So the refs made a mistake in the Minnesota-SDSU game. The last basket shouldn't have counted. Is it fair to say that the refs cost Minnesota the game?

I don't think so. The refs' error cost 2 points. But the Jackrabbits (not the refs) scored 57 other points. Minnesota (not the refs) missed 32 shots and 8 free throws.

You can truthfully say: "if the refs hadn't made the mistake, the Gophers would have won." But you can just as truthfully say: "if the Gophers had made one more basket, they would have won." In any close game, you can point to dozens of plays and say: "if that hadn't happened, the other team would have won." Outcomes of complex events like basketball game results have multiple causes. The refs' error here was a cause; it wasn't the cause.

The Gophers' intent in appealing was to get the attention of the Selection Committee. Worried that it might end up on the bubble, Minnesota wants the Committee to ignore or discount this game. Should the Committee do that? Should it exclude this game from its RPI calculation?

Again, I don't really think so. There are lots of close games, and quite a few of them have arguable reffing errors that contributed to the outcome. This is a particularly clear case, but adjusting the RPI in this case could produce a raft of appeals. The game isn't worth the candle.

Beyond the RPI, the Committee looks at a bunch of factors. The RPI is based on results alone, but the Committee might look at scores and qualitative performance. Perhaps when assessing this game in those mushier ways, the Committee could factor in the error.

Aside from that, however, this appeal should have no effect. The only really important thing is clarifying the rule and working to ensure that the same mistake isn't made again in the future.