ADVERTISEMENT

Fastest way to national recognition

I fail to understand the idea that good football means bad basketball and v-v.

Are there schools with no football teams that are really good at basketball? Sure, mostly either private schools for rich kids (new Big East, WCC, A-10, etc) or urban public schools in really big cities w/o the footprint for football (Cleveland State, for example). Neither is us.

Are there really big public schools where basketball is way bigger than football? Sure, quite a few. UK, Kansas, UNC, UCLA, a lot. But, remember that Commonwealth still holds three times as many as Rupp and the Rose Bowl about 10 times Pauley. But in any event, that is not us. We are not a really big public school named for a state or city. We are who we are.

There is not a basketball Big Green Club and a football Big Green Club, there is just a Big Green Club. There is not a basketball Athletic Department budget and a football Athletic Department budget, there is just an Athletic Department budget. All of the $$ go into one pot, and even if there is not enough to go around, there are 10 other sports to shortchange before you get to basketball.

The only thing I can come up with is tickets sold. OK, yes money is tight, but really? There are enough people to go around. You are telling me that if MU had a great football team and sold out every game (something we have never come close to doing) that there are not ONE-FOURTH of that number willing and able to turn out for basketball? I just do not believe that. Football success builds the fanbase for basketball success with builds the fanbase for football success...

In any event, I do think that Danny is on the right track and we have some good years coming. And I don't think what happens on the other side of 20th St. has anything to do with that.

Sam, I usually agree with you on most things but really observe the landscape in what you are saying. The "BIG" schools can pull it off, like Baylor, Oklahoma and a few others, but not many G5 schools can. Many, like us have to choose where to pump money. Unless donors come through, they have to choose what they are willing to pay a basketball coach, football coach etc. Its not to say the program that gets the short stick won't be good or make a decent run, but it does say that it will be unsustainable due to lack of funds to keep coaches in place etc. Memphis is a good example. Programs like Wichita state, Butler, Gonzaga don't have to make those choices, but Boise, us, ECU etc do have to make them. Even Cincy does, when they won the Big East, basketball was not at the top. Now they are slipping in football and basketball is rising. UL was above most of that, but they are not the rule, they have power 5 like budgets and money floating around to play with.
 
Sam, I usually agree with you on most things but really observe the landscape in what you are saying. The "BIG" schools can pull it off, like Baylor, Oklahoma and a few others, but not many G5 schools can. Many, like us have to choose where to pump money. Unless donors come through, they have to choose what they are willing to pay a basketball coach, football coach etc. Its not to say the program that gets the short stick won't be good or make a decent run, but it does say that it will be unsustainable due to lack of funds to keep coaches in place etc. Memphis is a good example. Programs like Wichita state, Butler, Gonzaga don't have to make those choices, but Boise, us, ECU etc do have to make them. Even Cincy does, when they won the Big East, basketball was not at the top. Now they are slipping in football and basketball is rising. UL was above most of that, but they are not the rule, they have power 5 like budgets and money floating around to play with.

Boise is pretty good this year FYI
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT