You say we are now playing like a 4 seed, and thus should make it to the Sweet 16 regardless of our actual seed and draw. But, in 2004 we played a team that was playing like a high seed. In fact, in the two weeks prior to the tourney, they played better than us. Yet, that 2004 game is seen as a major negative against Stansbury. Now, this year you attempt to do basically the same thing in reverse.
I'm not arguing that we should totally write off that 2004 loss, I'm saying that you can't have it both ways. Either you base tourney performance solely on seeding or you look at things more in-depth. If you want to now look at other things rather than actual seeding, well your hammering of Stansbury for his postseason record suddenly gets cloudy.
