Guys we’re five weeks into the 2011 season and we still have a lot of unbeaten teams. Some, like the top 6, were expected while others were not. We’ve got some low ranked teams boasting undefeated records and a couple Non-BCS squads in the ranks as well.
My question to you all is simple: Who is for real and who is “for fake” as I’ve grown to term it? Just so we’re clear “for fake” doesn’t have to mean “4-0 Kansas State is fake because they won’t go undefeated.” That’s a bit harsh in my opinion, of course the Wildcats won’t go undefeated but they have beaten Baylor and Miami this is a team that should improve upon a season ago.
With that in mind my number one “for fake” team is Stanford. To reference K-State again, the Wildcats have accomplished more this season than Andrew Luck and company. I’m not sold on the Standford defense and just because they’ve looked good when things were easy this season doesn’t mean I expect them to walk through Oregon or Washington unscathed.
For me the Cardinal are living off borrowed time and when things get tough Jim Harbaugh won’t be walking through that door. Owen Marecic won’t be there to cover their defenses holes and in the end this could all flame out for Stanford as quickly as it began a year ago.
Allen Kenny: Stanford is a good call, Mike. Great offense run by the best quarterback in college football, but that defense may be eventually be the Cardinal’s undoing.
I’m going with 5-0 Michigan as “for fake.”
Brady Hoke and the new staff there have generated of enthusiasm through their first five games in the Maize and Blue, but the schedule has served them well so far. For starters, the Wolverines have yet to travel. Their first road game is this weekend at Northwestern – I definitely consider the Wildcats a live underdog.
Then, look at the games Michigan has won. Western Michigan and Eastern Michigan were bodybag games, and this year, Minnesota is close. If not for some late magic in the Big House’s first night game, the Wolverines would have blown a gift-wrapped win against Notre Dame. San Diego State is actually a strong mid-major, but the Aztecs were playing an early kickoff against an opposing coach who knows their personnel inside and out.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Michigan goes 2-5 in its final seven games of the year.
Kevin McGuire: With all due respect, dig a little deeper with those Michigan “bodybag games” Allen. I’ll give you Eastern Michiagn and Minnesota, but don’t be so quick to dismiss the others. Western Michigan’s pass offense is ranked 21st in the nation, Notre Dame’s total offense is ranked 29th, and San Diego state is 33rd overall. And Michigan shut them each down when it counted the most. I am as interested to see Michigan hit the road as anyone but with the defense playing drastically better than they have in recent years, and with Denard Robinson doing his thing, I think Michigan is legit. BCS contender? Probably not. Big Ten contender. Absolutely.
But we’re supposed to be focusing on the “for-fakes” as Felder terms it. For me, I’m looking at you Texas.
The Longhorns can prove me wrong this weekend against Oklahoma but I am not going to start getting so excited over wins against Rice, BYU, UCLA and Iowa State. If you want to talk about a team piling up good numbers against inferior opponents, look no further than Austin. We have discussed UCLA’s fall from college football before. When was the last time Rice did, well, anything? BYU has squeeked out a couple fun wins but ultimately they are a “meh” team. And Iowa State was more than ready for a fall back to earth after a 3-0 start, as far as I’m concerned.
Aaron Torres: Kevin, I think if you’re going to argue against Western Michigan as being a “body bag,” game, then you’ve also got to admit this: The game was a lot closer than the 34-10 final. You know how I know that? Well, because Western Michigan outgained Michigan by almost 100 yards (462 to 386), with the Wolverines getting two non-offensive touchdowns. One of which was a fluky 94-yard interception return, that completely swung the game. I know you can’t play the “what if,” game, but even if WMU settles for a field goal there, it’s 10-7 WMU, and who knows what happens. Instead it was 14-7 and the game was never the same. How different might Michigan’s season be right now if the Broncos had punched it in there?
Point being, that I too want to see how Michigan fares on the road. Allen brought up every bullet point that I would’ve wanted to hit on, except for one: Didn’t Michigan start 5-0 the last two years? Didn’t they finish a respective 5-7 and 7-5? Don’t we need to see them in adversity, on the road, against teams that match up to them with comparable talent? Don’t we need to see Denard Robinson forced to make tough passes, and not be able to just tuck it and run against inferior defenses? Isn’t his completion percentage significantly down (54 percent from 62 percent last year)?
Now that’s no discredit to what Brady Hoke and company have done so far; the fact is, even when Michigan was jumping out to 5-0 starts the last two years, their defense never looked as good as they do now.
But it’s like Allen said, I still have quite a few “if’s” about this team. 7-5 seems a lot more realistic to me than 9-3.
Kevin McGuire: On Michigan, yes they have started 5-0 before. Last season they started 5-0 but gave up 37 points to UMass and 35 points to Indiana. Through five games this season, other than Notre Dame, Michigan has allowed 20 points. This defense is far different from the one we have seen the past few years, and Aaron you actually helped prove my point about this defense with your example. Thank you sir.
Also, what stat book are you looking at with those yard totals? Michigan out-gained Western Michigan 288-279 on offense (total yards including kick and punt returns is a different story).
Here is where the “Great Stat Debate” starts and in the end Kevin is right and we send a gigantic BOOM! Roasted! To ESPN.com for having stats that differ from CBS, CFBStats and the individual school websites.
Aaron Torres: Yeah, seeing the same.
But even if the stats that I pulled off ESPN.com were wrong, the point still remains: That was a play or two from being a game. Now if you want to argue that Western Michigan is better than anyone realizes (they nearly upset Illinois and beat UConn last weekend), that’s fine.
My point still stands: I need to see Michigan away from the cozy confines of Ann Arbor. I’m still sticking with 7-5, or maybe 8-4 as where this team’s season ends. Don’t know you can say the same about any of the other undefeated’s.
I won’t waste my time pulling up stats on Texas (Thanks for nothing ESPN!), but I definitely think the Longhorns are for real. Maybe not “National Championship” for real, but definitely not 5-7 “for fake,” either. They’ve got dangerous young skill-position talent at running back (Malcolm Brown), wide receiver (Jaxon Shipley) and two quarterbacks who are infinitely more trustworthy than poor, old Garrett Gilbert. And their defense is coming on strong.
So while I won’t argue they’re an 11-1 team, what I will argue is that they’re just young, and just naive enough, to give the “powers” in the Big XII trouble all year. Starting this weekend.
Tom Perry: I guess I’ll be the non-AQ hater of the group.
My “For Fake” team is Boise State. Of course we knew there was a chance they’d be here right now and because of the schedule the Broncos are going to be 12-0 (unless some sort of Nevada game occurs). Add into the mix that TCU is down and Boise won’t play anyone of real significance this year. So I’d take any of the undefeateds (except Illinois) to beat the Broncos — even on the Blue Turf.
I love Chris Petersen and Kellen Moore is a winner. I get all of that. But Boise is basically a tick better than Georgia, which isn’t saying that much.
