Personally I'd rather see seeding based on wins minus losses. With the rules posted on the Pac-12 site, reductio ad absurdum would yield that a 1-0 record would be seeded #1 over a 17-1 record.
If Stanford football had played and defeated WSU, we would have finished with a 4-2 record and a win over UW. But UW at 3-1 would have been North champs because they had a better winning percentage and fewer losses. With wins minus losses, Stanford and UW would have tied at +2 and Stanford would have won the head-to-head tiebreaker.
If Stanford football had played and defeated WSU, we would have finished with a 4-2 record and a win over UW. But UW at 3-1 would have been North champs because they had a better winning percentage and fewer losses. With wins minus losses, Stanford and UW would have tied at +2 and Stanford would have won the head-to-head tiebreaker.
If there's one thing people have learned in Berkeley, it's that you can't put "Cal football" and "Rose Bowl" in the same sentence. The words just don't fit. You'd be better off linking "covered wagons" with "Mars travel." (Bruce Jenkins, Cal '70, SF Chronicle, Nov. 11, 2017)