Jump to content

NIT 2020


Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, Slowry said:

If we have to go to the NIT I’m hoping this plays out.  I want Mizzou to get hot.  I’d love to see the Bills play a home game against Mizzou.  If the schools can’t get together and make this happen maybe the NIT will.

Nobody has to play in the NIT so if that was how it was going to happen, I'd bet quite a bit that Mizzou would just decline an invite. You can't change a tiger's chicken's stripes.

 

By the way, Mizzou already is hot. They made their bed in January but have played quite well the last 4 games. They largely play the bottom of the SEC down the stretch and may get a bunch more wins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, glazedandconfused said:

Yea they got rid of the losing record rule a couple years ago.

Only selection criteria is that any team that wins conference regular season but doesn't make the NCAA tourney is automatically qualified for NIT.

The rule may no longer be on the books, but I do not believe a team with a losing record has actually ever played in the NIT.  Therefore, I think it is safe to say that there is still an "unwritten rule" that you have to have a winning record. 

Example: I believe in 2019 Penn State had a NET ranking of 50, but their record was 14-18.  They were left out of the NIT in favor of San Diego with a NET ranking of 97 and a record of 21-14.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, kshoe said:

Nobody has to play in the NIT so if that was how it was going to happen, I'd bet quite a bit that Mizzou would just decline an invite. You can't change a tiger's chicken's stripes.

 

By the way, Mizzou already is hot. They made their bed in January but have played quite well the last 4 games. They largely play the bottom of the SEC down the stretch and may get a bunch more wins.

I know you don’t have to play.  But do you know your match up before you get the choice to decline?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/19/2020 at 6:07 PM, RUBillsFan said:

The rule may no longer be on the books, but I do not believe a team with a losing record has actually ever played in the NIT.  Therefore, I think it is safe to say that there is still an "unwritten rule" that you have to have a winning record. 

Example: I believe in 2019 Penn State had a NET ranking of 50, but their record was 14-18.  They were left out of the NIT in favor of San Diego with a NET ranking of 97 and a record of 21-14.

The "losing record" rule was put into the NIT so that a team from a one bid league such as the SWAC, MEAC, or Patriot League could have their regular season winner eligible for the tourney in spite of the possibility of having a losing overall record. With teams from those leagues playing so many buy games, it's possible a team could win their league despite being less than .500 for the season. With only about 15-20 at large bids available to the NIT, I don't think the NIT selection committee would give a team with a losing record an at-large.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, billikenbill said:

The "losing record" rule was put into the NIT so that a team from a one bid league such as the SWAC, MEAC, or Patriot League could have their regular season winner eligible for the tourney in spite of the possibility of having a losing overall record. With teams from those leagues playing so many buy games, it's possible a team could win their league despite being less than .500 for the season. With only about 15-20 at large bids available to the NIT, I don't think the NIT selection committee would give a team with a losing record an at-large.

Surely there is money on the table for MU coaches for an NIT appearance - can’t see them declining

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, and I may be off about this: but unless a team gets to NYC, the NIT is not really much of a money-maker for participants.  It's more of a PR thing, brings some pretige, yes, but monumentally less than a bid to the Big Dance, including $$.

In the NCAA all conference "units" are pooled and the $$$ distributed to each conference team.  Last year those units were $1.8 million each.  It's a good reason to cheer on the sweater vest crowd next month, because every win will net SLU a boatload of extra $$.

Not sure how the NIT works, in that regard??  Lots of football bowl games are also not money makers for the schools, by the way...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, DoctorB said:

Actually, and I may be off about this: but unless a team gets to NYC, the NIT is not really much of a money-maker for participants.  It's more of a PR thing, brings some pretige, yes, but monumentally less than a bid to the Big Dance, including $$.

In the NCAA all conference "units" are pooled and the $$$ distributed to each conference team.  Last year those units were $1.8 million each.  It's a good reason to cheer on the sweater vest crowd next month, because every win will net SLU a boatload of extra $$.

Not sure how the NIT works, in that regard??  Lots of football bowl games are also not money makers for the schools, by the way...

If you are a coach and wanting to show how your team is progressing a NIT invite is certainly worth it.  For coach whose team has struggled the last couple of years a NIT invite can be what keeps you from getting canned so in that regards it has a monetary value to that guy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Crewsorlose said:

Nice NET bump for the VCU win: from 79 to 69. Would be amazing if this team could take care of St. Joe's and then somehow win @URI. I like how we match up against them. 8 days from now the Billikens could have an inside lane to a 4 seed in Brooklyn and a NET in the mid-low 50s. 

I think the key to getting a big bump in the NET was beating VCU by 10+ points.  Need to max that margin of victory factor.   We probably have to win by 10+ over St Joes or our NET may drop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I know SLU's goal is to defend its A10 Tournament Championship and again garner the A10's automatic bid.  That is my goal for this SLU team too.

As a fallback, with a NET of 72, SLU would have the 22nd of 32 NIT bids.  The lower NIT seeds have a way of disappearing for those NIT automatic bids that go to regular season conference champions, from the Mid-Majors and Low Cons, that don't win their conference tournaments.  At this point I would guardedly say having the 22nd of 32 NIT bids should be on the right side of the NIT bubble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, wgstl said:

How would we know this?  

That's per a pure following of the NET in selecting the NIT field.  There are always a few exceptions, a few variances annually, about 3 annually in the NCAA, but in general the NCAA and NIT fields both closely match the RPI formerly and NET currently.  Sometimes the NIT will let a Power 5 outlier in the NIT field.

On another note, per a pure following of the NET in selecting the NCAA, Richmond with NET of 49, would be the first team OUT of the NCAA and IN the NIT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Bay Area Billiken said:

That's per a pure following of the NET in selecting the NIT field.  There are always a few exceptions, a few variances annually, about 3 annually in the NCAA, but in general the NCAA and NIT fields both closely match the RPI formerly and NET currently.  Sometimes the NIT will let a Power 5 outlier in the NIT field.

On another note, per a pure following of the NET in selecting the NCAA, Richmond with NET of 49, would be the first team OUT of the NCAA and IN the NIT.

Still a good Chance of playing Rhode Island twice.  Theres still time left in the season to get a good NIT seeding. Im predicting 3-1 for remainder of season, than 3-1 in A10 tournament. That will put us closer to NCAA bubble watch with 24 wins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...