Ultimately, once the games tip off, the impact of being a No. 2 seed instead of a No. 1 is minimal.

	Shereka Wright and Kristy Curry made a good case for a No. 1 seed.

The roads to the Final Four aren't usually much tougher or easier based on the number in front of your name. But, let's face it, it's all about status. We've talked about it all year. It heads the debate every March. We care. The schools care. And when it comes down to it, that seed can even help in the recruiting game. That number seems to be a symbol of something earned.

So did the committee make the right call, awarded Texas the fourth No. 1 seed over Purdue?

After listening in to the NCAA teleconference Sunday night, there might not have been a wrong answer. By its own admission, the selection committe felt Texas was fourth on the S-curve, Purdue fifth. Fair enough.

Committee Chairwoman Cheryl Marra also said that a team's record against the Top 25 and Top 50 did not carry any special weight. However, that category is really Texas' only true advantage over the Boilermakers. Purdue has a better overall record, a higher RPI, better strength of schedule, better nonconference RPI, better record in the last 10, and a better road/neutral record. Purdue also won its conference tournament. Texas did not and was beaten badly trying.

In fairness, many of those criteria were extremely close, but ultimately what it came down to was that Texas was 2-1 against the other already established three No. 1 seeds, while Purdue was 1-3.

Though my bracket didn't have Texas a a No. 1, the Longhorns as a top seed does have substantial merit. However, that might not have been the case with some other teams.

Houston, at 27-3, was made a No. 3 seed, while 24-7 Vanderbilt was a No. 2 and gets to play in its home state in the first two rounds. Not only was Houston's record better, but the Cougars were higher in the RPI, had an 18-1 road/neutral record, and had eight wins over the Top 50. Both won their conference tournaments, while Houston also has a regular-season Conference USA title on its résumé. Vanderbilt does have two more Top-50 wins, but that's its only advantage.

That leaves two possibilities. Either the committee decided, consciously or unconsciously, to put more stock in record vs. the Top-25/Top-50 than overall record, or that Vanderbilt's affiliation in the SEC and tournament championship were incredibly significant.

	Stanford and Nicole Powell might have deserved better than a No. 6 seed in the Midwest.

The overall record vs. Top 25/Top 50 issue also enters into the decision that was made for Stanford, which has a 24-8 record and was the Pac-10 regular-season and tournament champion. The Cardinal were seeded sixth, while 19-10 Notre Dame gets a No. 5. The only criterion where the Irish has the edge in this comparison is in the aforementioned Top 25/Top 50 record (8-6 vs. 3-3 Top 50).

If the committee's first priority is integrity of the bracket, as has been mentioned numerous times in the last week, and Top 25/Top 50 record isn't given any special weight, then Stanford absolutely should be higher than a No. 6, certainly ahead of Notre Dame, and for that matter, another fifth seed in Miami.

Another head-scratcher? Top-seeded Penn State potentially might have to face Virginia Tech in Blacksburg in the second round, and then, perhaps, Connecticut in Hartford in the Elite Eight.

Second-seeded Kansas State also might have to play at seventh-seeded Minnesota in the second round, and Vanderbilt is in the same position in the Midwest, where the Commodoers could play at Chattanooga. The only flip side is that they at least stay close to home.

Last year, in the only other tournament with pre-determined sites, not one No. 1 or No. 2 seed was set up to play a potential road game in the second round. This, the committee explained, was done because it was more important to keep teams closer to their true seed than tinker with the numbers because of geography.

While I think this is utterly unfair, the committee did have a problem with nine host schools falling below the No. 4 seed level.

This might be a big reason that the number of pre-determined sites moves from 16 to eight next season. That's a welcomed move as the parity in the women's game continues to grow. No greater example of that parity is the fact that we are even having a debate over the No. 1 seeds.

Purdue or Texas? It might not matter in three weeks, but it sure is fun right now.

Charlie Creme can be reached at cwcreme@hotmail.com.