Comments on: Leaders & Legends: Name change ahead?

By: Will

Will — Wed, 16 Jan 2013 15:31:08 +0000

Too much is being made of the Divisional names. Bottom line for me is; what kind of product does the B1G put on the athletic field of play that coincides with the product we carry inside the institutions walls. If we truly are the elite conference in research education, then we should be intelligent enough to outwit the other conferences on the field of play. Yes, the SEC may have “more” super athletes, but we have a large number of them as well and to go along with that, we should have the IQ’s to figure out how to get back on top of sports world.

By: Mike

Mike — Wed, 16 Jan 2013 00:52:55 +0000

Count me among those who feel the Legends and Leaders names are pretentious and arrogant and confusing. These names seem even more so given the lack of “legendary” on field performances against teams from other conferences (how about that Rose Bowl record) and lack of “leadership” shown by some of our university leaders off the field (OSU and PSU). Please keep it simple: geographic alignment and names.

By: Tom from Virginia

Tom from Virginia — Tue, 15 Jan 2013 20:54:41 +0000

The Leaders and Legends names have grown on me, as well. The bigger picture is on-field performance. Nobody makes fun of you (to your face) if you win. Many programs of the B1G are great legends on the field, but we haven’t been leading on the field lately. We do lead in academics and world-class research, which is refreshing, since this is still supposed to be about student-athletes and higher education.