just looking-
tru TV-
5 Virginia/ 12 UNC Wilmington
4 Florida/13 E Tennessee St
4 Purdue/13 Vermont
5 Iowa St/ 12 Nevada
3 Baylor/14 New Mexico St
6 SMU/ 11 USC
6 Cincy/11 Kansas St
3 UCLA/14 Kent St

so had no 1/16 or 2/15 games.
Had 1 2nd rd game- a 3 Baylor/11 USC game.

look at CBS-
5 Notre Dame/12 Princeton
4 West Va/13 Bucknell
1 Villanova/16 Mt St Mary's
8 Wisconsin/9 Va Tech
7 Michigan/10 Oklahoma St
2 Louisville/15 Jacksonville St
7 Dayton/10 Wichita St
2 Kentucky/15 No Kentucky
So CBS had 1 of the 1/16 games and 2 of the 2/15 games.

really each of the 4 networks covering the tourney got of their 8 games 4 games in the 4/13,3/14,2/15,1/16 realm, but then 4 games in the 5/12, 6/11,7/10,8/9 realm.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/blakewilliam...928f4177f6

To update the linked article: The 2016 NIT champion, George Washington, lost in the second round of the CBI this year. Not a ringing endorsement of the value of playing in the NIT.

(04-01-2017 10:54 AM)ken d Wrote:  http://www.forbes.com/sites/blakewilliam...928f4177f6

To update the linked article: The 2016 NIT champion, George Washington, lost in the second round of the CBI this year. Not a ringing endorsement of the value of playing in the NIT.

I think you have to factor team age into this. A young team winning the NIT would be potentially helpful for further development in the following season. A senior heavy team winning the NIT might be fun--but may not necessarily foreshadow any great run the following year.

(04-01-2017 10:54 AM)ken d Wrote:  http://www.forbes.com/sites/blakewilliam...928f4177f6

To update the linked article: The 2016 NIT champion, George Washington, lost in the second round of the CBI this year. Not a ringing endorsement of the value of playing in the NIT.

Yes we did. But we lost 4 starters last year. And our coach got canned right before the season and we were left with 80% new players and a 31 year old head coach. 20 wins was actually pretty good.

GW elected to play in the CBI because we wanted to help some of our younger players develop. More practice. More game time.

(04-01-2017 12:22 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(04-01-2017 10:54 AM)ken d Wrote:  http://www.forbes.com/sites/blakewilliam...928f4177f6

To update the linked article: The 2016 NIT champion, George Washington, lost in the second round of the CBI this year. Not a ringing endorsement of the value of playing in the NIT.

Yes we did. But we lost 4 starters last year. And our coach got canned right before the season and we were left with 80% new players and a 31 year old head coach. 20 wins was actually pretty good.

GW elected to play in the CBI because we wanted to help some of our younger players develop. More practice. More game time.

Tom, I didn't mean to single out GW with my comment. Rather, it just further made the case already made in the article.

If you want to play in the NIT because it will give you a leg up on next year (for those with young teams, not veterans) there isn't much evidence that it helps much. Do some teams follow it up with an invite to the NCAA the next year? Sure. But who is to say they wouldn't have done that even if they hadn't played in the NIT?

If you want to play in the NIT, do it for the guys on this year's team, not next year's. Not because it will make you better, but because the players would rather keep playing than not. Getting to The Garden is just a bonus.