04-08-2024, 12:21 PM
Precisely what our seed will be at Pac-12s remains to be seen, and it'll depend on the next couple of weekends of course, but here's where things stand right now:
T1. UCLA (7-1) (two Pac-12 matches left, vs. UO and at USC)
T1. USC (7-1) (2 left: vs. UO, vs. UCLA)
3. Cal (6-1) (3 left: at UW, at Wazzu, vs. us)
4. Stanford (5-1) (3 left: at Wazzu, at UW, at Cal)
5. UW (4-3) (3 left: vs. Cal, vs. us, at Wazzu) (losses to UCLA, USC, and ASU)
6. ASU (3-4) (3 left: at Utah, at CU, vs. UA) (losses to Stanford, Cal, UCLA, and USC)
T7. Arizona (2-5) (3 left: at CU, at Utah, at ASU) (losses to the same 4 plus UW)
T7. Utah (2-5) (3 left: vs. ASU, vs. UA, vs. CU) (wins over Oregon and Wazzu)
9. Colorado (1-5) (3 left: vs. UA, vs. ASU, at Utah) (win over Oregon)
10. Wazzu (1-6) (3 left: vs. us, vs. Cal, vs. UW) (win over CU)
11. Oregon (1-7) (2 left: at USC, at UCLA) (win over Wazzu)
It's a circle at the top: USC's one loss is to us, our one loss is to UCLA, UCLA's one loss is to Cal, and Cal's one loss is to USC. (It's also a circle with the bottom three, which is interesting.) USC and UCLA will get to decide the higher seed among those two on April 19, right when Stanford and Cal will be doing the same. If USC beats UCLA and we beat Cal, then in theory we'd have the tiebreaker for the #1 seed, but we'd have one fewer conference win because our match vs. CU got rained out. Given how bad CU is, you'd hope that wouldn't become an issue, but in theory, we might have to play and beat CU at Ojai in order to claim the #1 seed. Might not be worth it, to be honest. Just give us the #2 seed and let us avoid tiring out our players. (You could also see a team demanding we play CU because if we lost to them, we might fall behind another team in the seeding. Can't imagine CU wanting an extra match they know they'd lose when they'll have their hands full surviving their first match. But given the clear distance between the top 4 and the rest, and the relative parity in the top group, might as well just get on with it.)
As it stands, though, I don't see a whole lot of value in which seed you get. We're the best team in the Pac-12, sure, but pick your poison as to who you put at 2-4. So you're going to have to beat two of those teams to win the title, and I don't see the order making much of a difference. Given those remaining matches, here's how I think it goes:
1. UCLA (9-1)
2. Stanford (8-1) (UCLA's H2H win over us, and our H2H win over USC, makes the CU match irrelevant)
3. USC (8-2) (wins the H2H tiebreaker over Cal)
4. Cal (8-2)
5. ASU (6-4)
6. UW (5-5)
7. Utah (4-6)
8. Arizona (3-7)
9. Colorado (1-8) (sneaks ahead of the other two because it has a slightly higher win percentage if our match isn't required to be played)
10. Oregon (1-9) H2H over Wazzu
11. Wazzu (1-9)
So, in that case, #1 UCLA would play the 8-9 winner (which would be Arizona), #2 Stanford would play the 7-10 winner (which would be Utah), and #3 USC would get the 6-11 winner (which would be UW), and the rest would be a regular 8-team bracket. We'd be on track to get USC in one semi and it would be Cal-UCLA in the other.
T1. UCLA (7-1) (two Pac-12 matches left, vs. UO and at USC)
T1. USC (7-1) (2 left: vs. UO, vs. UCLA)
3. Cal (6-1) (3 left: at UW, at Wazzu, vs. us)
4. Stanford (5-1) (3 left: at Wazzu, at UW, at Cal)
5. UW (4-3) (3 left: vs. Cal, vs. us, at Wazzu) (losses to UCLA, USC, and ASU)
6. ASU (3-4) (3 left: at Utah, at CU, vs. UA) (losses to Stanford, Cal, UCLA, and USC)
T7. Arizona (2-5) (3 left: at CU, at Utah, at ASU) (losses to the same 4 plus UW)
T7. Utah (2-5) (3 left: vs. ASU, vs. UA, vs. CU) (wins over Oregon and Wazzu)
9. Colorado (1-5) (3 left: vs. UA, vs. ASU, at Utah) (win over Oregon)
10. Wazzu (1-6) (3 left: vs. us, vs. Cal, vs. UW) (win over CU)
11. Oregon (1-7) (2 left: at USC, at UCLA) (win over Wazzu)
It's a circle at the top: USC's one loss is to us, our one loss is to UCLA, UCLA's one loss is to Cal, and Cal's one loss is to USC. (It's also a circle with the bottom three, which is interesting.) USC and UCLA will get to decide the higher seed among those two on April 19, right when Stanford and Cal will be doing the same. If USC beats UCLA and we beat Cal, then in theory we'd have the tiebreaker for the #1 seed, but we'd have one fewer conference win because our match vs. CU got rained out. Given how bad CU is, you'd hope that wouldn't become an issue, but in theory, we might have to play and beat CU at Ojai in order to claim the #1 seed. Might not be worth it, to be honest. Just give us the #2 seed and let us avoid tiring out our players. (You could also see a team demanding we play CU because if we lost to them, we might fall behind another team in the seeding. Can't imagine CU wanting an extra match they know they'd lose when they'll have their hands full surviving their first match. But given the clear distance between the top 4 and the rest, and the relative parity in the top group, might as well just get on with it.)
As it stands, though, I don't see a whole lot of value in which seed you get. We're the best team in the Pac-12, sure, but pick your poison as to who you put at 2-4. So you're going to have to beat two of those teams to win the title, and I don't see the order making much of a difference. Given those remaining matches, here's how I think it goes:
1. UCLA (9-1)
2. Stanford (8-1) (UCLA's H2H win over us, and our H2H win over USC, makes the CU match irrelevant)
3. USC (8-2) (wins the H2H tiebreaker over Cal)
4. Cal (8-2)
5. ASU (6-4)
6. UW (5-5)
7. Utah (4-6)
8. Arizona (3-7)
9. Colorado (1-8) (sneaks ahead of the other two because it has a slightly higher win percentage if our match isn't required to be played)
10. Oregon (1-9) H2H over Wazzu
11. Wazzu (1-9)
So, in that case, #1 UCLA would play the 8-9 winner (which would be Arizona), #2 Stanford would play the 7-10 winner (which would be Utah), and #3 USC would get the 6-11 winner (which would be UW), and the rest would be a regular 8-team bracket. We'd be on track to get USC in one semi and it would be Cal-UCLA in the other.