cats gone wild;1074551 wrote:I could tell you what 100% non Big 10 fans think of the names..............

I could tell you to go fuck yourself and that you are the biggest *** on this site, but I don't want to get BANNED......................................................

gorocks99;1074477 wrote:I can never remember which SEC team is in which division because I don't care about the SEC.

The B1G is easy (for someone who follows it), all the M's, N's, and Iowa in Legends, the rest in Leaders.

This

Doesn't anybody think the 'somewhat like' crowd was just trying to be positive?

Does anybody really 'hate' the names? I don't 'hate them'. But, if questioned in that manner, unless I understand exactly that my response would be used to decide whether to change them, I probably would say "I somewhat like the names". If I knew my thought had power, I'd say they were spawned from Satan's bowels and roam the undead world eating infants.

But, that's just me.

I don't despise the names, but I really, really don't like them. They're stupid and make no sense. It's like feeling compelled to put two names on every trophy the league gives out, like they're afraid some school might be offended if they aren't represented. Well, guess what? No all schools are equal in their success in all sports.

This isn't soccer for 5 year olds where everyone plays and everyone gets a trophy.

If they had done it right the first time (and not caved in to Alvarez), the divisions would be fairly simple:

Great Lakes

Ohio State, MSU, UM, Illinoi, Northwestern and Penn State.

Plains

Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota, IU, Purdue and Wisconsin

It truly isn't rocket science -- but put a group of "academics" in a room and they'll eff things up quicker than a group of politicians.

Hate the names, love the Big ten championship game. Had an amazing time in Indy before and after the game. (Side Note: MSU fans are by in large assholes, Wisky fans were awesome to be around)

Iliketurtles;1074455 wrote:LOL 516 people thats it? That is probably like 1% of big ten fans. I also agree that the names are stupid.

You obviously have never done any sampling

Writerbuckeye;1075764 wrote:I don't despise the names, but I really, really don't like them. They're stupid and make no sense. It's like feeling compelled to put two names on every trophy the league gives out, like they're afraid some school might be offended if they aren't represented. Well, guess what? No all schools are equal in their success in all sports.

This isn't soccer for 5 year olds where everyone plays and everyone gets a trophy.

If they had done it right the first time (and not caved in to Alvarez), the divisions would be fairly simple:

Great Lakes

Ohio State, MSU, UM, Illinoi, Northwestern and Penn State.

Plains

Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota, IU, Purdue and Wisconsin

It truly isn't rocket science -- but put a group of "academics" in a room and they'll eff things up quicker than a group of politicians.

So, you have Penn State and OSU in the Great Lakes with a minimal lake costal line. Then you have Wisconsin and Minnesota in the Great Plains when about 1/2 of Wisconsin's border is Lake Michigan, and Minnesota, which is nicknamed Land of 10,000 Lakes.

And, you talk about putting academics in a room and screwing things up; THANK God you weren't in the room...

ts1227;1075790 wrote:You obviously have never done any sampling

516 is sufficient when the sampling is 100% random. This was not, therefore the sample size needs to be much larger in order to increase external validity. In other words, they can't use it to generalize across the populations of B1G states, and even moreso the country because they knowingly selected a specific sample.

LJ;1076981 wrote:516 is sufficient when the sampling is 100% random. This was not, therefore the sample size needs to be much larger in order to increase external validity. In other words, they can't use it to generalize across the populations of B1G states, and even moreso the country because they knowingly selected a specific sample.

True. To go 100% random would generate "who gives a shit"answers from about 45 states in the US, and would have been just as useless. The best you can do is random in/around the footprint, IMO.

ts1227;1077001 wrote:True. To go 100% random would generate "who gives a shit"answers from about 45 states in the US, and would have been just as useless. The best you can do is random in/around the footprint, IMO.

Right. But asking people who came to a B1G event to see the B1G trophy is nowhere near random :laugh:

Honestly, I would've been fine with North/South before the season from a geographic standpoint, although it would've probably make things slightly unbalanced in favor of the North (on the whole). With Penn State potentially in the crapper it's really not feasible from a competitive standpoint now though.

North:
Minnesota, Wisconsin, Northwestern, Iowa, Michigan, Michigan St

South:
Nebraska, Illinois, Purdue, Indiana, Ohio State, Penn State

LJ;1077008 wrote:Right. But asking people who came to a B1G event to see the B1G trophy is nowhere near random :laugh:

This. If you actually care enough to go to an event like that you almost definitely have a very positive view of the conference (and anything it does).

516 is a fair enough sample size, it is the asking of the question and how it relates to the acceptable answers that is the problem. I don't know a single person that legitimately LIKES Leaders and Legends, fans of Big 10 teams or not. It is silly and arrogant. They might not come out and say they hate it (although I will) but they might not fully express their opinion. The Big 10's rationale is just trying to rationalize a poor decision, and the names will still be made fun of by college football fans. The divisions will be the one that has Michigan in it and the one that has Ohio St. in it.