Creampuff schedule

[GopherFan]

Every year there is a lot of talk about the creampuff non-conference schedule that the Gophers play. Most of what I hear are complaints about the teams played and that victories over these teams have no value. Implications are that things would be better if the schedule was more difficult. For those who subscribe to this thinking I have some questions for you:

1. Show me a team that is outside of the consistent top ten teams nationally who doesn't pad their schedule.
2. Explain to me why, considering the recent history of the program, Minnesota warrents playing these teams and beyond that why a top team would want to play us.
3. Most importantly, is upgrading the schedule going to make the program better?

Lets apply this theory to this years schedule. If the Gophers had a more difficult non-conference schedule with opponents that either end up in a bowl or are competing for a bowl what would the record and the end of the non-conference schedule be? 0-4? 2-2? Maybe, but certainly not 4-0. So now that the team is at 2-2 at best how is that better? The road to a top tier bowl that everyone covets just got that much more difficult. The team would need 4 Big Ten wins just to become eligible let alone anything more than the Motor City Bowl. At 2-2 after non-conference this year and with the Big Tens wins at 3 the team is 5-7 and not going to any bowl. At this point what have we achieved? You can certainly say that the schedule was more difficult and you can tell people that the losses were to good teams but so what? Are people suggesting that losses to good teams mean more that wins to bad teams? Does a player take value in that? Is this more difficult schedule going to make more fans interested? Was the dome going to fill with fans willing to watch them get pasted by USC, Florida or maybe even just an average team like Kentucky. If the team is 0-4 or 2-2 at the end of the non-confernce schedule against tough teams will that increase Big Ten ticket sales or will it be an early excuse for people to write off the rest of the season? How does the more difficult schedule help recruiting? Only the very best teams are going to attract top talent by putting together the most difficult schedules. A top player is willing to risk losing in a difficult non-con schedule at USC not Minnesota. To get players interested in coming here we need as many wins as we can get. And certainly if getting blown out by Iowa is bad for recruiting how can getting blown out by USC be any better. We need to face reality here. Minnesota is not in a position to complain about any opponent because we have a enough trouble beating the ones we play. In reality I don't like the weak schedule any better than the rest of you but I think its folly to think that making the schedule harder will automatically make things better.

[WolfontheProwl]

Looking down the road over the next several years the schedule is going to get much tougher with teams like Cal and Oregon State. I think the schedule talk is overstated as its hard to get good teams to get out of their home field or to play teams with a shot to beat them. I think it is important for the Gophers to try and get games in certain areas to help recruiting. Getting games in Florida, Texas, California, and on the East Coast is a good idea. You cant get everything you want every year but games against BCS schools is important which is why games against Syracuse, Oregon State, and Cal are so important.

[gopherjay]

Money to pay opponents. Many top teams don't travel every year for non con games. Look at Ohio state, why would they play away non-con games. Every once in a while big matchups are made like this year but that is still about money because TV drives that. We have the same schedule as everyone else.

[cduff]

I'd agree with that. The biggest problem in putting together a quality non-conference schedule, is that the bigger teams don't ever want to play more than one non-conference road game per year. Even though the NCAA has permanently gone to a 12-game schedule, this hasn't changed. Teams still want a minimum of 3 of their 4 games to be at home. If the top 60 teams in D-1 all want 3 home games, the math doesn't add up. So what you're left with is the bottom 60 teams, and then 1-AA teams, getting paid by the bigger schools to give the other team a home game and and give you a beating.

[50PoundHead]

Agree 100%. The media in this town gets all over Brewster for playing Northern Illinois, but doesn't say anything about Iowa playing those tough Maine Black Bears. All D-1 squads jockey to get the most delectable cream puffs on the schedule.

[UpnorthGo4]

Many of the posts about the Gopher's easy non-conference schedule under Mason related to the relative value of bowl games as an indicator of coaching success. Mason's defenders always made a big deal about all of the bowl games that the Gopher's played in. And Mason's critics always downplayed those bowl games because roughly 50% of the 120 Division I teams qualified for them. Unless a team has a sh*tty season, going to a bowl game is a given. For that reason, the only real measure of any Division I coach is his conference record. And of course, I never miss the opportunity to tell people that Mason's Big 10 record was 32-48. Thanks for another opportunity to post Mason's real record. Likewise, the Gopher's bowl game this year was built on an incredibly favorable early season schedule. The four game losing streak to end the season (especially the Iowa game) really diminishes what was accomplished this season. A winning bowl game is not going to change that perception very much.

[stevedave23]

Most people ripping the gophers non-conference schedule have no idea how college football works. Which really comes as no suprise since most people in the Twin Cities (other than the diehards like us on this board) don't know much about college football.

With the exception of the perennial top ten teams, nearly every team in the top conferences (B12, B10, SEC, ACC, PAC10) plays an easy non-conference schedule. Did anyone see who the mighty Florida State played this past weekend?? I rest my case.

[GopherFan]

UpnorthGo4,

Please help me understand what you are saying. If a coach, Mason or anyone else, plays an easy non-conference schedule and wins enough Big Ten games to get to a bowl game if the bowl game does not meet a certain standard we should consider that a failure? If that is true then what is the minimum standard for success? It is not the Gophers fault that there are a bazillion bowl games so don't penalize them for making one. And if they do play a harder schedule, lose and miss a bowl game is that better? Again, I don't like the easy schedule any more and anyone else but don't rip this program for an easy schedule when everyone pads their schedule as well.

[Schnoodler]

Maturi explained it once. The better the opponent the less you play at home. A creampuff might agree to a 1-3 swap while a mac maybe a 1-2. Atop team 1-1 Thus with an all creampuff NC schedule its probably three home games and one road like this year.

cal is probably a home and away swap.

So be careful what you wish for.

[TruthTeller]

could be good or bad.....

[stevedave23]

It is not the Gophers fault that there are a bazillion bowl games so don't penalize them for making one.

Amen. It always annoys me when the bowl season starts and people whine about how many bowl games there are. What's the harm in having a lot of bowl games?

[Goldmember]

Pretty much every team in the Pac Ten plays a schedule like this.

It is much easier to schedule games against the Sun Belt and MAC. It may even have been essential when the Gophers were renting their home field. But overall, I don't think it is worth it. Even if you win these games, you really lose. Plus, they are terrible preparation for the Big Ten schedule, and demand for tickets to these games is low.

If Minnesoat starts the next season with a 1-7 record and loses the first 4 games at TCF Bank Stadium a lot of people are going to claim that the non-conf. schedule was too tough. But I think it will have done more damage to beat North Texas and Toledo assuming those same Big Ten losses happen.

[stevedave23]

Wisconsin went to two Rosebowls with the help of easy non-conference schedules. People can argue this but I don't think they would have gone with a tougher non-conference schedule.

[josh087]

Either:

1) We start beating some quality big ten teams on a regular basis

or

2) We start scheduling and beating some quality non-conference opponents


The media is going to rip on the NC schedule. It's perfect for them. It's a no-win situation for the Gophers unless they start piling up 10 or 11 wins a season.

Unfortunately the media in this town isn't going to give the Gophers a break for doing the same thing every other BCS conference team does with their schedule. And the media CONTROLS the average fan in this town. Anyone who thinks otherwise is just being naive.

[Schnoodler]

tough nuts. You schedule easy to make money, prepare for the conference games, and get a decent bowl bid. Not to satisfy the media idiots. They should be smarter, the U shouldn't get dumber.

[Goldmember]

Wisconsin went to two Rosebowls with the help of easy non-conference schedules. People can argue this but I don't think they would have gone with a tougher non-conference schedule.

You can lose all four non-conference games if you want to, but if you win the conference you're going to the Rose Bowl anyway.

[Boondoggle]

Either:

1) We start beating some quality big ten teams on a regular basis

or

2) We start scheduling and beating some quality non-conference opponents


The media is going to rip on the NC schedule. It's perfect for them. It's a no-win situation for the Gophers unless they start piling up 10 or 11 wins a season.

Unfortunately the media in this town isn't going to give the Gophers a break for doing the same thing every other BCS conference team does with their schedule. And the media CONTROLS the average fan in this town. Anyone who thinks otherwise is just being naive.

It seems as though most of the negativity in the media is coming from the Star Tribune or a couple KFAN hosts (Hartman and Barreiro). My favorite Twin Cities publication that covers the Gophers would have to be the Pioneer Press. They cover the Gophers in a way that analyzes what is on the field, what is positive, and what is negative. Although non-conference scheduling has been criticized by many in the media, I think we will be able to compare our non-conference schedule of the future to other BCS teams, thus eliminating a majority of the media's scheduling criticisms.

[gopherfan34]

Most people ripping the gophers non-conference schedule have no idea how college football works. Which really comes as no suprise since most people in the Twin Cities (other than the diehards like us on this board) don't know much about college football.

With the exception of the perennial top ten teams, nearly every team in the top conferences (B12, B10, SEC, ACC, PAC10) plays an easy non-conference schedule. Did anyone see who the mighty Florida State played this past weekend?? I rest my case.

Perhaps you are one of those "people in the twin cities who don't know much about college football"

Um FSU played Maryland. An ACC opponent, who happened to be ranked. So what was your point again?

[Schnoodler]

Perhaps you are one of those "people in the twin cities who don't know much about college football"

Um FSU played Maryland. An ACC opponent, who happened to be ranked. So what was your point again?

You can dig out the exceptions all you want, but he's right, the gophs aren't out of the norm on this.

[gopherfan34]

You can dig out the exceptions all you want, but he's right, the gophs aren't out of the norm on this.

What exception? I pointed out that FSU played a conference game this past weekend. A conference game against a ranked opponent. Which didn't fit with what he was trying to say. And made him look stupid. Claiming he is a diehard and using FSU as his example pretty stupid. If he wanted to prove his point he should have Alabama playing Arkansas State two weeks ago.

So tell me how FSU playing a conference opponent is an exception?

[goldfan24]

Look at all the top teams in the country and you will see they all play cupcakes every season.
Iowa played Maine. Didn't the BIG BAD HAWKEYES LOSE to Western Michigan at Kinnick last fall?
The Iowa fans were calling for Kirk's head after that loss. NDSU would have beat several Big Ten teams last year because they had a team of experienced 23-24 year-old red-shirt seniors playing. Not so good this year after they all were gone. Texas plays cupcakes in their non-conference season also.

The Gophers will play their most difficult non-conference schedule in many years next year. Look at who Iowa and Wisconsin play and have played over the years.

[Goldmember]

Justa guess ... he meant Florida, who played the Citadel.

[stevedave23]

Totally my fault. I meant Florida not Florida State. The Florida Gators played the Citadel this past weekend. Maybe I don't know anything about college football? lol

[Schnoodler]

What exception? I pointed out that FSU played a conference game this past weekend. A conference game against a ranked opponent. Which didn't fit with what he was trying to say. And made him look stupid. Claiming he is a diehard and using FSU as his example pretty stupid. If he wanted to prove his point he should have Alabama playing Arkansas State two weeks ago.

So tell me how FSU playing a conference opponent is an exception?

I got lost in the shuffle of miscommunication. my bad. I guess my point need not be directed at you.

[StPaulHawkeye]

Right on GopherJay; it is all about money.

This year before the Maine/Iowa game, I heard (sorry but I can't provide a link to confirm) that Maine's take from the gate at Kinnick was more than 2 or 3 years worth of their home gate combined. As a former coach there, Coach Ferentz was not only getting a pretty good chance at a win, but also helping that school's athletic budget.

As someone mentioned, "creampuffs" from the former I-AA are not guaranteed wins - ask Michigan. Iowa State has lost to Northern Iowa as well. You guys can attest to the fact that NDSU was no creampuff. MAC teams are creampuffs no more, IMHO. Plus with scheduling taking place so far in advance for football, it's hard to tell who is going to be a creampuff and who is not. I didn't see Ball State as a BCS buster 5 years ago. Missouri pulled out of a scheduled game with Iowa a few years ago because Iowa was "too good." Funny how that worked out. :-)

Final comment, I would imagine that the players from smaller schools welcome the chance to play in a 70,000-100,000 seat stadium. They have nothing to lose and they will talk about lining up against future NFL players for the rest of their lives.

[The Big L]

Whats lost in the fray here, I think, is that teams like Florida can still get huge crowds playing The Citadel.

We haven't been able to draw big crowds for games against smaller non-BCS schools. We have a problem getting the masses behind Gopher football, a problem that many top programs do not have. Bringing in high quality opponents is more important for us, because it will draw more fans, draw more attention, and hopefully make the fanbase larger and stronger.

[Schnoodler]

Whats lost in the fray here, I think, is that teams like Florida can still get huge crowds playing The Citadel.

We haven't been able to draw big crowds for games against smaller non-BCS schools. We have a problem getting the masses behind Gopher football, a problem that many top programs do not have. Bringing in high quality opponents is more important for us, because it will draw more fans, draw more attention, and hopefully make the fanbase larger and stronger.

While I agree in the basic premise that we'd all rather see USC than Montana I think it's an oversimplification. A tougher schedule also means more losses. I have a feeling that a 10-2 creampuff record would be more effective than a 7-5 record against tougher opponents in draws at the gate. And when you consider that it would also mean fewer home games, it becomes tougher to support the premise.

The only way to where we want to be is to improve the program so that playing a mid tier D1 still feels like a cream puff game. Then we can be 10-2 against tougher competition.

[DaveC]

Not only is it hard to schedule a good time from a major conference, bad teams from those conferences can be a scheduling disaster too. At least that's been the case for the Gophers over the years. We've tried to get series going with Iowa State and Baylor only to have them back out after one game, leaving a last minute scheduling hole that's hard to fill. I'm concerned that Syracuse and Washington State will do that same thing if the Gophers get too good or they stay really bad. We will be able to offer them a much bigger paycheck for coming to TCF Stadium than we could in the Metrodome, but sometimes it's all about pride when these teams pull these things.

In any case, with those two teams, Colorado, Oregon State, Cal and Air Force on the schedule in the coming years there really shouldn’t be any legitimate complaints about the schedule. That’s the best a program at this level can do and you just have to hope these teams stay on the schedule. A 7-1 next year or in any of the next 5 years would be a much better indicator that this team is going somewhere, unlike what we saw this year and so many other seasons in the recent past.

[stevedave23]

Whats lost in the fray here, I think, is that teams like Florida can still get huge crowds playing The Citadel.

We haven't been able to draw big crowds for games against smaller non-BCS schools. We have a problem getting the masses behind Gopher football, a problem that many top programs do not have. Bringing in high quality opponents is more important for us, because it will draw more fans, draw more attention, and hopefully make the fanbase larger and stronger.

With the new stadium sold out home crowds won't be an issue for the time being. As far as generating more interest I can see your point but you also have to ask whether losing (perhaps badly) to bigger schools will generate more interest than beating small schools?

[Goldmember]

With the new stadium sold out home crowds won't be an issue for the time being.

Right, and that could be a short honeymooon. The problem is that having all the tickets sold does not always translate to attendance. Places that consistently sell out have FAR FEWER seats than demand.

We want people to complain that they can't get a ticket to Gopher football games. We want thousands and thousands of poeple to be saying things like, "I've never been inside TCF Bank Stadium. I would pay $50 or more to see the Gophers play any team on the schedule, any time."

If there is false demand (i.e. people are giving tickets away for free, not showing up and eating the tickets, or are only showing up because they already have the tickets in-hand), people will quit renewing in the lean years, and the stadium won't stay sold-out for long.

[McGopherFan]

With the new stadium sold out home crowds won't be an issue for the time being. As far as generating more interest I can see your point but you also have to ask whether losing (perhaps badly) to bigger schools will generate more interest than beating small schools?

How about tagging on one extra game at the end of the season. Get a southern team up here to play the Saturday before or after Thanksgiving. See if the swampers are really a football team or if it really is just basketball on grass.

I'd like the Gophs to get a tune up, and midlevel game in before moving into the Big Ten. And finish the season with the Blizzard Bowl. Let's see how tough the ACC or SEC teams are at 40 degreees or colder. I'd bet not a single southern team would do it, not for all the money in the world.

[Mase]

Most people ripping the gophers non-conference schedule have no idea how college football works. Which really comes as no suprise since most people in the Twin Cities (other than the diehards like us on this board) don't know much about college football.

With the exception of the perennial top ten teams, nearly every team in the top conferences (B12, B10, SEC, ACC, PAC10) plays an easy non-conference schedule. Did anyone see who the mighty Florida State played this past weekend?? I rest my case.

Wrong. Minnesota is #1. (http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=frightful/080905)

[stevedave23]

Wrong. Minnesota is #1. (http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=frightful/080905)

What am I wrong about (other than I meant Florida not FSU)? I never said Minnesota played tough non-conference games. I said that nearly every team in the top conferences does the same thing.

[Mase]

What am I wrong about (other than I meant Florida not FSU)? I never said Minnesota played tough non-conference games. I said that nearly every team in the top conferences does the same thing.

Your post implies that the Gophers non conference schedule is on a even keel with other programs and it's not.

[Schnoodler]

I've been studying this for an hour or so. And I don't think there's a lot of difference. The one major difference is that most programs play one decent opponent in their NC games. Outside of that it's pretty much the same selection of creampuffs that we complain about.

Using Sangarins SOS rankings as the measure.

Considering all four NC games we did have the creampuffiest schedule. We averaged a 108. The average in the B10 was 94.

If you factor out the toughest opponent our worst three average was 119. The B10 worst three average was 114. We were 7th in the B10.

The other part of what I learned is that there was no counter intuitive findings. In other words with very few exceptions a tougher schedule did lead to a worse record.

So basically replacing one cream puff with a decent opponent makes us just like everyone else. Going beyond that puts us at a disadvantage to everyone else.

[stevedave23]

Your post implies that the Gophers non conference schedule is on a even keel with other programs and it's not.

That's wasn't my point but I can't control how you interpret my post. My original point was that many people who are critical of the gophers non-conference schedule do not realize that most teams in the top conferences play smaller, generally inferior schools for their non-conference games.

I think most casual college football fans living in the twin cities turn on the tv on Saturday's and see non-conference games like USC vs. Ohio State and Michigan vs. Oregon and then wonder why the gophers don't play teams like this. The reason? We're not Ohio State or Michigan. Some day I would love for the gophers to be as consistantly good as Michigan or Ohio State. We're not there right now and I don't think that getting beat (or blown out) by top ranked teams is the way you get there. Personally, I believe that the gophers need to do it the Wisconsin or Northwestern way if they want to go to better bowl games including the Rose Bowl. That's just my opinion. You are welcome to disagree with it, that's what these message boards are for.

[Gold Rush]

I agree with stevedave23 in his line of reasoning.

The trick to scheduling is to bring in some teams just a little worse than you so you get the win against the best possible teams. That isn't always an easy thing to do!

I like the teams that we are bringing in in the next few years, but I don't have a problem with a couple creampuffs each year that are tune-up games, either. I would like the NCAA to step in and force its members to play two games vs. BCS schools in a conference vs. conference matchup - sort of what happens in the ACC-Big Ten basketball matchups. This way you would get one "good" home game and one tough road game each year against an evenly matched team in an opposing conference. For example, if the Gophers finished 6th in the Big Ten, we would play at the #6 Big 12 team and get the #6 Pac Ten team at home the next season. Two years later, we would swap and play different conferences. It would be a lot more fun for the fans than what we have right now and I imagine the TV ratings would be a lot better, too.

[Goldmember]

I've been studying this for an hour or so. And I don't think there's a lot of difference. The one major difference is that most programs play one decent opponent in their NC games. Outside of that it's pretty much the same selection of creampuffs that we complain about.

Using Sangarins SOS rankings as the measure.

Considering all four NC games we did have the creampuffiest schedule. We averaged a 108. The average in the B10 was 94.

If you factor out the toughest opponent our worst three average was 119. The B10 worst three average was 114. We were 7th in the B10.

The other part of what I learned is that there was no counter intuitive findings. In other words with very few exceptions a tougher schedule did lead to a worse record.

So basically replacing one cream puff with a decent opponent makes us just like everyone else. Going beyond that puts us at a disadvantage to everyone else.

Not to make this overly-scientific, but the ESPN article is using data that is much more appropriate to the discussion.

Sagarin Rankings are not a good measure of wheather or not a team is a "tough opponent" for scheduling purposes. The data that you are using could not possibly lead to any counter-intuitive findings (assuming you used Sagarin's current rankings). Sagarin's rankings already account for what has transpired on the field this year. For instance, Appalacian State's Sagain rating in 2007 was drastically improved by beating Michigan last year. But, the game was still a cupcake game for Michigan. Using the data as you have above ... the App. State game would appear to have been a STRONG opponent, but that strength was based largely on the fact that they beat a good Michigan team.

Also, I think what people usually mean when they say "cupcakes" is "uncompelling opponents". No one complained about the series with Colorado State, even though they were not a great team in 2005, and they are not in a BCS conference. Toledo had a better Sagarin rating than Colorado State in 2005, but Toledo would not have drawn nearly as much attention from fans because they are a MAC team.

[Schnoodler]

I would disagree.

[stevedave23]

I would like the NCAA to step in and force its members to play two games vs. BCS schools in a conference vs. conference matchup - sort of what happens in the ACC-Big Ten basketball matchups. This way you would get one "good" home game and one tough road game each year against an evenly matched team in an opposing conference. For example, if the Gophers finished 6th in the Big Ten, we would play at the #6 Big 12 team and get the #6 Pac Ten team at home the next season. Two years later, we would swap and play different conferences. It would be a lot more fun for the fans than what we have right now and I imagine the TV ratings would be a lot better, too.


I wouldn't mind this. In fact, I would love to play more competitive non-conference teams...if that's what everyone else did. I just don't think it's very smart to play teams like Florida and Oregon every year while Wisconsin plays Maine and The Citadel.