Surely they wouldn't price it above the 6D?
Of course they would, the 6d is entry level (it just happens to be full frame), the 7d is medium to pro (sports/wildlife aps-c) ... the 1.6x lens magnification is the reason many photogs have a 7d even if they could easily afford a 5d3.
Think of the price difference of a 300mm lens to a 300x1.6 ~= 500mm lens - that's the amount of money you can save when buying aps-c over ff, and Canon know they can add a part of the difference on top of the 7d2 price.
I don't have a 7D. But what I've heard and read from those who have both it and a 5DIII, even using the same lenses for little birdies when they're distance-limited with both bodies, the 5DIII still beats the 7D. I've heard from more than one person who had both with the intention of using them for different stuff...and who ditched the 7D (either altogether or to pay for another 5DIII).
Even though the cropped image from the 5DIII doesn't have as many megapickles as the still cropped image from the 7D, the image quality is at least comparable, with the nod perhaps going to the 5DIII. But, more importantly, even though the frame rate is lower for the 5DIII, the autofocus system is so much better that you get a higher percentage of keepers.
So, if you want something better than a 7D, consider a 5DIII.
One would assume, of course, that the 7DII would have the same autofocus as the 5DIII and the frame rate of the 7D and image quality up to current standards, which would obviously tip the scales back to the 7DII for distance-limited photography. But I think it's also safe to assume that the 5DIV will again jump ahead, and that the two will continue to play leapfrog.