Would you rather have a consistently top 10 football team or basketball team??

:box :box :box

what's the matter with doing both?

You need a team of 60 to do football with some some great peple at certain spots.

With B-Ball you need three players and 5 to support them.

Let's do both.

>>>T_O_B

:bonez :bonez :bonez :bonez :bonez :bonez

 
Last edited by a moderator:
With a commitment to the b-ball team I think we could have both. Maybe not every year with b-ball, but certainly better than what it has been.

 
This is a no brainer....FOOTBALL!!!

Damn pumpkin pushers call basketball a sport. The wrestling team did pretty good this season....

Sounds like we have a wrestler on our hands..........the red headed stepchild of basketball.

Just kidding...had to take a little jab at you. It wouldn't be winter sports season if b'ball players and wrestlers didn't feud!! :cheers

 
The only advantage college basketball has over college football is that it is not run by complete nincompoops. (i.e. let's not have a playoff, let's destroy the NU/OU rivalry, let's keep wildly irrelevant bowls for teams that don't even have winning records because we get more money, etc. etc.)

Even in spite of all that rubbish, football- no question.

 
Asking a Nebraska fan if anything is more important than football is like asking a an alchoholic if he would like another drink... Not to mention this is the Husker FOOTBALL board. Just sayin...

I think Florida and Ohio State definitively proved you can have both. That said, both schools who have done it are football schools, if that makes you guys feel better. I think it is a LOT easier to build a competitive Basketball Program than a football one. I also think that outside of KU, the North has been weak in Basketball for a long while, so that means opportunity. If you can compete as a top half team for long enough, better recruits can come, and 2 or 3 guys can make a whole basketball team. K-State showed that, getting 3rd with Beasly...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top