In addition to my belief that the Gophers need to schedule at least one high major program at home, I also think that they need to eliminate the really bad teams from the schedule.
I realize that scheduling is difficult, but last season the Gophers had six 200+ RPI games and two 275+ RPI games. That is a total RPI suck.
Let's contrast that with Wisconsin. The question was often raised last season about how the Badgers were still doing all right in the RPI despite not winning any of their marquee games in the non-conference. Part of it was the result of playing better bad teams.
Minnesota RPI non-conference victories: 157, 233, 212, 231, 87, 114, 115, 283, 4, 247, 325. Average 182.5
Wisconsin RPI non-conference victories: 156, 213, 194, 134, 61, 207, 71, 220. Average 157. That excludes losses to 8, 35 and 41. Overall average is 121.8.
Both teams played one Division II team.
Who you play really does matter. It impacts a team's RPI, which then impacts perception. It impacts seeding for the NCAA tournament. The reality is that the Gophers need to be more strategic in who they schedule for their "buy" games. They need to try to get more teams from leagues that are traditionally a little stronger, but still probably aren't good enough to beat them. Replacing one or two of the 240+ RPI teams with teams in the 140 range would make a difference.
Maybe it's difficult to predict RPIs, but they can do a better job predicting success. Last season the Gophers played only four non-conference opponents that ended up the season with a better than .500 overall record -- Bowling Green, Louisville, Cornell and North Dakota State.
They clearly have to find teams from bad to average leagues to fill out their schedule. But it would benefit the team greatly if they did more than just schedule bad teams from bad conferences.
