Place your bets!!!!

Did anybody else notice that the only two #1 seeds to lose before getting to the final four both lost to #2 seeds who held the "home court" advantage over the number ones? The Tourney Committee was looking really good this year on its seedings up until this weekend. How on earth do you give a #2 seed that kind of home court advantage over a #1? In case you missed it, Kansas (#1 seed) had to play UCLA (#2 seed) in San Jose, California. North Carolina (#1 seed) had to play Georgetown (#2 seed) in East Rutherford, New Jersey. It doesn't seem quite fair to Kansas or North Carolina, does it?

I'm not saying the tournament is fixed. But, if I was a betting man I would place copious amounts of cash on Georgetown to win it all. Georgetown's "referee supported" run looks eerily similar to Duke's "referee supported" run in 1992. They get outplayed severely for most of the game, and then the officiating style changes late to favor Georgetown and then the Hoyas respond and win the game. The same thing happened with Duke in 1992. Coincidence?

I'm a Kentucky fan and I'm still upset about the poor officiating in the 1992 Duke vs. Kentucky game. I still get pissed off everytime ESPN reruns that game and calls it an "instant classic." I often wonder why ESPN doesn't call the 1998 Duke vs. Kentucky game an "instant classic." The 1998 game was actually played in the final four, while the 1992 game was played in the elite eight. The 1992 game was decided by one point in overtime while the 1998 game was decided by two points. The 1998 game was just as memorable because Kentucky erased an 18 point deficit to come back and win the game. You never hear anyone at ESPN even mention that 1998 game. This just serves as one more example of ESPN's bias towards Duke.