Yes, people debate the #1 vs #2 spot way too much. Of course, there is some prestige to being #1, but the only advantage is getting to choose the jersey color for the championship game.
There is a difference in #3 vs #4. To my mind, the #4 spot might be the 2nd worst on the board. It gets a bye week to get cold (I don't like the bye), then gets a game against a closely-rated team who has probably just gotten in a really good workout against a competent but not truly dangerous team. If the #4 seed wins that match-up, it's straight to the Lion's Den to meet #1, followed by a likely match-up with either #2 or #3.
The worst spot is #8. The first round is against a similar opponent, then it is straight to the meat grinder.
#5, #6, and #7 probably have better match-ups and get to keep that playoff focus throughout the run.
#9-#12 get to play the underdog where winning just the opening round game is an acknowledged accomplishment.
Just my opinion. All of that is predicated on the assumption that the playoff committee has seeded the tournament competently and the teams are ordered accurately. Sometimes, there are advantageous match-ups to be had in terms of playing style or familiarity that make the actual seeding number irrelevant. No matter where a team sits, they have to play their best game and beat the opponent in front of them, so good luck to all!.