Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : 2003 NCAA College Basketball March Madness -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jeffrey S. Mitchell who wrote (25)	3/16/2003 3:49:28 AM
From: EL KABONG!!!	Respond to of 278

Jeff, You could be right, but that would (likely) mean that the Big 12 would have 2 #1 seeds. (Take your choice of two from Oklahoma, Kansas and Texas.) Only one of those three is the champion of the Big 12 (Kansas), and another (Oklahoma) should win the conference tournament (if they avoid the Missouri upset). In theory anyway, only 1 of those 3 teams is the "best" in the Big 12 conference. My thoughts are that the dance committee selects only one team from the Big 12 as a #1 seed, and offers the final #1 seed to a different conference leader. If Oklahoma wins the tournament (and I think they should), then Oklahoma gets the nod. Should Missouri win, then the #1 seed goes to Kansas. My guess is that the final #1 seed goes to the next best conference, and that would be the Big East, and Pitt would be the obvious selection from that conference. #1 seeds would therefore be dispersed geographically (west, southeast, midwest and east) as well as by conference (where the "best" conferences are each represented by their "best" team)... At least that's how I see it... KJC PS - This line of thought also presumes that Kentucky and Arizona are foregone conclusions for #1 seeding status...