Yeah pretty much true. But it’s a starting point from the standpoint that they are measuring teams on Q1 wins and Q3/Q4 losses. They say this right on their website.It's not just a starting point. The committee loves to use it when it supports their decisions, but will throw it right out the window and come up with some wacky seeding. It's more of window dressing, frankly, that the committee throws out there to cover up their storyline/favoritism and NCAA advertising dream matchup choices.
Yes, this is conspiracy-like, but I think we can all agree that the committee has made some horrible decisions many, many times in the past, and it doesn't take much work to figure out that a lot of it is linked to money, eyeballs, storylines, etc., and the "NET" they've created was more of a cloak than a tool.
So they can easily justify decisions on this basis. Doesn’t mean they won’t contradict themselves or twist themselves in knots on other decisions.
But if you’re Kentucky, you know going in to expect to be judged harshly if you are low on Q1 wins or have a Q4 loss. No one in that room is going to defend you.