(04-04-2018 01:00 PM)bcunn3128 Wrote:  

(04-04-2018 11:45 AM)eastisbest Wrote:  

(04-04-2018 11:33 AM)bcunn3128 Wrote:  

(04-04-2018 11:29 AM)eastisbest Wrote:  Raise your hand if, you're not a "journalist" and you know without looking who won the
men's NIT, CIT, and CBI. All three or no cookie.

We weren't in any of 'em so I don't care.

Even if we were, how many would know the winners?

Even more after the fact, when hindsight says UT would have been competitive in the NIT, I like they took that stand. Like my opinion of the ESPN bowls, these things just aren't worth it if there's nothing but extra practice and debt to be gained. The NIT would have brought a fairly likely good match-up. The others? Most likely a nothing to prove along with a debt.

I hear your point. Honestly, I paid attention to the one CMU & EMU were in for a hot minute (don't even remember now whether it was the CIT or CBI), and then just didn't care anymore.

I think the NIT still has some national value. UT lost in the championship game in 1943 (much smaller tournament in those days).

NCAA was very new then. Many felt the NIT Champ was the real national champion.

without researching I'm guessing penn state, sam houston state, north texas and I think san francisco came in 2nd in one of em. also mid major western kentucky made it to NIT final 4 but lost.