05_never_again
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2006
- Messages
- 23,194
- Likes
- 20,779
Definitely, and to your point about revenue, even Kentucky is a "football school." By a noticeable margin. Football brings in more money than basketball even at Kentucky. And waaaaaay more at Michigan St, another "basketball school." Even at Duke, basketball just brings in barely more money than football.I agree. I think most schools have more football support than basketball. Appeals to more people. There are a lot of schools without great success in either sport. So by default schools tend to be “football schools”. And when schools have a lot of success in both sports, they’re still “football schools”. Basketball schools either don’t have a D1 football program or have a humongous disparity in success - Kansas, Duke, Kentucky. Just seems like a pointless designation. Nobody wants to be a “basketball school”. And I say that as someone who likes basketball better.
Duke's basketball program makes more money than every other Final Four school
The separator is mostly reputation and what "moves the needle" more than anything else. Despite football bringing in more money, Kentucky is going to spare no expense for its basketball program. They aren't going to spare no expense for something related to football. Duke definitely is not. That ultimately is what makes it a basketball school; they care more about it, and their identity as a school and athletic program is wrapped up more in it.
Bottom line, a school that is really good at football is going to be a "football school" even if it is also good at basketball. Michigan and Florida are great examples.