The last four years have been a pretty good sample size of porous play for the Cyclones. The football team is 3-21 in conference games the last three years, while the basketball team is 16-35 in Big 12 games in those same three years (including three straight losses in the Big 12 tournament).  It is arguably the worst three year combined stretch for the marquee sports in the last 25 years. 

(For what it's worth, I do like the direction the basketball team is headed. Look for an uptick in conference wins going forward. And I think the football team is capable of winning six games in '09 as well.)

The question is still valid. Football is by and large easier to cheer for on a national level. Just based purely on revenue generation, the percentage of stadiums filled to capacity, and TV ratings, the numbers clearly favor football. 

At Iowa State, however, the basketball tradition is much more prevalent and there has been a lot more success on the hardwood. 

So is it easier to watch a basketball team struggle over a 35 game period indoors, or a football team over just twelve games, but in the cold, windy bleachers at Jack Trice? 

The turnaround from bad to good is a lot quicker in basketball, as illustrated by the 98-99 season (15-15) to the 99-00 season (32-5). Which can make the suffering a bit easier to swallow if brighter things are ahead. But, football success can be a lot more rewarding and let's face it- tailgating at Jack Trice, whether the Cyclones are good or bad, is a great way to spend Saturday's in the fall. 

If I had to choose I'd rather cheer for a bad basketball team. Because of the tradition at Hilton and the history of quicker turnarounds, the light at the end of the tunnel is just a shade brighter. 

It'd be nice if karma turned Iowa State's way at some point and both major sports could be good at the same time. But, I'll be humble and take one at a time.   

Thoughts?