Possible B10 logo with 16 teams

Submitted by BlueCE on June 11th, 2010 at 9:25 AM

SIAP, I looked all over and could not find this referenced...

 

Someone came up with a possible Big Ten logo incorporating (http://b16ten.org/) the 16 teams reference... it actually works pretty well

Comments

ZooWolverine

June 11th, 2010 at 10:39 AM ^

I'm not sure the precedent of keeping the name is that convincing.  There was probably a fairly broad understanding within the conference that we were unlikely to stay at 11 for a long time, especially with the conference championship benefit of going to 12 teams.  It wouldn't have been a huge surprise for ND to have joined a few years later (as they almost did), so being the Big 11 for a couple of years wouldn't have made much sense.

The Big 8 going to Big 12 didn't seem to hurt the brand, I don't think a slight rename for the Big Ten would hurt either.

Raoul

June 11th, 2010 at 11:11 AM ^

I would be shocked if the conference's name is ever changed, no matter the number of schools. There are plenty of examples from the corporate world of companies keeping well-established and valuable brand names even after they no longer "fit." I already used this example on another thread, but 7-11 has kept its name despite the expansion in the hours that its stores are open.

Also, the Big Ten name has been in at least unofficial use for nearly a century (since 1917), though there was a gap of a few years as the Big Nine after Chicago left and before MSU came in. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Ten_Conference)

The Big 8 name didn't come into use until 1958 (earlier names included the Big 6 and Big 7), so it wasn't nearly as well-established. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Eight_Conference)

Laveranues

June 11th, 2010 at 9:48 AM ^

If I'm not mistaken, 16 in hexadecimal is 10, so the Big 10 can keep the logo (sans the '11' silhouette) and claim it's hex.

edit: err, they'd have to change Ten to 10.

Feat of Clay

June 11th, 2010 at 10:45 AM ^

Dude, you weren't alone.  It remains perhaps my biggest objection to expanding the conference.

Sadly, I never even saw the "11" until someone pointed it out to me a coupla years back.  I'm not the most observant of people, but from that moment I loved it with a fervor that suggested I'd drawn the thing myself.

jcgary

June 11th, 2010 at 10:05 AM ^

If Nebraska coming to the big 10 holds true and then the Big 10 adds ND and 3 other teams to make 16 but out of those 3 teams they only add one state not already in the footprint the Big 10 name would be acurate because we would be a conference made up of 10 states. 

oriental andrew

June 11th, 2010 at 10:47 AM ^

Although that would prove to be very difficult, as it severely limits the teams that could be added.   You would have to include ND and Pitt.  Still two teams to go, all which have been mentioned (as far as I know) currently being outside the footprint - Rutgers, UVA, Maryland, Syracuse, Mizzou, Kansas, Texas.  Of course, then we could always keep the current logo with the hidden "11" to indicate that the Big Ten actually covers 11 states.  =P

mcberry

June 11th, 2010 at 10:35 AM ^

That logo is alright, but it strikes me as being too obvious, too "leet-speaky" for me.  I like the current logo, as the 11 is subtle , sort of clever even. 

Instead, I think we take a different tack.  16 teams isn't merely a "Big" conference, but more of a "Mega" conference.  So they might as well go the high school naming route and just make it the Mega-16.

Hail-Storm

June 11th, 2010 at 10:58 AM ^

But still hate the idea of going to 16 teams. The max I want to move to would be 14. I'm hoping someone more clever than me can make a 12 or 14 logo just as appealing. And, I think we gotta stick with the Big Ten name.

ChalmersE

June 14th, 2010 at 4:05 PM ^

when it will be Coca Cola's Big Ten Conference (or you can substitute your favorite big corporation for Coca Cola.  [I'm not saying it will make me happy, but the way sponsorships are going, it almost seems inevitable to me.]