some of this stuff is priceless, though:
Translation: ‘we don’t like these names, but we couldn’t get everybody to agree on anything better, so we’re going to pretend we were trying to stimulate discussion.’
‘Leaders don’t need to be able to count to 10.’
Should have gone with Beef and Dairy.
I think you’re right about “couldn’t get everybody to agree on anything better”.
The names are pretty dumb, but the logo is really, truly awful. Ugh.
Thank God they didn’t go with something truly stupid like the “Bo” and “Woody” divisions, as some were suggesting. That might have been enough to make me boycott Rotel and Barbasol.
ding ding ding
Personally, I can’t wait for the messageboard threads on who will win the Bakken-Andersen Kicker of the Year Trophy each year. I do love that the running back trophy is all Wisconsin though.
The trophies:
http://www.bigten.org/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/121310aaa.html
Oh God, an award named after two people is worse than an award named after nobody. Do your job, guys. Pick one person at each position. Yes, I know it’s hard. That’s why you get paid.
And that logo is stupid. See, the existing logo was kind of clever, because it made the numeral 11 out of the words Big Ten. The new logo just makes the numeral 10 out of the word Ten. That’s redundant, and dumb.
Especially dumb, considering they conference has 12 teams (This is an “academic” conference?). Sorry purists, time to rename the conference. The Big Ten, with 12 teams, needs to swap names with the Big 12, with 10 teams.
It’s the Big Ten, always will be and always should be. No one from any of the schools would tolerate anything else. The alumni outrage would be off the charts. Suggestion otherwise indicates that you simply don’t get it.
The division names are overwhelmingly embarrassing. Holy crap that is stupid. The logo is bland and I think I would have preferred that they just erased the ghost “11” from the current logo over this one. That said, conference logos are pretty meaningless and I rarely notice them and getting cut with the “IG” in this one reeks of trying too hard. I can tolerate the two name awards, the league has been around for a 100 years I think they can justify it. My biggest complaint is COURTNEY BROWN? Courtney fucking Brown? Simeon Rice and probably a dozen other guys threw up in their mouths seeing this. I want to complain about the Ameche-Dayne trophy too, but I suppose the Grange-Griffin trophy is better as a MVP award…but I’m not sure.
I will forever be pretending that the Graham-George trophy honors Jeff George though. Ha!
I am no Big Ten partisan but it seems that they got every single decision wrong.
The logo should have dropped the negative-image numbering (which was kind of cool for their current logo, since they had 1 more team than their name, wink wink) and gone forward without using the number “10” in any of their logos. “Big Ten” should have only been used spelled out, since the number doesn’t mean anything in relation to the current conference.
The division names are extremely non-intuitive (what makes one school a “leader” and another a “legend”?). They should have followed the lead of other conferences and used directional designations; if the conference alignment did not allow for such an option, they should have gone with the generic option (“Red” and “Blue,” or somesuch). At the very least they should have chosen two names which are easy to tell apart; instead they used two plural names that start with “Le”. Egads.
And regarding the awards, this is the first I’ve heard of them, but it seems they were trying to appeal to as many schools as possible instead of just taking a stand and picking one player per award. Archie Griffin deserves the conference MVP since he’s the only player in NCAA history to win back-to-back Heisman trophies. End of story. (If you have rationale for another player, fine, but just pick one.)