Apparently you can't get over it. I am not trying to justify anything to you, and I certainly don't have to justify anything to you, and won't try, because it is pointless, because you can't handle it when something doesn't fit your opinion.
For the final time. I heard on 1620 this morning, that the NIT field was based on a metrix rating. I don't know which one. I was not listening that closely when they were talking about it. Maybe I'm mistaken and they were just talking about who was chosen as the NIT field and not seeds? I saw that Nebraska was listed as a 5 and didn't look closer.
I can't speak to what the NIT decided to do. All I can say is Nebraska's RPI 1-50 record and SOS is not stellar against the rest of the field, just as this matrix shows. The NIT always has played with the seeding numbers for whatever reason.
You are losing your mind about Stanford? A team that played 14 top 50 teams, and won 4 (according to this matrix), vs Nebraska who played 7, and won 1? Stanford's SOS is 38 and Nebraska was 81? Maybe that had something to do with it?
You assumed I am trying to justify the NIT's seeding. I am was not. I was trying to understand if there was a rhyme or reason to their seeding (and it appears I might have heard what they said on the radio wrong). It appears the NIT did what they always do, put teams wherever they want. If you expected a completely fair seeding, you haven't paid much attention to the NIT in the past.