Member for

13 years 4 months
Points
-26.00

Recent Comments

Date Title Body
my point was that if u split

up the teams that has nothing to do with geagraphy then it doesnt matter what you name them when it comes to people remembering which teams are in which division.

i think itll be unique to the

big ten in time, when people start associating them with the big ten.  Maybe to start off they could have thought of something else. However I do like the divisions split up not based on geography.

I wouldnt call it a photographic memory....

I just know that psu, osu, pur, ill, ind, and wisco are one division and they call it the leaders and the other one is the legends. Not that those particular word only apply to those in that division.

so they should have split up the teams...

... in a way that people could remember which division they belong to ?

I agree with the way they split up the teams,

So as long as its not dictated by geography the names are meaningless, as long as I know which teams are in which division. Differentiating the 2 words is pretty simple.  And they thought those two words describe all the conference teams.

the 2 words were used to describe all the teams in the big 10

and your telling me that people are not going to remember which word applies to which teams. Ive seen it once and can recall it.

The logo is the only bad part

I see no problem with the conference names.  They wanted 2 words that describe thier universities.  I dont think it will take more than 5 minutes to remember whose in which conference.  The names of the trphies are well thought out.  THE CONFERENCE DOES NOT REVOLVE AROUND MICHIGAN AND OHIO ST.  The name of the Championship trophy is fitting. There is no one more deserving than Paterno.   I do think the logo is terrible though.