GD: I haven't seen that specific idea. It's okay, but I don't like the fact that you would be in a division with a team that you didn't play. I mean, if Mizzou and Georgia were to play eight games and both end up 6-2, but never play, you're going to have the tiebreaker be something like the record against Vandy, Kentucky and Tennessee. I don't like that.

I also don't like that you play some SEC teams like every 12 years. There has to be a better solution. Personally, I don't see the need for the annual crossover rivalry. But maybe that's because I've only covered the SEC for five years. I don't see a problem with getting rid of Tennessee/Bama or Georgia/Auburn or Florida/LSU but obviously a lot of people do.

So if you have to keep those games, go to a nine-game schedule. I agree with the idea that every player should have a chance to play in every SEC stadium during his career. If you play nine games, you're going to see three teams from the other division every year. I don't feel like working the whole thing out, but that would mean there are only one or two stadiums that you don't play in.

Year 1/2 schedule: UGA, Florida, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vandy, Kentucky, Arkansas, Alabama, Texas A&M.

Year 3/4 schedule: UGA, Florida, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vandy, Kentucky, Arkansas, LSU, Ole Miss

Year 5/6 schedule: UGA, Florida, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vandy, Kentucky, Arkansas, Mississippi State, Auburn

So in that case, players who are there five years are going to play all 13 teams and play 11 of them on the road. That's a decent solution.

I still think what's most likely is that eventually we have four 16-team conferences (the Big 12 is the one to most logically go away). In that case, you have four four-team pods:

East: Florida, South Carolina, Georgia, Kentucky

West: Missouri, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

North: Vanderbilt, Auburn, Tennessee, Alabama

South: Ole Miss, Mississippi State, LSU, Texas A&M

You play the three teams in your division every year. You play two teams from every other division every year. So let's take a look at that for Mizzou:

Year 1/2: Arkansas, OU, OSU, Vandy, Auburn, Ole Miss, Texas A&M, Florida, Kentucky

Year 3/4: Arkansas, OU, OSU, Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi State, LSU, Georgia, South Carolina

Every player plays every team home and away in his career if he stays four years. It's a pretty easy schedule to devise. At the end of the year, you take the four division champions and play them in a conference semifinal. The winners play for the conference championship. The winners of the four conference championships play in a national semifinal and the winners of those games play a national title.

PROS: It's simple. It works. It makes sense.

CONS: It adds two games to the schedule for some teams. You could end up playing 16 games. But two teams already play 15. And let's be honest, nobody really believes the crap about it impacting the academic side to have to play more games. Baseball is missing two days of class every time they go on the road. Softball is gone all the time. Let's just be honest about why we're here. And it isn't primarily to go to class.

GD: Whatever. I don't really care. I haven't watched either of the last two games. The Chiefs have played in one AFC title game in my life. They lost it. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me every year for 40 years and I'm a complete dumbass. I'll watch when I can, but I'm not going to get overly emotionally invested in it.

GD: I would think so. I wouldn't start him. I think Ish Witter has earned the right to start that game. But if he's healthy, I don't know why Crockett wouldn't get some carries.

GD: Right now? Yes. First off, let me say, I don't think Baker Mayfield is bad. He's clearly a very good quarterback. Is he the best player in college football? Is he a guy I'd be confident using a first round draft pick on? I don't think so. That doesn't mean he's not an NFL quarterback. It doesn't mean he's not a very good one. It just means that because of the system he plays in, I think his numbers get inflated. And, yes, it's fair to say the same thing about Lock at this point in time. I think Drew has a better arm. Mayfield is more mobile. Given their games, I think the NFL will like Lock more. But with the offenses that many colleges (including OU and Mizzou) run now, it's almost a completely different game than the NFL.

GD: If they weren't when you asked this question, they are now.

GD: With the news that Josh Heupel is no longer the offensive coordinator, I can't see Mizzou having a shot at Foster.

GD: I think Missouri will take a quarterback. If Lock leaves, I think it's quite likely it's a grad transfer. If he stays, it obviously won't be (though it could be a traditional transfer).

On the biggest story, it has to be moving to the Big Ten. I never actually had a story ready to go, but I was pretty sure it was going to happen.

Those results would put Mizzou 20-11 overall going into the SEC Tournament. If the SEC is as good as people think, it MIGHT be enough as long as you didn't lose your first conference tournament game. To feel comfortable, I think you'd need to win two.

GD: Not sure where you're hearing that exactly, but I wouldn't agree with it quite yet. I think Brooks is going to definitely play next year, but anointing him the starter over Garrett would be premature in my opinion. Either way, both are going to be on the field. You need two guys to play at pretty much every position on the field sans quarterback. I think Garrett had a really good second half and impacted games down the stretch. Now you want to see it happen for a full season.

GD: There are two possibilities here. Either he promotes Ryan Walters to the full time DC and stays very, very involved in the every day operation or he hires an outside full time DC and takes a little step back from the every day involvement. I'm not sure at this point which way he'll go. I've had people tell me both sides of it. As was posted on the board yesterday, there's at least some interest in now former Arkansas DC Paul Rhoads, but I don't think it's super serious yet.

GD: I've noticed that too and don't have a good answer, but you can always find the visit list here.

GD: Lock. If you said either, neither or both, I'd probably go both. But not sure. With Porter, honestly guys, we're just waiting. There's not going to be any new development or breaking news for a while. Zero chance he plays before January. At that point, we'll see. I think it will also be January before we know for sure on Lock.

GD: I would assume that everyone currently committed will sign in December. If not, the coaching staff will treat them as not committed and will actively recruit to fill their spots. That doesn't mean they couldn't sign in February, but you have to assume they don't want to.

GD: 1. Could really come back at any time between now and mid to late January. Depends on when you submit your name.

2. Drew Lock, Terry Beckner, Terez Hall, Emanuel Hall for starters. Really there are quite a few that might have a chance in future years, but we've got to see them on the field.

3. January

4. Da'Ron Davis is my guess

5. More than have the last couple years, but fewer than did under Pinkel.

GD: Da'Ron Davis will. Tyrone Collins, I believe, has talked about possibly enrolling early. Could be some juco candidates as well if Missouri is able to land them.

GD: The skipping a bowl game thing is something that's really just come up recently. Arkansas had a few guys do it in the 2007 Cotton Bowl, but it's become a little bit more common.

As far as the bowl revenue, it is all pooled and split among all 14 schools. So the more teams in the playoff, NY6, the better it is for the league.

GD: The 10th coach should go into effect in January, I believe. As far as redshirts, you hear a lot about Jordan Elliott. Christian Holmes was in effect a redshirt. Early in the year I heard a lot about Larry Borom and Case Cook as guys that could have played but it wasn't necessary. And, yes, recruits can go to practice, as long as they pay their own way to get there.

GD: Not yet, but we don't even know who will be transferring. That won't start to happen until after the semester/season are over.

GD: Beckner could play outside some. So could Akial Byers. Those are the two most likely to me. I think you'll see more 3-4 looks next year, although I don't expect it to be the base.

In the defensive backfield, the top three corners will be Christian Holmes, DeMarkus Acy and Adam Sparks in some order. Fourth one will be interesting to follow. Safety is absolutely wide open, but I think Jordan Ulmer and Tyree Gillespie will get long looks.

GD: I don't think it will change things a whole lot honestly. Coaches have always been in and out of town recruiting during bowl practices, so this won't likely be any different. I wouldn't expect a press conference or anything. Assume that will all happen in February. Once the kids have signed, Missouri can talk about them publicly, so I would think Odom would be free to comment on them. And yes, they can absolutely talk with them privately.

GD: This is where the early signing period comes into play, I think. In the past, you could take your time and fill them in January or even after signing day. I would think you'd want to get guys on board as soon as you could to lock up the commitments you have. Will be interesting to watch. To be honest, we're all guessing on all of this as far as the early signing period because it's never existed before.