No I just made it up and threw it out there.... haha.... I have it on very good authority that this is the case with the Pac-12 seedings. I was wondering the same thing. I don't know if other conferences do this or not. I guess we will find out when official brackets are dropped in other conferences. Seems like it "should" be uniform, but I don't know. This is the reason that Olmos is the #1 and Eichens is the #2 - but Valencia is #3 having beat them both. Valencia did not qualify a spot but Olmos and Eichen's did. I am okay with this, but I think there is a worse scenario that is connected to it.... there are many top 5 wrestlers that did not earn an AQ for their weight in their conference because they did not wrestle enough matches. They are going to go in and make the finals and "steal" a spot from some border line guys all because they decided to not wrestle a full schedule. The NCAA will need to address this. There are guys who had great seasons, who earned a spot and will get bumped because they finished 6th instead of 5th because the #4 guy in the country took his spot because he dint' have enough matches. Whether you like Mineo or not, he is spot on with this take:
'Another unintentional impact that low match counts and mff’s have on things is ncaa conference allocations- when a guy like Yianni doesn’t have 15 matches and doesn’t qualify for RPI the conference doesn’t get his allocation there, and he will win the tourny and take that allocation anyway. We saw this last year where a few big names didn’t earn allocations because of match counts, etc but took the spots, pushing others out.
Ncaa may want to look at this format because it doesn’t hurt the top guys but it does hurt the guy who was seeded 3rd, fringe qualifiers, etc…"