Exile on Waveland

Or not.

Colts on the clock. Not sure Iglesias makes it past them. He didn't in with CCP and me running our mock.

Gilbert is a real nice pick. Just like last year with Forte, lot of us Colts fans were real high on him.

Wells couldn't see the field for the Colts. If you can't block or catch the ball, you can't be a RB in the Colts system. It has nothing to do with talent level. I think we all agree that Wells is the more talented pure runner, but he would really hurt the Colts when he was on the field. If the Colts drafted Wells, the only time they could really use him would be as a goal line/3rd and 1 back, and you don't draft a RB in the first round for those two situations. Exactly. Excellent post by me; really added a lot.

There was no way the Colts were taking Beanie Wells.

Well, CCP and I were right about position, just not player (though Moreno would've been the pick if available, I assume). Colts desperately needed a running back, in my opinion.

Guess Moreno won't be falling to the Colts like twice in our mock draft. Darn. I think I'm starting to smell CB for the Colts at 27 -- figuring one or maybe even both of Vontae Davis or Alphonso Smith will be left. ETA: Assuming I'm also correct about what DT's are available.

...Trying real hard to trust Crean...

Don't mind at all. Remain thoroughly pleased with the selection.

I won't be a very happy camper if the Pacers take Lawson at 12, thus passing on some of the players picked right behind them.

I probably would've liked TJ Lang at this point if he hadn't been picked, but not sure another offensive lineman is worthwhile here (at least to me). On the defensive line, I think either Myron Pryor or Roy Miller at DT would work with Marks already being selected for UT. The secondary I would lean towards Bruce Johnson (good KR too) or even Kevin Ellison at safety. I would love the Colts to load up on DT's, a la interior offensive linemen last year, but in real life I might expect secondary. Lean towards Miller probably; up to you of course.

Sorry, busy day at work. Good pick, though.

holy [expletive] that is creepy. Um, weird. . .?

Thank you. I missed a number of those declarations. Guess no longer subscribing to a newspaper has its downfalls. I hadn't heard and am surprised by Evan Turner (especially) and Willie Warren at least not testing the waters.

The team that drafts Lawson in the top-10 will be disappointed. Just as the Bobcats have been disappointed with Felton and just as the Bucks -- then Raptors, then Pacers -- have been disappointed in Ford. I also think you underestimate Felton's talents.

I'm not much of a fan of his pro prospects either.

Very funny. Edit: I was actually complimentary of the Illini in that post, too. I'm just an ass is all. I would agree after the preceding post. That year did involve one of the worst couple shots ever at Assembly Hall.

Yes. I'm tired of hearing how the Big 10 is boring. During the late 80s they tried to run n gun stuff with Tom Davis at Iowa, the Flying Illini and the fab 5 and never won anything. Now it seems like a big 10 team makes the fianl 4 just about every year. But out here it's all ACC is awesome, blah blah blah. IDK..Michigan won the NT in 89 and the Flying Illini were clearly the 2nd best team that year(actually smoked Michigan twice during the season but lost to them in the final 4). So I wouldnt say they never won anything. And who won the Big Ten that year...? Hmm... Hint: Neither the National Champions nor the "2nd best team" (who was actually likely the best). Was that the last conference title you guys won? Very funny. Edit: I was actually complimentary of the Illini in that post, too.

Yes. I'm tired of hearing how the Big 10 is boring. During the late 80s they tried to run n gun stuff with Tom Davis at Iowa, the Flying Illini and the fab 5 and never won anything. Now it seems like a big 10 team makes the fianl 4 just about every year. But out here it's all ACC is awesome, blah blah blah. IDK..Michigan won the NT in 89 and the Flying Illini were clearly the 2nd best team that year(actually smoked Michigan twice during the season but lost to them in the final 4). So I wouldnt say they never won anything. And who won the Big Ten that year...? Hmm... Hint: Neither the National Champions nor the "2nd best team" (who was actually likely the best).

Mike Davis is an "odd" fit for any college basketball team.

Im sorry but the "Big Ten honks" deserve to come out and talk some [expletive]. The Big 10 has been killed by every major sports journalist/tv commentator, and fans of all other major conference. Everybody all year wanted to kiss the Big Easts ass, and yet the Big Ten Champ manhandled the Big East Champ in Louisville, and took it too UConn. Plain and Simple. BIG EAST KILLERS! :D Well, I'm convinced. The Big 10 was better! I don't think we were better, but we were good enough that everyone didn't need to take popshots at us all year long. That's pretty much were I stand (I think most agree). The Big Ten was a solid, deep conference this year that didn't deserve to be treated like the SEC (which really got off easy relatively).

After we got bad mouthed all year for playing defense we deserve this. And we agree too! BIG TEN!!!!! Big Ten fans definitely deserve this. We've been crapped on this year, and it was completely undeserved. PS Double excitement for the Branch McCracken shout out!

Oh, and those Duke and UNLV teams were basically exactly the same.

I understand your point, but you dont think its possible UNC caught MSU on their worst night? I mean that same MSU team that lost by 35 points is giving UConnn a hell of a game, and has already beaten Louisville. I mean Illinois beat Mizzou by around 30 early in the year too, do you think the same woulda been true had they played in the tourney? It's a stupid point. Being blown out doesn't preclude you from competing/winning the second time around. Roy's teams in particular, because of the style they play, are always ahead of the curve early in the season. Add in the fact the team is primarily upperclassmen used to their system, and it's not surprising they boat race so many teams in the non-con. Like I said, I think UNC would win a rematch. But it's hardly out of the realm of possibility for MSU to win. My point isn't solely because UNC won by 35. It's that to win by 35, you have to completely dominate a game. And I happen to think that when Team A dominates Team B in the way that UNC did MSU earlier this season with the same exact players (sans Suton) at the same exact site, that 35 points is too much of a gap to overcome. You know that sometimes these deficits snowball. It's tough to say about an Izzo-coached team, but Michigan State kind of packed it in that night. UNC didn't; therefore the margin increased to a point that I don't think was terribly indicative of even that night's game. I actually think the 35-point margin will help Michigan State.

Citing the previous outcome is a terribly illogical argument.* Surely no one thinks that UNC is 35-points better than Michigan State. Surely no one believes that result predetermines the next one (an example that comes to mind is UNLV-Duke from 1990 to 1991). Even so, not having Suton is a pretty big deal. The Spartans are obviously on quite a roll right now. Pride also shouldn't be underestimated. I would envision a game were Michigan State can do no wrong. *Edit: This was a poor sentence in which my meaning wasn't apparent. Obviously a previous result matters -- a lot, actually. I simply meant that it's not proof that UNC automatically wins the next one.