Big Ten Reveals Logo, Divisional Names

Written December 13th, 2010 by MaliBuckeye

Earlier today, the Big T1e2n announced both its division names for football and revealed a new logo. Let the branding of obedience begin:

Still not sure how that equals twelve

Other options for your bootleg t-shirt needs:

Yup, we’re “Big”. You’ve got to wonder if the failure to try to build a number into the logo like with the Big T1e1n means something about future expansion.  Ooooooh! Conspiracy!!


And now, the divisions. The Conference has decided that “Legends” and “Leaders” will be the monikers for the new configuration, although to me they sound like less than reputable “dancing establishments“. Or so I would imagine, if I was into imagining such things.

Here’s Delaney’s take-

“‘Legends’ is a nod to our history and to the people associated with our schools who are widely recognized as legends – student-athletes, coaches, alumni and faculty. ‘Leaders’ looks to the future as we remain committed to fostering leaders, the student-athletes who are encouraged to lead in their own way for the rest of their lives, in their families, in their communities and in their chosen professions,” said Delany. “We’re proud of our many legends and even prouder of our member institutions that develop future leaders every day.”

Interesting that the team with the word “Leaders” in their fight song isn’t in that division, and that the living legend isn’t in that division.

While I’m not a design guy (in spite of my infatuation with uniforms) and only know enough about marketing to buy whatever the voices on TV tell me, I’ve got to admit being a little underwhelmed by these decisions. Of course, given who the design team was, you’ve got to wonder if there also wasn’t something else going on.

With the history of the conference, you’d think that they could have chosen to name it after any of the great coaches from the past. Another option would have been to use other regional distinctives: Land and Lakes, Rust and Dust, Fishing and Hunting… heck, even “Us” and “Them” would be logical to most of the constituents, particularly if everyone thought their division was “Us”.

Of course, they could have also just divided things up geographically and not had to deal with this, but that would have made way to much sense.

There’s also lots and lots and more lots of trophies, all named after historic figures in conference play (wow, what a great idea!). While it may seem a little “youth league soccer“, I’m perfectly OK with the number of trophies as long as the designers of the new logo don’t get one.

Other observations:

  • The award for best linebacker does not include a “legend” from Ohio State or Penn State, although I’m not asking Butkus to step down. Interesting, though, that they’d choose Pat Fitzgerald, since he’s still active in the conference.
  • QB award named for two Purdue players.  When I think “Purdue”, I think “cradle of quarterbacks”.
  • WR award includes a player from Wisconsin. Really?
  • Championship trophy represents a team that’s not even in the conference anymore.
  • Buckeyes get 5 nods, Wolverines and Badgers have 4; Penn State, Illinois, Michigan State, Minnesota, and Purdue each have 3; Iowa, Indiana, and Northwestern have 2; Nebraska is only “honored” once, as is the University of Chicago.


  1. JimNo Gravatar
    December 13th, 2010 at 1:24 pm

    As long as they continue to expand and bring Michigan back into the same division as Ohio State, that is the only thing I really care about at this point.


  2. JayNo Gravatar
    December 13th, 2010 at 3:08 pm

    I too am underwhelmed by these choices, although I also feel some enthusiasm given the multitude of future jokes that could be made, especially about Legends and Leaders. Those titles take me back to the days of summer basketball camp, when the kids would be split into different divisions for the week. The Lantern used to do impromptu interviews with students on campus, and one of the stock questions was “Would you rather be hatefully remembered or completely forgotten?” I feel like a similar “essay” question is available here: Would you rather be known as a legend or as a leader? Why?

    Thank you Nebraska, for giving us the opportunity to become Conference G-Zero.


    JayNo Gravatar
    December 13th, 2010 at 3:16 pm

    Wait wait! Even better:

    Conference Zero-G. We’re out of this world!


    MaliBuckeyeNo Gravatar
    December 13th, 2010 at 4:07 pm

    Leader- moving forward.
    Legend- remembering the days of Yore/having mythical status that’s difficult to verify.

    Who says they didn’t name them after Ohio State and Michi1gAAn?


  3. EricNo Gravatar
    December 13th, 2010 at 3:48 pm

    As far as I’m concerned – other than Jay’s fantastic perspective on it – this is a monumental fail in the marketing department.

    Round of applause to the Big Ten, forging new paths back to the 80′s.


  4. MaliBuckeyeNo Gravatar
    December 13th, 2010 at 4:09 pm

    This is also an option.


    EricNo Gravatar
    December 13th, 2010 at 4:11 pm

    I second this motion. Can we vote now?


    MaliBuckeyeNo Gravatar
    December 13th, 2010 at 4:23 pm

    As long as we get Baldwin to handle the press conference.


Comment On Article

Optimization WordPress Plugins & Solutions by W3 EDGE
Optimization WordPress Plugins & Solutions by W3 EDGE