ESPN

The Big Ten on Sunday announced new divisions (East and West) for the 2014 season and a move to a nine-game conference schedule beginning in 2016. The league also is adopting a more aggressive approach to nonconference scheduling for the College Football Playoff environment -- at least one game per year against a major-conference school and no FCS games -- that it hopes to have in place by 2016.

ESPN.com caught up with league commissioner Jim Delany on Sunday to discuss some of the key issues.

On the approach to realigning the divisions for a 14-team league ...

Delany: We started into it in November soon after [the additions of Rutgers and Maryland]. We included Rutgers and Maryland in all of our discussions, culminating in the review today by the presidents. We met six times. Early on, we decided that we wanted to prioritize geography. We've got a conference that goes from the Atlantic Ocean to the Colorado border and from the Canadian border in some cases to the mid South. Therefore, we thought geography was a good way to bind the conference together. We also wanted to preserve as much tradition as we could, and we do that through the protection of the rivalries. Before, we had 12 of the 13 trophies protected. This time, we have 10, and the three that are not will occur at least once every four years. Likewise, if you're a student-athlete, you'll have a chance to play everybody at least once in a four-year cycle, even though it's a bigger conference. The presidents and athletic directors were on board, too, with the idea of playing as much as we can. That takes our conference schedule from 48 games to 63 annually, so you have over a 30 percent increase in conference games, but only a 16 percent increase in conference membership.

We wanted to strengthen our schedules by playing each other more, but also by monitoring and asking that everybody schedule at least one comparable opponent. We were at about 20 percent of our games against BCS [automatic-qualifying conferences]. That moves that to a minimum of 33 percent, so one in every three years will be against a BCS opponent. And then we made a decision not to play others from divisions [FCS] where they have fewer scholarships. We think it's good for the fans, we think it's good for the players. It strengthens our schedule from the perspective of the postseason and it binds the conference together in a powerful way.

It turned out sort of the way we started, which was number one, respect geography, number two, preserve rivalries and then competitive balance.

On competitive balance as a lower priority this time around ...

Delany: It was a third principle. It was the first one in our last go-round. We seeded everybody 1 through 6, and we had four schools, based on 20-year history, who we all thought were No. 1 seeds (Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State and Nebraska). So we split them, and then we split Iowa and Wisconsin, and then we split Northwestern and Michigan State. This time around, with two new members on the East Coast, we changed our thinking, we adapted to a new set of circumstances and we put competitive balance third. The only way we could have seriously engaged there was to move Ohio State, Penn State or Michigan, based on the 20-year history, into the West. We weren't willing to do that. So we'll see.

We look at the SEC over the last 25 years, and they started off in a period where [East division members] Georgia, Florida and Tennessee dominated, and then in the last decade, LSU, Alabama and Auburn [from the West division] have been stronger. So we expect it to go back and forth. We look at Nebraska and Wisconsin as elite programs. We think Iowa has played in big-time BCS games. We see Northwestern with 10 wins, and we see new leadership at Minnesota, Illinois and Purdue, and it's hard to predict. But we think there's a lot of parity in the Big Ten. We've had nine different teams go to the Rose Bowl in the last 24 years. We've had six or seven teams play in BCS bowls, so we think we can handle it. Obviously, we won't know for a decade exactly how that plays out.

On why Ohio State, Penn State or Michigan couldn't move to the West, or Michigan State, a team a lot of fans have brought up as one that could create more balance ...

Delany: If you were going to balance the bracket, you would have to [move] Penn State, Michigan or Ohio State, and all three felt strongly that this should be geographic. Both Michigan and Ohio State felt like they should be in the same division. In the case of Michigan State, they have a very strong football program, but when we looked at them last time, they were what I would describe as a 3 seed. And Purdue was a 4 seed. Moving a 3 seed over wasn't really going to be the answer to competitive balance anyway. In the case of Purdue last time, they'd been to a lot of bowl games, they'd been to the Rose Bowl, they've had good years, a little down in the last couple years but still bowl-eligible. Michigan State's a good football program, but it wasn't going to make things equal competitively. It may have had an effect. It depends upon what you think Michigan State and Purdue will do over the next decade.

On crossover schedules and rotations ...

Delany: The strong majority view was that we not have assigned crossovers, so we could play each other as much as we could over a long period of time. Obviously, Indiana and Purdue have the Bucket game, it's historic and we wanted to preserve that. It made Purdue comfortable going West, Indiana comfortable going East and it preserved that tradition. An awful lot of our rivalries could be taken care of through divisional play. If you look at the schedules, what you'll see is over time, the crossovers rotate. In the first 18 years, you're going to see a lot of competition between teams at the top of either division. We call that a bit of parity-based scheduling. You'll see Wisconsin and Nebraska and Iowa playing a lot of competition against Penn State, Ohio State and Michigan. But it will eventually rotate. BTN did some surveys. We didn't rely on them but we followed the results. We had 62,000 people who participated. By and large, this aligns with what we think is fan-friendly in terms of regionalization, protection of rivals and so on. About 80 percent of fans were supportive of nine or 10 games.

On the possibility of 10 conference games and the need for teams to play seven home games per year ...

Delany: It was fully explored. A negative of the nine is the 5-4 [home games vs. road games]. But we're able to get the 5-4 to be identical in each division, so the people you're playing against are all playing five or four. The 10 would have been nice, but we were having difficulty seeing 28 nonconference games and being able to accomplish what we wanted with major matchups. While we explored it, we felt we'd have a much harder time getting to seven home games. A lot of these budgets are predicated on it. We thought it was a reach. Who's to say in the future where we might go, but right now, we thought nine was the right place to be.

On the new scheduling principles Big Ten teams want to adopt ...

Delany: We're shooting for 2016, but we have some contractual issues. People are going to try to make it work. The conference is going to try to help as much as we can and coordinate and communicate to other conferences who have a desire to upgrade schedules. You're only talking about three or four weeks, and then you're pretty much going to conference play. Everybody's looking for improved schedules. I think they will be. And the committee we finally establish will have guidelines in that direction. We're not saying everybody has to play the same schedule, but if you're a Top 10-type program, we want you to be scheduling a Top 10-type program. If you're in the middle, we understand that.

For the most part, [the FCS games] were wins, and in a lot of cases, they weren't good matchups. They're good football teams, but it's hard to compete when you're 25 scholarships less. We think it's a balanced package. We think it's progressive with what's happening in the future. All in all, we feel pretty good about it.

On division names and Legends/Leaders going away ...

Delany: We're East and we're West. It's pure geography. Last time, we were a combination of competitive balance and geography being last. Those names weren't available to us last time, so we didn't have much discussion on it. It's just a reflection on each division.

People can have the discussion [on Legends and Leaders] now or in the future, but for us, it was a good-faith effort. If they weren't accepted, and I take it to some extent, they weren't, but among the athletic directors and presidents, it was pretty cut and dried that if you go with geography, geographic names are the right way to go.

The Big Ten presidents and chancellors on Sunday approved the new East-West division alignment in football for the 2014 season, as well as a nine-game conference schedule beginning in 2016.

Legends and Leaders are gone, as the league made geography it's top priority in aligning the new divisions. Here's how they'll look when new Big Ten members Maryland and Rutgers join the conference ...

Big Ten East: Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers

Big Ten West: Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Purdue, Wisconsin

The Purdue-Indiana game will be the only annual protected crossover in the new alignment. The initial alignment featured protected crossovers for every Big Ten team.

"Big Ten directors of athletics concluded four months of study and deliberation with unanimous approval of a future football structure that preserved rivalries and created divisions based on their primary principle of East/West geography," commissioner Jim Delany said in a prepared statement. "The directors of athletics also relied on the results of a fan survey commissioned by [Big Ten Network] last December to arrive at their recommendation, which is consistent with the public sentiment expressed in the poll."

Delany told ESPN.com that geography was the top priority in aligning divisions, followed by preserving rivalries and then competitive balance, which had been the driving force behind the initial alignment. The athletic directors met six times to discuss divisions and scheduling since Maryland and Rutgers joined the league in November.

The Big Ten will keep an eight-game league schedule for the 2013, 2014 and 2015 seasons before joining leagues like the Pac-12 and Big 12 with nine. In 2014 and 2015, teams will play six division games plus two crossover games. Beginning in 2016, teams will play six division games and three crossovers.

Beginning in 2016, the East division teams will play five Big Ten home games and four Big Ten road games in even-numbered years (2016, 2018, 2020, etc.). The West division teams will play five Big Ten home games and four Big Ten road games in odd-numbered years. The Big Ten last played nine league games during the 1983 and 1984 seasons.

The new alignment preserves 10 of 13 rivalry trophy games through division play or the Purdue-Indiana crossover, but all 13 games will take place at least once every four years. Also, while Purdue-Indiana is the only protected crossover, the league will have cross-division rotations.

"In the first 18 years, you’re going to see a lot of competition between teams at the top of either division," Delany said. "We call that a bit of parity-based scheduling, so you’ll see Wisconsin, Nebraska and Iowa playing a lot of competition against Penn State, Ohio State and Michigan. But it will rotate. Early on, we feel this gives the fans what they want."

The Big Ten approved a nine-game league schedule in August 2011, but went back to eight after forming a scheduling partnership with the Pac-12. When the partnership fell apart last summer, the Big Ten decided to keep an eight-game league schedule, which will remain for the next three seasons.

The division names discussion was a brief one.

"It's pure geography," Delany said. "Last time, we were a combination of competitive balance and geography being last. So those names weren't available to us last time. We didn't have a lot of discussion on it."

We'll have more reaction from Delany and others on the divisions/scheduling announcement, so stay tuned ...

The sting from the collapse of the short-lived Big Ten/Pac-12 scheduling alliance isn't totally gone for Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany, but his desire to form partnerships with other conferences hasn't wavered.

Delany told ESPN.com on Monday that the Big Ten continues to explore possible affiliations with other leagues, both for bowl games and non-league scheduling. The Big Ten will be increasing its conference schedules to nine or 10 games, reducing the number of nonconference games by one or two per season.

"We would like to discuss [partnerships]," Delany said. "We were disappointed that the [Pac-12] collaboration didn’t work. Whether we're at nine or 10, there will be fewer nonconference games, but we hope the fewer are better improved in quality. We would be very energized to sit down with others who were interested in also upgrading their schedules to see how we could do that."

Delany points out that different Big Ten programs have different goals, whether it's competing for national championships or making bowl games on a regular basis. But the message from the league office to its members is to push themselves more in non-league scheduling.

"What we've got to do is upgrade," Delany said. "It doesn't make any sense to be playing people from different divisions with fewer scholarships [FCS]. It doesn't make sense for everyone to be playing Southern Cal and Texas, but there's comparability there that we could seek out. We're trying to find out ways that we can create fair schedules, good schedules, healthy schedules for our teams, our players, our coaches and our fans."

Creating healthier bowl matchups also is an objective for the Big Ten. One idea gaining steam is to increase the flexibility of the selection process by sharing tie-ins with other conferences.

The Big Ten continues to have conversations with other leagues and bowl games as it prepares for its next lineup -- beginning in 2014 -- one built around " keeping things fresh for the fans and for the players and for the bowls," Delany said.

"If you have someone who goes to the same bowl three years in a row, that’s problematic," Ohio State athletic director Gene Smith said. "Even two years in a row is problematic. So how do we change that model?"

The Big Ten has valued its alliances with the Rose Bowl in football and with the ACC in basketball. Other leagues like the Big 12 also are motivated to form similar partnerships.

"The problem with partnerships beyond two or three or four is everybody has different objectives," Delany said. "Simple partnerships are easier than multilateral partnerships, but we'll explore both."

Let the nine versus 10 debate really begin.

The eight-game Big Ten schedule soon will be a thing of the past. Big Ten athletic directors and coaches met Monday at league headquarters in Park Ridge, Ill., to discuss, among other things, how many conference games will be played following the additions of Maryland and Rutgers in 2014.

League commissioner Jim Delany told ESPN.com that all of the discussions focused on models with nine or 10 league games. There was "no support" to keep the current eight-game league schedule.

"There's real recognition that we now live in two regions of the country, and we want to make sure those are bound together as best we can, so more games [makes sense]," Delany said. "Eight games is not on the table. It's nine or 10."

The change likely won't be implemented until the 2016 season, two years after Maryland and Rutgers join the Big Ten. The league had told its athletic directors not to schedule nonleague games after forming the Pac-12 scheduling alliance, and then gave the green light once the alliance fell apart last summer.

A resolution on the final number of league games for future schedules is expected this spring. The athletic directors have several meetings scheduled in the coming weeks, including in March at the Big Ten basketball tournament in Chicago.

Several factors drive the Big Ten's move to more league games.

"We want to try and provide an opportunity for our league teams to be exposed to as many league venues and conference experiences as possible," said Ohio State athletic director Gene Smith, who chairs the Big Ten athletic directors' group. "There may be a situation where a student-athlete may go four years and play somewhere and never get a chance to play against another [conference] team. ... There's television considerations there. When you have intriguing conference matchups that are better than some of our nonconference matchups, that's an important piece, so there are a lot of different issues."

The downside of a nine-game schedule is an uneven number of home and road games for half of the league each season. A 10-game schedule maintains balance but makes it harder for schools to keep a minimum of seven home games per year, which has been a budgetary requirement in recent seasons.

Delany said if the Big Ten adopts a 10-game schedule, there would be discussions about an "equalization process" relating to revenue, possibly involving the Big Ten's next television agreement.

"If you go with 10 and you can't guarantee people seven home games, how do we financially make people whole?" Smith said. "Then how often does that occur? That's one of my challenges for Ohio State, not just the athletic department institutional revenue but the economic impact in our community. That's a huge discussion, the value of 10 versus nine is better for the overall good, so I'd be willing to say, 'OK, I can work with the alternative, where I'd have six [home] games once every X number of years, and we're made whole.' "

One concern with increasing the number of league games is its impact on future nonleague scheduling. Ohio State, for example, recently added series with big-name opponents Texas, Oregon and TCU.

Could those games be in jeopardy?

"We're going to hold onto those," Smith said. "That's what's going to cause us in a 10-game conference scenario to have some challenges with having six home games. If we move to 10 conference games, in a normal situation, I'd just buy in two games every year. Then I wouldn't have a problem. But we're going to maintain our philosophy of playing those type of [bigger nonleague] games, whether it's nine or 10.

"Those are great experiences for our kids. We're a national program. It's something I don't see us changing."

The Big Ten has traditionally been reluctant to stage night games in November. That could be changing.

League coaches expressed support for more primetime games in the final full month of the regular season during conference meetings the past two days. Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany told ESPN.com that the conference has no objection if schools want to schedule more night games in general, including ones in November.

Delany said Penn State, Nebraska and Ohio State are among the schools that have been pushing for more games under the lights.

"We've been very supportive of night games," Delany said. "We've gone from zero to 15, and our television partners like them if it's the right game. ...

"So there seems to be more of an openness to open that window on the game-day experience, whether it's in November or October. We won't stand in the way. We just have to figure out the best way to do it, but I think there's value there."

Though the Big Ten doesn't have a specific policy against November night games, it hasn't exactly been encouraged, either. The last Big Ten night game in November was in 2008 when Iowa went to Minnesota. And that was played in the Metrodome.

Cold weather, of course, has been one of several reasons why the league has preferred noon and 3:30 p.m. ET kickoffs in November. But the exposure to the elements for fans may be worth the added exposure for the teams involved, as college football is increasingly becoming a primetime sport.

"The viewership is larger and more diverse," Delany said. "November can be cold, but that's going to be a local decision and one we would encourage."

Delany said we could see a November night game as soon as the 2013 season, "if we had the right games and we had the right schools and we had the openness."

Ohio State athletic director Gene Smith said he's a proponent of more night games.

"November is a good option," he said. "Historically, we've been resistant to that for weather reasons and our kids getting home so late at night or early in the morning. We're more open to it now. One of the things we have to look at is the historical temperatures in November, what they look like, and [then] we can make an informed decision on that point. I'm open to it."

Don't hold your breath on a Michigan-Ohio State night game. But if the schools are interested and the matchup is an appealing one to TV, a November primetime game could happen and prove beneficial. Just remember to dress in layers.

Big Ten athletic directors will meet several times over the next few months to hammer out some key decisions for the 2014 season and beyond. The most pressing, and arguably most important, issue will involve figuring out how many times to play each other during the season.

League officials chose to stay with eight conference games per season after Nebraska joined the league in 2011. But when Maryland and Rutgers come aboard next year, that could change. ESPN.com interviewed several conference athletic directors, who confirmed that a nine- and even a 10-game league schedule are on the table in the upcoming discussions.

"That’s something that we have to really resolve quickly, because the ramifications of that discussion are significant," Michigan athletic director Dave Brandon told ESPN.com. "It’s a high-agenda item."

The reason for the priority is obvious: More conference games means fewer nonconference opportunities. Some schools, like Nebraska and Minnesota, already have four out-of-league opponents lined up for the 2014 season and beyond, while others are waiting to see what the league decides before signing contracts with future opponents.

The Big Ten announced in August 2011 that it would go to a nine-game league schedule. That was scrapped a few months later when the Pac-12/Big Ten alliance was brokered, but then that agreement was canceled the following spring before it ever began. Athletic directors we talked to were at the very least interested in revisiting the nine-game schedule idea.

Commissioner Jim Delany has said he'd like to see more conference games. Brandon and Ohio State athletic director Gene Smith both told ESPN.com that they favored that idea when the Big Ten balloons to 14 teams.

"As the conference expands, it would be unfortunate if a student-athlete came to the University of Michigan, played in the Big Ten Conference for four years and never even got to play or compete against one of the schools in the conference," Brandon said. "That doesn’t make a lot of sense to me. As the number of institutions has grown, I believe we should take a look at at least moving to nine."

"I would like to go to nine or 10," Smith said.

Of the major conferences, only the Pac-12 and Big 12 currently play nine league games per season. No FBS conference plays 10 league games per year. The main advantage of adopting the latter, more radical idea would be balancing the conference schedule. Every team would then play five home and five road league contests, instead of having years with five road conference games and only four at home in a nine-game slate.

"Nine is challenging because of the statistical advantage for the home team over time," Purdue athletic director Morgan Burke said. "If you have some teams with five home games and others with only four, do you really have a true champion? To some people, that is a stumbling block."

But a 10-game schedule would bring its own share of obstacles. Such a plan leaves only two nonconference games and could make schools less inclined to play home-and-home intersectional matchups versus big-name opponents.

For example, Ohio State has already scheduled several high-profile series for the future, including home-and-home deals with Oregon, Texas and TCU. But with a 10-game conference schedule, the Buckeyes would have only six home games in years when it traveled to play opponents like the Ducks, Longhorns or Horned Frogs -- assuming it decided to keep those series.

"Most of us need seven home games in order to make our local budgets," Smith said. "Is there a way to overcome that? I don't know. We'll have to look at that. The conference is aware that it's an issue."

Would the extra inventory of conference games add enough value to the Big Ten's next TV contract to make up for the loss of home dates? Smith also points out that, with only two nonconference games, schools could potentially avoid paying huge guarantees to lower-level conference teams to fill out their schedule. Such teams are routinely getting $1 million or more to play sacrificial lamb against power programs in their giant stadiums.

Still, giving up home games is not a popular idea in a tough economic climate.

"Let’s face it, we have a stadium that we’re putting 112,000 people in every week," Brandon said. "It doesn’t make a lot of sense to be shutting that stadium down and not playing as many events, and going to places where you’re playing in front of crowds that are far less. We have to think about that financial consideration, and how do we leverage the assets we have in the most positive way for the conference and all the institutions?"

The forthcoming four-team playoff also complicates matters. Strength of schedule is expected to be a main component for the playoff selection committee. Would playing 10 games in the conference help or hurt Big Ten teams? In years when the league was viewed as down, like in 2012, it would most likely damage a league contender's chances, not to mention that 10 conference games means seven more guaranteed losses for Big Ten teams.

"I think [a 10-game schedule] could work if you're trying to schedule strong opponents in those other two games as well," Penn State athletic director Dave Joyner said. "The decision is, are you going to play two, three or four games outside of conference? I think a lot of it will depend on what the feeling is on how that would affect strength of schedule."

So a nine-game schedule appears to be a more likely option, but the thorny problem of an unbalanced number of home games remains. Could the league try to get creative, and perhaps add more neutral-site conference games to the mix? Anything and everything appears to be up for discussion.

"Maybe you could do it divisionally, where one division plays five home games one year, and then that division plays four home games [the next year]," Northwestern athletic director Jim Phillips said. "I don’t know. But it should be interesting.”

That last part is the only guarantee right now.

The Big Ten's bowl lineup will change in 2014, and the changes likely won't be limited to games and dates.

The entire bowl business could soon have a dramatically different look.

Several conference commissioners, including the Big Ten's Jim Delany, publicly discussed the need to change the bowl business model earlier this month during the week of the national title game. Declining bowl attendance is a concern, as are issues such as ticket distribution and the selection of teams. The Big Ten's athletic directors will discuss the future of the bowls when they meet next month at league headquarters in Park Ridge, Ill. -- they'll tackle not just the who, what, where and when, but the how and the why.

"There are going to be some changes," Iowa athletic director Gary Barta told ESPN.com. "What I worry about is the watering-down of college football. College football's been on a meteoric rise since the creation of the BCS, both in stadium attendance and TV ratings. I think we're starting to see that saturation, and that's what I worry about going forward in the next 10 or 20 years. As we go into introducing the 2014 playoff, it is a chance for us to re-look at all of our bowls."

Several Big Ten athletic directors we contacted talked about having a more "national" bowl lineup beginning in 2014. They might as well have substituted the word "flexible."

Right now, the Big Ten's bowl lineup contains heavy doses of SEC, Big 12, Florida, Texas and Jan. 1. The selection order is fairly rigid. As a result, we've seen teams go to the same bowl in consecutive seasons (i.e. Nebraska at the Capital One in 2012 and 2013) or to the same state for a number of years. Wisconsin played in six consecutive bowls in Florida from 2004-2009, including back-to-back appearances in both the Capital One and Champs Sports Bowls.

The repetition problem exists even outside conference bowl tie-ins. Ohio State went to Arizona four times in a five-year stretch, three times for Fiesta Bowls (one of which was the national championship) and once for the BCS title game.

"I used the term bowl fatigue," Ohio State AD Gene Smith told ESPN.com. "When you go back to the same place multiple times … the novelty is lost."

The key to preventing bowl fatigue, several ADs say, is eliminating the rigidity of selections.

"We're going to try to get toward more looking at how do you put together a slate where you get good matchups, but at the same time avoid repeats … the bowls don't want that either," Purdue's Morgan Burke said. "I don't know that we can unteach what people have learned over the years -- 'We have the next pick, and the next pick.' Maybe you don't do that this round. Maybe we say, 'You're going to get a Big Ten team, and it will be part of a selection process.'"

Delany has mentioned the possibility of collaborating with other leagues on bowl tie-ins, essentially sharing the spots depending on the year and the attractiveness of the matchup.

"This is about the fans and the fans' experience and us really listening to what they're saying," Northwestern athletic director Jim Phillips said. "It's been documented that repeat institutions and repeat bowls and repeat matchups is not a recipe for success. People want fresh and new and exciting matchups. Any way we can do that with those bowl tie-ins, I would be in complete favor of that."

The Big Ten hosted officials from 10-12 bowls last fall and will discuss possible tie-ins with the athletic directors throughout the spring. It's likely the Big Ten adds at least one new bowl on the East Coast -- the New Era Pinstripe Bowl at New York's Yankee Stadium certainly is in the mix -- and possibly another in California, where it currently makes only one postseason appearance (Rose Bowl).

Another huge component is ticket distribution. Many Big Ten schools struggled to sell their ticket allotments from the bowls this past year, as fans could spend much less for tickets -- often better seats -- in the secondary market.

"What we have to do is work with the bowls to take that impact off of the institutions but work closely together on a sales strategy," Smith said. "Let's forget about the institution being responsible for X, and the bowl being responsible for X and the local organizing committee being responsible for X. Look at your aggregator sales plan, then come up with a cooperative strategy to make sure we're selling the bowl out. We've just got to think differently than we have in the past, and think about pricing, and [tiers] of pricing and the venues and things of that nature."

The ADs are mindful of the upcoming playoff. Although they'll be tackling several important items in the coming months, the Big Ten's bowl lineup and the bowl system as a whole will merit close attention.

"The landscape is shifting with the 2014 playoff introduction," Barta said. "I want to make sure we keep the bowls relevant."

The Big Ten could decide by June whether to replace the Legends and Leaders names for its divisions in 2014, colleague Brett McMurphy reports.

McMurphy spoke to league commissioner Jim Delany, who said changing the division names is an option when Maryland and Rutgers join the conference for the 2014 season. The Big Ten will also have to decide on the makeup of its divisions and scheduling, but there might not be a more divisive issue than those division names.

“Obviously, we got some acceptance [with Legends and Leaders], but not as much as we would have liked,” Delany said. "... I think on the other hand, we said we would test market it, and we have for a couple of years. We have the opportunity to look at it again. I’m sure we will. Whether or not we change or not is to be determined. I don’t have any presumption that we’ll change on it, but that doesn’t mean we’re not looking at it.

“I don’t think when you try to build something, lead some organization, you don’t want to be tone deaf. But it’s not up for vote every week.”

Delany also said that if the league does not decide to organize its divisions by geography, then it will not use geographic names like East and West for its divisions.

The league conducted a survey in the fall of 2011 and found that of the fans it polled, 57 percent either liked the Legends and Leaders names "somewhat" or "very much." About 35 percent disliked the names somewhat or very much, while only 8 percent were neutral. Anecdotally, we hear from many fans who don't like the names, and of course the league has set itself for some easy wisecracks with such ambitious names.

The Big Ten has a lot of decisions to make this year before moving to 14 teams. Division names are not that important in the grand scheme of things, but it's one that will generate plenty of discussion and debate.

The Big Ten plays unquestionably the nation's toughest bowl lineup. The league also plays quite possibly the nation's least diverse bowl lineup.

One of those things should change when a new lineup is unveiled for the 2014 season and beyond.

The Big Ten's current rundown includes three matchups against SEC foes in Florida (Capital One, Outback, TaxSlayer.com Gator). It also includes at least two matchups against the Big 12 (Buffalo Wild Wings, Meineke Car Care Bowl of Texas) and often a third (Heart of Dallas, which sometimes features Conference USA teams). Although the Big Ten faces the Pac-12 most years in the Rose Bowl Game presented by Vizio, the two leagues that have the most in common aren't tied into any other bowl matchups.

The lineup is very SEC- and Big 12-heavy. It's also very New Year's Day-heavy, with five of the eight tie-ins on Jan. 1.

"We want to play the best," Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany told ESPN.com on Wednesday. "I don't think you'll see any radical changes in those areas, but you'll probably see us having more interactions with more conferences. I'm not exactly sure how that'll play out, but the sites will be national and the quality of opponents will be national."

Delany said the Big Ten met with officials from 10-12 bowl games in November at league headquarters in Park Ridge, Ill. Although Delany's top priorities are figuring out the new division alignment -- with Maryland and Rutgers set to join the league -- and revising the 2014 football schedule, but he hopes to have the bowl lineup, which likely will span the 2014-17 seasons, finalized before the summer.

The Big Ten won't compromise degree of difficulty in the lineup, but Delany understands that a lack of variety can turn off fans interested in traveling to different areas. He attributes part of the bowls' recent attendance/interest problems to a lack of diversity in participating teams.

"We're going to try and be national and try to have relationships on both coasts and maybe in areas we haven't been before," Delany said. "There will be more diversity in teams that get to go, so no one goes to Florida five times in six years or even three years in a row. I hope we would put together a slate of games where our alums live, where we recruit and against opponents that will test us every year. Those are the elements.

"It's a puzzle. Some of the outlines are falling into place, but it's a long way from the particulars of it being filled out."

Delany said at the Big Ten's spring meetings in May that the league has interest in the New Era Pinstripe Bowl at New York's Yankee Stadium. That was before the league added Rutgers and Maryland as new members and spoke extensively about its new East Coast presence. Nothing is official yet, but I would be stunned if the Big Ten's new lineup doesn't include the Pinstripe Bowl.

We know the Big Ten will have a more frequent presence in the Discover Orange Bowl against an ACC opponent.

Another California bowl also is possible (Bridgeport Education Holiday, Kraft Fight Hunger). It would be surprising if the Big Ten's next bowl lineup doesn't include another Pac-12 matchup besides the Rose, and maybe an ACC matchup on the East Coast.

"We'll still have significant competition with the SEC in Florida," Delany said.

Whether that includes keeping all three matchups or maybe just two remains to be seen.

But variety will be a bigger element of the Big Ten's next bowl lineup, which will be welcomed by most fans.

Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany knows it's a bottom-line world and the bottom line is his league finished 2-5 in bowls this season.

But Delany also is a realist. He knew all seven Big Ten squads entered their games as underdogs. The league's best team, Ohio State, and arguably its second best, Penn State, watched at home because of NCAA sanctions. After a season where the Big Ten took a beating on and off the field, the prospect of a winless postseason seemed to fit the league's narrative this season.

Instead, Northwestern and Michigan State won their games, while both Minnesota and Michigan were in position to win in the fourth quarter before squandering leads. Wisconsin paced Stanford in the Rose Bowl Game presented by Vizio, while Nebraska, written off by most against a Georgia team that nearly made the national title game, entered the fourth quarter tied with the Bulldogs.

"I wish we had won more, obviously," Delany told ESPN.com on Tuesday. "You go into all the games hoping you do. We were decided underdogs in a lot of them. I want to first recognize and congratulate the guys who beat us. And then we had a couple teams that did win. It was great for Michigan State -- they fought awful hard -- and Northwestern did as well. They carried the banner. With the exception of Purdue, which did not play well at all, we were right there. If Georgia's a top 5 team, Stanford's a top 10 team, our teams certainly went toe-to-toe with those guys.

"Notwithstanding the results, I'm cautiously optimistic going forward."

New Year's Day -- or in last year's case, Jan. 2 -- hasn't been a celebratory one for the Big Ten in recent years. There was the infamous 0-5 performance two years ago (featuring three blowouts). The league has gone 1-4 in each of the past two seasons.

But aside from Purdue's 44-point loss to Oklahoma State in the Heart of Dallas Bowl, the Big Ten teams held their own.

"I thought Michigan and Wisconsin and Nebraska and Minnesota fought their hearts out," Delany said. "I love how hard they played. I thought the teams were prepared. Obviously, we've taken a fair share of criticism, and I don't think it's undeserved because when you're the Big Ten or a major conference, you're expected to perform, perhaps win more games than we have in the last five years. But I've seen the story before in basketball, in football. I've been through five-year down cycles before. I've been through 10-year up cycles.

"But I'm cautiously optimistic."

One reason is the potential for greater coaching stability in the Big Ten. The league is in a historic period of changes with its football programs. Indiana's Kevin Wilson, who just finished his second season, is the longest-tenured coach in the Leaders Division. After Iowa's Kirk Ferentz (14 years), Northwestern's Pat Fitzgerald (seven years) is the Big Ten's longest serving coach.

But newer coaches are having success. Urban Meyer went 12-0 in his first go-round at Ohio State. Minnesota's wins total doubled in Jerry Kill's second season. And Penn State's Bill O'Brien won Big Ten Coach of the Year honors in his first year as a head coach, despite dealing with unique challenges in State College. Delany called O'Brien's achievements "under almost impossible circumstances ... one of the best stories of the year."

"I would say it's clear that we're not conference 1 or 2, and we need to move forward, but I think our coaching situations will stabilize a bit," Delany said. "Getting Ohio State back will be a good thing. I see improvement at a lot of places. I see improvement at Indiana, I see improvement at Northwestern, I see improvement at Michigan, I see improvement at Michigan State. Ohio State had consequences for its actions, but they'll be fully available [for the postseason] next year, and they ran the table this year."

The Big Ten's biggest issue continues to be an absence from the national championship race. A conference can't be great, Delany said, unless it competes for the crystal football. The Rose Bowl also has been a problem for the Big Ten, which has won only once (Ohio State in the 2010 game) since Wisconsin's consecutive wins in the 1999 and 2000 games.

"It's the biggest game we play every year, other than the national championship game," Delany said. "It's huge. It's always disappointing not to win. ... It's elevated above everything else."

The Big Ten is still looking to elevate its profile, but after entering bowl season with a very low bar and avoiding a total mess, the league at least can avoid months and months of national flogging ... maybe.

"I love the effort that our guys gave," Delany said. "I would have loved to win a little bit more, but we showed that whatever the margin is between winning and losing, it's been tightened up a bit."

Indianapolis has almost everything a league like the Big Ten could want for its signature sporting event.

It boasts first-rate facilities for the game itself and for surrounding events like Big Ten Fan Fest. It boasts an excellent concentration of downtown hotels and restaurants. Indiana Sports Corporation has an unmatched track record of staging major sporting events, including the Super Bowl and the Final Four. The Big Ten picked Indianapolis to host its football championship game for these reasons and others. And from an event production standpoint, Indy has delivered.

But Indianapolis has two drawbacks.

1. There aren't overwhelming numbers of Big Ten fans who live there.

2. It isn't a true destination city.

In other words, Indianapolis isn't Chicago.

Some might say I'm picking on Indy after last Saturday's Big Ten championship game, which drew a crowd of only 41,260 to Lucas Oil Stadium, which can seat more than 67,000 for football games. Few anticipated a great crowd after a season in which the Big Ten had two of its best teams -- Ohio State and Penn State -- facing NCAA sanctions and barred from the title game or bowls. The fact that the title-game participants, Nebraska and Wisconsin, weren't in the national title race didn't help matters, either. Add in that Wisconsin finished third in the Leaders division with a 7-5 regular-season record, and the Big Ten title game had as much buzz as bingo night (yes, I know some of you love bingo).

No one expected a packed house at Lucas Oil. But 41,000 and change?

Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany, speaking Thursday in New York, called the turnout "a little bit disappointing."

"The two fan bases and those who came out to watch were excited about the game and bought some tickets, but it didn't have that extra zip," Big Ten deputy commissioner Brad Traviolia told ESPN.com. "The inaugural game was unique in that you can't really take that first year with all the buzz and excitement of something new … and have that be the standard going forward.

"But for many reasons, we can't take this year's experience and say this is the norm going forward. It's a unique year."

Traviolia is right. It's hard to imagine another Big Ten season with such a perfect storm of bad as this one. The likelihood of having another title game matchup as humdrum as last Saturday's is slim. And if Ohio State starts reaching the title game on a regular basis -- a strong possibility -- Buckeye fans can make the easy drive west on I-70 and flood Indy with scarlet and gray. But Ohio State and, to a lesser degree, Michigan are the only massive fan bases that can easily access Indy. The Big Ten also can't count on having matchups that resonate nationally every year, either.

Looking at all those empty seats Saturday night, I couldn't help but wonder what the attendance would have been like at Chicago's Soldier Field. Chicago is the Big Ten's nerve center. Almost every Big Ten school has huge alumni bases in Chicago. There are multiple Michigan bars, multiple Iowa bars, multiple Wisconsin bars, multiple Nebraska bars, multiple Ohio State bars ... the list goes on. The league office is located just outside the city limits in Park Ridge, Ill.

Chicago is first and foremost a pro sports town, but it's also a Big Ten town. I know. I live here. I meet Big Ten fans everywhere, whether it's at restaurants, grocery stores, concerts or just on the street. Even when I don't want to meet Big Ten fans -- like while exercising at my gym -- they pop up. They're everywhere.

When the title game matchup isn't great, it's a lot easier to fill seats when the target audience already lives in the area. The die-hards always are going to travel to see their teams, but the Big Ten needs to market not only to the two participating fan bases, but to the general Big Ten fan, who can decide hours before kickoff to head to the stadium, grab some tickets and watch the game.

There are simply many more of those folks in Chicago than Indy.

"Demographic-wise, absolutely that's true," Traviolia said. "Chicago is just a bigger city. It has a bigger population base. There are more Big Ten alums here in Chicago than there are in Indianapolis. That's just a fact. But population is one area we looked at when we made a decision in terms of assigning the championship game, but we also looked at the facility and the community involvement, the local organizing committee, what the city can bring to the table, the cooperation with the NFL franchise.

"There's a whole list of things you go through."

Traviolia couldn't cite the exact number of Big Ten alums in Indy when we talked, but he called it "a nice amount." It's still not close to what you see in Chicago.

Chicago also is a true destination city, even when the mercury drops. It offers more to do and see.

When Indianapolis and Chicago presented their bids for the championship game in May 2011, Indianapolis did to Chicago what Wisconsin did to Nebraska on Saturday night. Indy had the better pitch, the better pitchmen (Gov. Mitch Daniels and former Ohio State basketball star/TV analyst Clark Kellogg), the better track record and the better facilities. The Big Ten made the right decision to go with Indy for the first five championship games.

The Chicago group needs to put together a better, more cohesive plan. Even then, there are drawbacks, namely an outdoor venue with a horrifically bad natural grass field. There would be more logistical headaches in Chicago.

There also likely would be more demand for tickets. The Big Ten and other leagues are asking fans to travel to both the league title game and to bowl games. When the college football playoff arrives in 2014, fans might be deciding between three postseason sites (league title game, national semifinal, national championship). If more of fans already live in the city that hosts the league title game, those decisions are easier.

"If you have an undefeated, No. 1-ranked team in the country, there's a buzz surrounding that," Traviolia said. "I remember when Illinois [basketball] was ranked No. 1, we had the men's tournament in Chicago. That was really the first time we had sold out the tournament prior to the games starting. A team having a great year has a huge impact.

"That being said, local support is very important as well."

I'm seeing a similar pattern with the Big Ten men's basketball tournament, which used to alternate between Chicago and Indy, and then went to Indy permanently in 2008 because of many of the reasons outlined above. But tournament attendance at Bankers Life Fieldhouse has fluctuated -- it largely hinges on the strength of Indiana University's team -- so the Big Ten decided to bring back Chicago to the rotation.

Traviolia and his staff are in the process of reviewing this year's football championship and how they can improve future events. They'll look at factors like ticket allotment to participating teams as well as ticket prices.

Although it's too early to say what might change in 2013, the Big Ten likely will make some tweaks.

"We're in Year 2 of a five-year commitment to Indianapolis, and right now the mindset is to make Year 3 the best we can," Traviolia said. "We're not pretending we have it figured out by any means. We didn't after Year 1 and we don't after Year 2. It's something that you look at, review, you talk to people, you see what went well, what can be done better."

Big Ten officials have used the word demographics a lot in recent weeks to discuss the league's recent expansion. Demographics also apply to the title game, and Chicago's advantage can't be ignored when the Big Ten looks for sites beginning in 2016.

Back in late July, when the Big Ten coaches gathered in Chicago for the league's annual media days, Northwestern's Pat Fitzgerald proposed something radical.

Just for this season, Fitzgerald said, the Big Ten should use a selection committee to choose which team faced the Legends Division champion in the conference championship game. Fitzgerald saw that two Leaders Division teams -- Ohio State and Penn State -- were on probation and envisioned a scenario like last year's Pac-12 title game, when Oregon played 6-6 UCLA because USC was ineligible.

"I don't know if fans get excited about a .500 team playing in the championship game," Fitzgerald said at the time. "There's obviously a chance of that."

Fitzgerald's proposal was discussed but not for very long. When we asked Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany about the idea, he quickly brushed it aside.

You couldn't blame the league for not adopting the committee idea. Penn State had just received its NCAA sanctions about a week earlier, so there hadn't been much time to mull the consequences. The logistics of the proposal -- who, for instance, would sit on such a committee and how could that not become a political nightmare? -- also presented some problems.

But as we get close to November, Fitzgerald's plan is starting to make more and more sense. His worst-case scenario looks more likely to develop, as Ohio State (9-0) has emerged as easily the best team in the Leaders (and the whole league). Penn State looks like the second-best team on that side. The Leaders' representative in Indianapolis on Dec. 1 could be a .500 team if clubhouse leader Wisconsin (6-3, 3-2) were to lose its final three games at Indiana, versus Ohio State and at Penn State. Or Indiana (3-5, 1-3) could sneak its way to nearby Lucas Oil Stadium after a 0-3 start in league play, if things break right.

If either of those things happened, try explaining to Michigan or even Fitzgerald's 7-2 Wildcats why their teams didn't deserve a shot at the championship game.

November is supposed to be the most exciting month in the Big Ten. Instead, we may get a situation where Nebraska wraps up the Legends title while Wisconsin keeps on backing into the conference championship game. Yawn. How much more exciting would it be if more teams were still alive?

If ever there were a year for a league to think radically about its championship game, this was the one. In fact, I've got an even more radical idea: Why not let Ohio State play in the Big Ten title game?

Think about it: The Big Ten is already allowing the Buckeyes to officially win the Leaders Division trophy, anyway. The NCAA postseason ban is for bowls only; any restriction on participation in conference championship games is strictly a league decision.

Whoever wins the Legends Division isn't playing for a BCS title no matter what. So, fine. Give the Legends champ the Rose Bowl bid. Then let it play Ohio State in Indy for the actual Big Ten championship.

OK, you say, but what if the Buckeyes win that game? I say, so what. Does it really matter if, for example, Nebraska goes to Pasadena at 10-3 instead of 11-2? And wouldn't the Huskers look much more legitimate if they beat Ohio State than if they topped a mediocre Wisconsin or, worse for perception's sake, Indiana?

You can't tell me you wouldn't rather watch a potential 12-0 Buckeyes take on whoever comes out of the Legends than the alternatives. It's not like the Big Ten championship game is some hallowed event, as this is only the second one. And there's an even worse scenario than a team on probation winning the conference title game: A 6-6 team pulling off the upset and stealing the Rose Bowl bid, providing Big Ten critics with their easiest punch line of all time.

I'm mostly being whimsical here. Ohio State certainly earned its title-game ban by breaking NCAA rules and being too shortsighted to not self-impose a bowl ban on last year's underwhelming team. The Pac-12 didn't implode when UCLA made its conference championship game last year, and neither will the Big Ten if a similar thing occurs.

But if we're going to have league championship games, they should at least involve the best teams and be entertaining. That's why some radical thinking was in order for this year's unique circumstances.

It figures that the most important meetings to determine college football's future postseason structure are taking place this week in Hollywood, Fla.

After all, every other meaningful event in the sport occurs well south of the Mason-Dixon Line.

Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany needs to make sure that changes, no matter which playoff format the BCS leaders ultimately choose. Forget the laughable "Four Teams Plus" plan that keeps the Rose Bowl in the mix for determining the national champion, but has virtually no chance of being approved by commissioners not from the Big Ten or Pac-12. While Delany loves the Rose Bowl and always will, his top priority this week in South Florida should be proximity.

If a four-team postseason plan is green-lighted, as many expect, Delany must ensure that it's possible for at least some of the games to be played in or near the Big Ten footprint. Because the current system doesn't serve the Big Ten or its fans.

There are myriad reasons for the Big Ten's downturn during the BCS era, but the location of the most significant bowl games, including the national championship, undoubtedly hurts the league, which has played several virtual road contests.

Since the BCS launched in 1998, the Big Ten has dropped two games to LSU in New Orleans, including the national title game after the 2007 season. The Big Ten also is 0-4 against USC at the Rose Bowl. While there are exceptions, like Penn State's Orange Bowl win against Florida State, Big Ten teams generally become roadkill in these matchups.

The Big Ten's destination dilemma is inherent within the current bowl/BCS system. The big bowl games always have been played in the south and west, and because of the "double-hosting" model, the same holds true for the national championship games. Most Big Ten fans understand the reasons behind this, and have willingly hopped on airplanes every December and traveled far and wide to see their teams play. It's this willingness that has made Big Ten teams so attractive to BCS bowl committees.

But the future postseason structure will bring change. A four-team setup would create two semifinals, which might take place within the current bowl structure, but most likely will not. The semis could take place at on-campus sites belonging to the higher seeds, a plan Delany advocates, or at neutral sites like Indianapolis' Lucas Oil Stadium and Detroit's Ford Field. The Edward Jones Dome in St. Louis? Beats facing LSU in NOLA.

"Yes, has to be," Ohio State athletic director Gene Smith recently told ESPN.com. "If you go neutral sites, you've got to have one in the Midwest. You've just got to. If it's campus sites, it's hard to dictate that, because it depends on the rankings. If you go campus sites, you hope some Midwest team is up there and they get to host."

Although Big Ten fans travel better than any in the country, the cost of making two long trips -- for the semifinals and championship game -- in a short span around the holidays will be too much for many to bear.

"If you think about it, just about every conference now has a [championship game], so you expect your fans to go to that," Wisconsin athletic director Barry Alvarez, who is attending the BCS meetings along with Delany, told ESPN.com. "Now you're going to go to a bowl site, and if you're in a championship game, that's three games you want them to travel to. It would be nice if one of those games would be at a home site, or two of them."

There's also the possibility the national championship game moves away from the bowl sites and goes to the highest bidder, which could bring venues like Lucas Oil Stadium and Ford Field into the rotation. The chance to play for a title on Big Ten soil will excite fans around the Midwest, but they'll settle for having some type of nationally relevant football game within driving distance in late December or early January.

Delany's ideal setup likely would call for semifinal games on campus, and the national title game at the Rose Bowl every year. Don't hold your breath on either element coming to fruition, but having a neutral-site semifinal in the Midwest every year certainly isn't too much to ask.

Big Ten fans have served their league and its teams extremely well by traveling in droves to big-time bowl games in faraway destinations.

It's time for Delany to return the favor by ensuring they'll have a chance to see their teams play meaningful games closer to home.

There are two ways for the Big Ten to boost its sagging national reputation.

The first is the most direct, effective and difficult: win a national championship. The BCS championship game is the only contest that truly shapes national perception. When a team hoists the crystal football in early January, the bowl performances of its conference brethren, good or bad, typically fade away. Until the Big Ten wins a title for the first time since 2002, it will have a hard time convincing anyone outside the heartland that it's an elite conference.

The second path involves more teams but can be more manageable: avoid days like the Big Ten endured on Jan. 1. As you remember, the league went 0-5 in bowls that day, a historic failure that made it easy for critics to open fire. The carnage included three double-digit losses to the rival SEC, which went on to win its fifth consecutive national title. The New Year's Day disaster said less about the Big Ten's strength at the top and more about its utter lack of depth as a conference.

Although Ohio State's losses in the BCS title game hurt the Big Ten's rep, the New Year's Day debacle along with poor overall bowl performances between 2006-08 (6-16 combined record) do just as much damage, if not more.

That brings us to this season.

Wisconsin on Saturday night announced itself as the Big Ten's best team -- perhaps by a wide margin -- and a national championship contender. Looking at the Badgers' remaining schedule, an Oct. 22 trip to Spartan Stadium -- Wisconsin's own personal house of horrors -- as well as trips to Ohio State (Oct. 29) and Illinois (Nov. 19) stand out. But the Badgers will be favored in all three games and have a very real chance to reach the Big Ten championship game Dec. 3 with an unblemished record.

If Wisconsin can win a national title -- preferably against an SEC opponent -- the Big Ten's overall bowl performance will be a footnote. Yet it won't be easy for Bret Bielema's crew.

What about Path No. 2? Can the Big Ten produce a good overall showing in the bowls?

Right now, Big Ten depth doesn't look very promising. Nebraska, which many considered the Big Ten's second best team, got steamrolled in Madison and has fallen well short of expectations on the defensive side. Two traditional powers, Ohio State and Penn State, are having major problems on offense. Michigan and Illinois both are 5-0, but neither squad has played a road game. Northwestern has significant concerns on defense, while quarterback Dan Persa's health situation remains in constant limbo. The Big Ten likely won't have to worry about Purdue, Indiana or Minnesota hurting its bowl record.

What the Big Ten needs is its middle class to rise in the final eight weeks of the regular season. It doesn't want a repeat of 2010, when only three squads entered the bowl season with more than seven victories.

Although every Big Ten team but Wisconsin has shown some flaws, the potential for improvement is there, particularly with certain teams.

Michigan and Illinois have won games despite playing their best football, particularly Illinois. If the Wolverines' defense continues to make strides and Denard Robinson trims his turnovers, Michigan will be a tough out. Illinois also has to cut down on mistakes after turnovers and penalties nearly cost it against Northwestern.

Three teams that should be better in November are Michigan State, Nebraska and Iowa. The Spartans' defense is for real, and can carry the team a long way. If the offensive line gets more consistent and Michigan State can produce an effective run game, look out for Mark Dantonio's team.

Iowa also is a squad to watch. Gifted QB James Vandenberg and a deeper-than-expected receiving corps make the offense extremely dangerous. The defense won't be as stifling as it has been in past seasons but still makes plays, particularly in the secondary.

There's something wrong with Nebraska's defense, but there's time to fix it, and Bo and Carl Pelini are pretty handy. Taylor Martinez is what he is and can't hurt the team like he did at Wisconsin, but an upgraded defense can take the Huskers a long way.

I have less hope for Penn State, Ohio State and Northwestern, as all three teams have significant weaknesses (offense for Penn State and Ohio State, defense for Northwestern). But each team also has reasons to believe it can make strides down the stretch (Penn State's defense, Ohio State's returning players from suspension, Persa's presence for Northwestern).

The Big Ten's problem hasn't been at the top the past two years. The league is 3-1 in BCS bowl games (yes, I know Ohio State's Sugar Bowl win will be vacated) with a close loss to a great TCU team in the Rose Bowl.

The bigger issue is building depth and solidifying the middle class before facing what is annually the nation's toughest bowl lineup.

Otherwise, Jan. 2 could be another very long day for Jim Delany.

CHICAGO -- Big Ten Commissioner Jim Delany says the conference may reconsider the names of its new divisions after overwhelmingly negative feedback.

Read the entire story.