No, it indicates you have a good riflery team.
"Elite program", my a$$...
Apparently more than that, unless you concede that UK basketball and riflery program is better than the combined efforts of the entire Louisville athletics department.
...A helluva lotta schools and coaches have gone to the NIT. U of L won it when it was bigger than the NCAA...
You mean in the mid 50's - late 60's? Yeah, UK did too, and yeah, Pitino missed that window by about 35-40 years or so by sending you all in 2002, and then again in 2006.
UofL can say it has a few more things than UK basketball. It has more losses, for example, and in this case, you have more NIT appearances than UK. We can certainly say this. While UK is the most "recent" coach to go to the NIT (and I'll never understand your obsession with "most recent" things. Like "most recent national champion in the state" as if that gives an award), but Cal didn't have 2 failed appearances in his first 5 years.
Pitino's first 5 years?
2nd round NIT loss
NCAA second round loss
NCAA first round loss
NCAA final four
NIT semifinal loss
And Calipari's first 5 years?
NCAA elite eight loss
NCAA final four
NCAA national champion
NIT first round loss
NCAA national runner-up
Nevermind the fact that Cal, in his 6th year at UK, went to another final four.
So, I think you should re-think your perception of Calipari's success as opposed to Quicktino's success, Zipp. More importantly, rethink your perception of UK's total athletics department's success as opposed to UofL's as well.
If UK's rifle team, and basketball team catapults UK ahead of UofL's entire athletics department, then your athletics department is not a "powerhouse" as you suggested.
What we do know, is statistically (and I know how much you love statistics, Zipp), UK's athletics department, as a whole, is in the top 25 in the nation, and UofL's is not.