The benefits and risks of playing a tough schedule

[Gold Rush]

OK, Brewster's philosophy is to play the tough schedule against the better teams. Obviously, Mason's philosophy was to schedule the easier teams and go 4-0 on them and then if you go 3-5 or better in the Big Ten you can make it to a bowl game and call it a moderately successful season.

I am starting to come around with Brewster's thinking, here. If our goal is to make it to a bowl game, any bowl game, then scheduling the creampuffs is a must. However, this simply did not make us a better football team and didn't really help us with the recruiting, either. If you look at Mason's first few classes with the last few, they were fairly similar, although he did have one pretty good year toward the end.

Obviously, scheduling the BCS teams might leave us with losses to teams like Air Force and California which might keep us home for the holidays. I suppose maybe some will wish we hadn't scheduled the tougher teams if we end up at 6-6 with a loss to Cal for example.

I think it all depends on what level you are at. I still do not think we should schedule a team where we have no shot at winning the game, but maybe I am wrong and we need to see just where we stack up and what we need to do to get to be a better football team. Air Force comes out of their easy victory thinking it's all good and are coming down off cloud 9, while the Gophers should be putting in a very tough week of practice knowing we have to play a very good football team with different schemes than we are used to playing against. Air Force's game film from the last week probably looks like a highlight reel!!

I think scheduling Syracuse instead of Nicholls St./Towson St. or the like was a great idea, although I would rather play the first road game in week 2 just to work out the kinks.
Syracuse really brought everything they could in that game and instead of coming out of week 1 with a 72-0 victory where we think we are a great football team with no weaknesses, we come out of there knowing we have a lot of work to do. When you think about it, this just might be the best possible outcome for the psyche of the team. We come out with a tough, come from behind win where we really had to battle, but we come out of there knowing we need to make some adjustments and work out some things first. Hopefully, this game will help make us a better team and help us down the road.

One other thing is I like getting a little respect for playing the tougher schedule. Every year you hear about someone playing an absurdly easy schedule (Penn St. this year) but then you hear about some of the teams not afraid to play anyone like Fresno St. and Oregon. and those teams get a little respect for it. While I still don't know if playing USC was a good idea, I think Brewster might have the right idea on scheduling all the BCS teams he can. You aren't doing it to put fans in the seats - we will sell out anyways - we are doing it for recruiting and to make us a better football team and I can respect that.

 

[DarrenTheGreek]

Even if you go 2-2 in non-conference, you only need to go 4-4 in the Big Ten to be bowl eligible. If you can't go .500 in conference you don't deserve a bowl. Therefore I have no problem with playing a moderately tougher non-conference slate. Going to the Carrier Dome and surviving a somewhat difficult environment is beneficial in the long run.

 

[frozengopher]

I'd rather go 0-4 with a ridiculously tough schedule in non-conference play if it preps us for an 8-0 conference season and a Rose Bowl. We can worry about national championships when we're at that level. We aren't. Yet.

 

[MilitaryGopher]

Its about recruiting

You need to play atleast one good non-conference opponent every year IMHO if your a school trying to rise up like the Gophers. The reason is recruiting plain and simple. Big time recruits want to p[lay in big time games and on big time TV networks. MAC schools dont raise the hair on any HS All Americans forearm and wont get you playing on ESPN or a network. Also, you would like for those big time games to be against schools from states like California, Texas, Florida, and Georgia etc. that way you get exposure in the kids minds down in those football hot beds. Kids in Minnesota and the Midwest know about Minneosota and the Big Ten its the other parts of the cpountry the where the big time games help.

 

[MilesTones]

Even if you go 2-2 in non-conference, you only need to go 4-4 in the Big Ten to be bowl eligible. If you can't go .500 in conference you don't deserve a bowl. Therefore I have no problem with playing a moderately tougher non-conference slate. Going to the Carrier Dome and surviving a somewhat difficult environment is beneficial in the long run.

+1. Although it was great to go to bowls in the Mason era, I always felt like we didn't really deserve to go, because of our NC schedule. Beating 4 cupcakes and winning 2 conference games shouldn't get you to a bowl. I'd feel better about 5-7 with this year's schedule - and missing a bowl - than one of the Mason 7-5 years with an appearance in a Toilet Bowl.

 

[Goldy247]

Personally I'd like to see us play all of the BIG TEN teams instead of playing 4 nc games.

 

[Great Plains Gopher]

All teams play some cupcakes because of the 12-game schedule. I would not be playing USC or CAL -that is suicide (we did this in the seventies, with disastrous results). Air Force is okay, Iowa State, Syracuse, even North Carolina, too, but not Texas, Nebraska or USC. We are years away from the big-time, as we saw Saturday. Staying home during the bowl season does no good for a program.

 

[dpodoll68]

I agree with all of your post except this:

I still do not think we should schedule a team where we have no shot at winning the game

We can win all 4 of our non-conference games this year. Will we? Probably not. But Air Force and Cal are both beatable. If we would have scheduled USC, Florida, Texas, etc. this year, those games would fit your "no shot at winning" criteria.

Next year's USC game is a better example. We have absolutely no shot at winning that game, and in fact, I'd be ecstatic if we stay within two TDs. But it will help our national exposure, and in turn, help recruiting, donations, etc., so it's far more beneficial overall than beating Nicholls St. by 10 TDs.

 

[Monty519]

The thing about next year is, we play USC, yes, but our other three non conference games are all should wins. So you get a high profile game, but it's only one game. If we had a combo of USC AND Cal in the same season, then I'd question that one. But if you look at our future non conference schedule, it's actually quite a nice blend of tough, yet winnable games, and games that are more of the "tuneup" variety. I like the approach a lot. Of course, you never know who will be decent in 2014, but still playing any BCS squads is respectable I think.

 

[wait!what?]

Personally I'd like to see us play all of the BIG TEN teams instead of playing 4 nc games.

This topic is always hotly debated.

 

[Go Gophers Rah]

Unfortunately, we have gotten used to an artificial W-L record and an invitation to bowl games that we may have not been so deserving to go to.

"everybody schedules cupcakes," you might say, but look at it this way, among the 11 Big Ten teams, here is the number of out-of-conference BCS-conference teams (including Notre Dame) that each have faced for the 10 seasons prior to this year:

19 - Michigan State
19 - Penn State
18 - Iowa
16 - Purdue
15 - Michigan
14 - Illinois
14 - Ohio State
13 - Indiana
12 - Northwestern
10 - Wisconsin
2 - Minnesota

I'm not saying that we weren't a good team during that stretch of time, I'm just saying that some of those 6 and 7-win seasons when we went to a bowl without winning at least 4 conference games (2004, 2005 and 2007) seem a little empty when looking at our nonconference opponents those years when compared with the other teams in the conference.

 

[GoAUpher]

Unfortunately, we have gotten used to an artificial W-L record and an invitation to bowl games that we may have not been so deserving to go to.

"everybody schedules cupcakes," you might say, but look at it this way, among the 11 Big Ten teams, here is the number of out-of-conference BCS-conference teams (including Notre Dame) that each have faced for the 10 seasons prior to this year:

19 - Michigan State
19 - Penn State
18 - Iowa
16 - Purdue
15 - Michigan
14 - Illinois
14 - Ohio State
13 - Indiana
12 - Northwestern
10 - Wisconsin
2 - Minnesota

I'm not saying that we weren't a good team during that stretch of time, I'm just saying that some of those 6 and 7-win seasons when we went to a bowl without winning at least 4 conference games (2004, 2005 and 2007) seem a little empty when looking at our nonconference opponents those years when compared with the other teams in the conference.

Yikes! I didn't realize the disparity was that bad.

 

[FreakyDeke]

I think the tough scheduling will also help our reputation of not traveling well. Until now we never had a real reason to travel (El Paso, Tulsa, Bowling Green, wooohoo). I can tell you I will be going to games in LA, Vegas, Chapel Hill, etc. and I'm probably not alone.

 

[MBAGuy]

Unfortunately, we have gotten used to an artificial W-L record and an invitation to bowl games that we may have not been so deserving to go to.

"everybody schedules cupcakes," you might say, but look at it this way, among the 11 Big Ten teams, here is the number of out-of-conference BCS-conference teams (including Notre Dame) that each have faced for the 10 seasons prior to this year:

19 - Michigan State
19 - Penn State
18 - Iowa
16 - Purdue
15 - Michigan
14 - Illinois
14 - Ohio State
13 - Indiana
12 - Northwestern
10 - Wisconsin
2 - Minnesota

I'm not saying that we weren't a good team during that stretch of time, I'm just saying that some of those 6 and 7-win seasons when we went to a bowl without winning at least 4 conference games (2004, 2005 and 2007) seem a little empty when looking at our nonconference opponents those years when compared with the other teams in the conference.

Great post. I had no clue we were that out of sync with the rest of the conference. I suspect if you extend this analysis out another ten years (say, to 1988), the picture doesn't get a helluva lot better. Be interested to hear the Masonites respond to this.

 

[drunkenMNgopher]

I think the tough scheduling will also help our reputation of not traveling well. Until now we never had a real reason to travel (El Paso, Tulsa, Bowling Green, wooohoo). I can tell you I will be going to games in LA, Vegas, Chapel Hill, etc. and I'm probably not alone.

As a Gopher fan that travels every year, I will be going to all the non conf. road games. I like our scheduling and Nashville, LA, Vegas, Chapel Hill, Colorado Springs, Boulder, Corvallis and even Oxford, woo hoo! I can't wait!

 

[scools12]

Gophers should play at least one non-conference game vs. a BCS opponent every year IMO. Even if it is USC, Texas or someone of that like. This gives a the program a chance to see where it is at and where it needs to go. I am not talking about a national championship level but a New Year's Day or Rose Bowil appearance. I don't see how the program improves by playing the non-conference schedule as it was under the Mason years. I beleive this program needs to think bigger than it did with Mason.

If the schedule does include one of the "big time" programs such as USC next year then I have no problem with the other 3 non-conference games being of the more winnable variety but this year's schedule with Syracuse, Air Force and Cal is a decent schedule and should be the norm.

 

[Hates Monikers]

I agree that we need to play a better schedule for recruiting purposes. If we're worried that one good game per year will knock us off the bowl bubble, we're not where we want to be anyway.

One thing that hasn't been mentioned is the importance of filling the new stadium. Although I have had basketball season tickets for 17 years or so, I could never pull the trigger on football (until last year) because of the schedule. Four awful non-conference games is more than half the schedule. That's just not good enough value for my money.

When that new stadium smell wears off in a few years, a good team and attractive games will be necessary to fill the stadium. The schedule we have this year would make me buy season tickets whether I think we're going to win those games or not. Conversely, I'm just about ready to get rid of my basketball tickets because half the games on the schedule are just plain rotten.

 

[Threefinesweethams]

An ideal NC schedule in my opinion would be 1 big-time game against a top 10-20 opponent, 1 game against a second-tier team from a BCS conference or solid team from the MWC or one of those conferences, and 2 cupcakes. This gives you a solid 3-1 and a decent shot at 4-0 even while playing at least couple of good games. This year's schedule is actually a little tougher than that, so Brewster deserves some credit for not shrinking away from real opponents.