There was an opportunity here to disincentivize ducking of the seed-protection sort that occurred when Schultz weighed in and then didn't take the mat against Kerkvliet. I get that there's a formula that gives everyone cover for unpopular results, and ducking isn't part of that stew, but (a) Schultz probably shouldn't be seeded second for not having as many quality matches--there was cover to drop him; and (b) by not disincentivizing it, you're effectively incentivizing it, and we'll just wind up seeing more gamesmanship that results in fewer top tier matches.
The coaches are diminishing the overall product by acting in their own self/team-interest with respect to matches, then, appearances issues notwithstanding, they get to validate their own conduct when seeding time comes along, because when are they ever going to punish their own for conduct they themselves might want to participate in. If we're all hypocrites, none of us are hypocrites.