[M T]

The Woofing Gods will note this is also dependent on Stanford not faltering in the 9 matches prior to the Louisville match.
While Stanford may be expected to win, no one should assume that nothing will go rong.

I think if the Cardinal beats the Cardinals on 11/30, they (Stanford) have a better than 50/50 chance of being the number 4 overall seed.
(Though any "bad" loss between then and now probably negates this.)

(1) Recency effect; if the committee hasn't already made up their minds before the match, it should have added impact at decision time.
(2) Geography:  this isn't supposed to matter.  But if Pitt, Penn State and Nebraska are hosting, then having Stanford (instead of Louisville) gives them better geographic balance for the regions.  Good for spreading the TV times across the time zones.
(3) Pro-Stanford bias (?):  Historically, Stanford has been seeded better than their RPI several times (and rarely, if ever, worse). (Of course, committee membership has changed over the years, so there may be nothing to this.)

None of these are particularly strong arguments, but I think they may add a slight tilt in Stanford's favor.

[M T]

The Woofing Gods will note this is also dependent on Stanford not faltering in the 9 matches prior to the Louisville match.
While Stanford may be expected to win, no one should assume that nothing will go rong.

I think if the Cardinal beats the Cardinals on 11/30, they (Stanford) have a better than 50/50 chance of being the number 4 overall seed.
(Though any "bad" loss between then and now probably negates this.)

(1) Recency effect; if the committee hasn't already made up their minds before the match, it should have added impact at decision time.
(2) Geography:  this isn't supposed to matter.  But if Pitt, Penn State and Nebraska are hosting, then having Stanford (instead of Louisville) gives them better geographic balance for the regions.  Good for spreading the TV times across the time zones.
(3) Pro-Stanford bias (?):  Historically, Stanford has been seeded better than their RPI several times (and rarely, if ever, worse). (Of course, committee membership has changed over the years, so there may be nothing to this.)

None of these are particularly strong arguments, but I think they may add a slight tilt in Stanford's favor.