GET THE INSIDE SCOOP EVERY DAY WITH YOUR PREMIUM SUBSCRIPTION!

GD: Most important things first: The Royals suck. Like real bad. They made two World Series by having the best bullpen in baseball and now they trot dudes out every night that make me go: "Who the hell is he?" And that guy proceeds to pitch like a guy I've never heard of and they lose. And I'm good with it. I wanted them to tank. They kind of pretended they weren't going to, but now they have to. Trade Lucas Duda and Jon Jay and Mike Moustakas and Kelvin Herrera and everyone else who isn't bolted down and give it another run in three years.

As for the automated balls and strikes, I'm sure we'll get it eventually. And that's fine I guess. I don't really care either way. Sometimes bad calls happen. If the machines calling pitches don't delay the game the way monitor reviews have in basketball, I'm okay with it. Otherwise, just live with a handful of bad calls and be good enough to overcome it.

GD: I don't listen to my own. First, I know what was said. Second, I don't like listening to myself. When I was in TV, I hated putting together a resume tape because it meant I had to spend an hour sitting there watching myself on TV. It's not fun. But anyway, yeah, I listen almost exclusively to podcasts. Honestly, they've replaced TV as background noise for me during the day when I'm working. Here are five I love:

1. Sports Media with Richard Deitsch -- This one's for media geeks, may or may not appeal to fans, but he's had some phenomenal guests (his former podcast was the Sports Illustrated Media Podcast before he moved to The Athletic and there are well over 100 episodes). You get an inside look at the way media people do their jobs, but there's also just a lot of good sports talk.

2. Origins with James Andrew Miller -- He's done two seasons, one on Curb Your Enthusiasm, which I didn't watch so I didn't listen to and one on ESPN, which was really good. He wrote the book on ESPN a few years ago and there's a lot of good insight.

3. 30 for 30 podcasts -- Almost as good as the documentaries.

4. The Daily -- Not looking to get into a political discussion because that's not why I listen. I don't want to sit down and watch much news, but this is usually about the biggest story of the day and I can catch up in 20 minutes on things I should probably know something about.

5. All Fantasy Everything -- It's hosted by a stand-up comic with different guest hosts every week. The concept is he picks a topic and they do a fantasy draft of the top five things in that category. It's long, more of a road trip podcast than something you can listen to on a commute to work, but it's funny as hell and it's fun to make your own picks while you listen.

I subscribe to more than 20 podcasts. Those are probably my favorites, but I enjoy Criminal, Reply All, Ear Hustle, How I Built This, Mogul, Someone Knows Something and quite a few others.

GD: Georgia because it's a division game. If Missouri can beat UGA somehow, they'll have a real shot at playing in the SEC Championship Game this year. Beating Alabama is great from a buzz and prestige standpoint, and obviously it would help a lot, but purely from a "what helps the team more" point of view, it's a win over the Bulldogs. Now, I don't think anybody would turn down a road win over the Tide, don't get me wrong, but if you go in knowing you're winning one and only one, you take the win over UGA for sure.

GD: I have absolutely no idea how they started. I assume they continue because it's a way for the school to make a little money and keep programs in the public eye. And in some places (mostly places that have no pro sports teams), they're worth the time. If you're an Alabama or Ohio State fan, this might be the only time you can find tickets and afford to take your family down to see your team. And in many cases, you have a chance to take your kids down on the field, meet players, etc. So that's all well and good. I just don't think there's any point from a football standpoint. And if you're a school that isn't drawing 30,000 (most of them), I don't know what the real value is.

There's no way they're going to do a scrimmage against another team because coaches are completely paranoid that other teams are trying to glean information about what they're going to do. So if they were actually playing another team, they'd be even more bland than they are in the scrimmages that we get to see now--where they tell us they're incredibly bland. I personally have a hard time believing that anybody can watch a spring game and find information that's going to help them win a game six months from now, but coaches sure seem to think it can happen.

GD: It's insulting and wrong to say that Porter, Sr., brings nothing to the table. He obviously knows basketball and I'm sure he's got some coaching ability. You don't get a job without it. That said, if his kids weren't who they are, is he getting a job at Washington and then Mizzou? Maybe, but the chances are certainly lower.

As far as the bigger scope of your question, different staffs split it up different ways. Some have coaches who specialize on offense, others on defense. Some have assistants who coach big men and assistants who coach guards. Depends on the strength of each coach and what the head coach needs. But the major part of an assistant's job (I'm going to say well over 50% and probably at least 80%) is to be able to recruit and get players. Have connections to areas and AAU programs and build relationships to get good players on campus. That's the most important part of the job for almost every assistant.

What's needed at each school depends on the head coach. Cuonzo Martin is mainly a defensive guy, so it's probably important that he's got an assistant or two who's specialty is more offensive. If you're an offensive coach (say a guy like Fred Hoiberg), you need an assistant who's got a real defensive specialty. If you're a young head coach, you want a veteran guy who's been through the battles on the bench before. If you're an older more experienced guy, you probably want somebody (or multiple somebodies) who's really going to bust it on the recruiting trail. Basically, whatever your potential weaknesses are, those need to be the strengths of your assistants.

GD: I assume we're talking about Dru Smith since Mark Smith has already signed. He is supposed to visit in nine days. Ideally, Missouri has a good idea what Courtney Ramey is going to do by then. I don't know if Ramey directly impacts Smith, but if you get him (and you've already got Mark Smith and Torrence Watson and Xavier Pinson and Javon Pickett) I'm not sure you have to have Dru Smith. That said, get as many good players as you can and sort it out later. I still think the biggest need in this class (with or without Ramey) is a big man who can contribute next season assuming Jontay Porter isn't coming back (which I assume).

GD: I'm not sure how much, but when I asked Jim Sterk a couple of weeks ago if the end zone would be enclosed by the start of the season, he said no. I imagine it will be somewhat enclosed and they'll at least have a foundation down, but I doubt it's going to be as high as the uprights.

GD: I'm sure there are any number of ways to get money to a prospect. I'm not sure I believe that duffel bags full of cash are just being dropped off for a kid to pick up all that often (but I do think it happens). But I imagine people can be pretty creative about it. The second part of your question is interesting. And you're right, if you pay a kid and he wants to go somewhere else, what are you gonna do about it? Cost of doing business. I think many things are structured like "You'll get X amount to commit and then X amount when you actually show up." But that's just going off whispers and rumors of things I've heard before. I've never had somebody say "I got paid and this is how it happened."

GD: Man, this is a tough one. I'd like to get Max Scherzer and I've tried before, but it's not easy. I'll try again this offseason. Brad Smith would certainly be a good one and one I'll try to get this offseason because I still view him as the most important player in the renaissance of the football program. Here's a wild card for you: When I was at KOMU in college, my buddies and I loved interviewing Caldrinoff Easter and Harold Piersey. So maybe I'll try to track those guys down.

GD: Justin Smith. Put that dude next to Terry Beckner and you've got a hell of a defense.

GD: In reverse order, we haven't heard much of anything on Blake Hinson. Missouri doesn't seem to be mentioned much with him at this point. I've seen Seton Hall, Washington State and Ole Miss as the most discussed teams.

As far as the backfield, I could see something very close to a 50/50 split. Rountree actually got the first series in the spring game and if the season started Saturday, I think he'd get the start. But Crockett's going to play plenty (and may very well be the starter by September). Either way, they'll both get plenty of carries. I think both average more than ten per game, but neither averages 20.

GD: 1. I guess you could. But it has to be a guy that's qualified to some degree. You can't just give up a spot on your coaching staff every year. I'm not sure it's a great way to do business (though it does have some merit if it guarantees you a five-star every year).

2. I understand that point of view. I don't know if I agree with it, but I do understand it. Let's see how the process plays out before we make any judgment. The one thing I'll say is that I think most of the complaining about the process with Ramey is from people who want him to decide on their timetable, not his. It's his decision. He gets as long as he wants to make it. If a coach thinks he's taking too long, he's free to move on.

GD: I mean, obviously, I have no idea on any of those answers and we have to see the season to know. Those are all questions the coaching staff needs to answer before deciding how much 3-4 to run. I'd also warn that it's not like Missouri is just switching to a 3-4 and running it 80% of the time. You'll see it and I think you'll see it more than you have in past seasons. But I'd bet they still spend more time with a four-man front than a three-man front.

GD: Third behind Crockett and Rountree. I'll guess maybe a half dozen carries a game.

GD: The silent recruitment is easier to cover because you just admit up front "I don't know and nobody else knows either and we'll wait to hear something." I'm not sure I'd describe the MPJ saga as "fun" to cover, but it certainly kept us on our toes and taught me a few things about using Instagram.

GD: 1) Who will be the four Captains this Fall? Drew Lock, Terry Beckner, Terez Hall and Paul Adams.

2) Who will win the #2 QB battle? Taylor Powell

3) Who will be the starting two safteys? Joshuah Bledsoe and Khalil Oliver

4) Most pivotal game on this year's football schedule? Purdue

5) Squad newcomer who will make the greatest impact this Fall? Alex Ofodile

6) Who will be the "break out" new Offensive Star this Fall? Larry Rountree (you guys know him, but most around the country don't)

7) Who will be the "break out" new Defensive Star this Fall? Joshuah Bledsoe

8) Biggest "trap game" on the football schedule? There are no trap games. This team isn't good enough to have a trap game.

9) Over/under on offensive points per game this fall? 31.5

10) Over/under on defensive points allowed per game this fall? 25.5