Shouldn't Texas be listed first? Or am I missing something? Kansas? I realize now that they are listing Kansas first due to their overall record. It is true that I am a dumbass. It is also true that it ticks me off to see them listed ahead of us, even though we have the tiebreaker in conference. The more I type the more I sound like aggy, so I will stop now.
Perhaps they are listed alphabetically, as the other teams with identical conference records are listed that way as well.
I think everyone needs to get over the whole tiebreaker thing. The ONLY place that it matters is in the seedings for the conference tournament. Outside of that, Kansas and Texas are co-champions and are probably always going to be listed alphabetically or by overall record, which is going to put Kansas first every time.
See that column over there to the right that says "overall winning percentage?" You guys are reading WAYYYYY too much into a conference standing listing. It's standard practice any time you put together a standings list that the winning percentage overall is what you use to sort teams if they're tied in conference standings. It is totally meaningless with the exception that one of those teams has to be listed first.