2018 Tiger Mailbag: 25th Edition

GET THE INSIDE SCOOP EVERY DAY WITH YOUR PREMIUM SUBSCRIPTION!

GD: Could he? Sure. That's a more talented team than Loyola and Loyola went to a Final Four. So it's absolutely possible.

There's always been talk around Mizzou about "sealing the borders." And I've always said if you get every single in-state kid in football and the major part of your football program is in-state kids, you're not a top 25 team. You can have a winning record, but you're not a top 25 team. There just isn't enough talent in Missouri to make that true. But in basketball? Absolutely you're a top 25 team. Here are the kids from the state of Missouri in the Rivals era that went on to have good or better careers (top of my head, I may be slighting a few guys):

Jayson Tatum, Brandon McKissic, B.J. Young, Mike Dixon, Jeriah Horne, Alec Burks, Jeff Graves, Jimmy McKinney, Tyler Griffey, Tyler Hansbrough, Martane Freeman, Jordan Barnett, Kevin Puryear, Juwan Morgan, O.G. Anunoby, Xavier Sneed, Brandon Rush, Devin Booker, Blake Ahearn, Ben Hansbrough, Lance Harris, Otto Porter, Anthony Booker, Steven Hill, Tyler Cook, Ben McLemore, Matt Lawrence, Quinton Day, Marcus Walker, Shaq Harrison, Landry Shamet, Kalen Grimes, Marcus Denmon, Bradley Beal, Jontay Porter, Ish Wainright

Here are the ones that are to be determined:

Luke Kasubke, Carte'Are Gordon, Torrence Watson, Jordan Goodwin, Isaiah Mosley, Jordan Lathon, Christian Bishop, Jordan Nesbitt, Mario McKinney, Yuri Collins, Fred Thatch, Caleb Love, Cam'Ron Fletcher, Marceedus Leech, Ochai Agbaji, Jericole Hellems, Courtney Ramey, Jared Ridder

That's 54 names that doesn't even include guys who might be mismarked in our database or who were highly thought of and didn't pan out and probably some that were good at smaller schools that I just don't really know about. And it doesn't include a few guys like Steve Moore and Ryan Rosburg who were definitely D1/high major players that were far from stars, but weren't bad. That's an average of three guys a year. That fills a roster. If that's ALL Missouri had gotten in the last 18 years, it might not be a top 25 team every year, but there would have been a lot of top 25 years in there.

GD: As of today, we don't have any pre-written. I wouldn't tell you if we did, but we don't.

GD: Mizzou has offered 17 in-state kids. They've got a commitment from Jack Buford. Isaiah Williams is committed to Illinois. Here are the remaining guys broken into categories:

Excellent chance: Marcus Washington, Ira Henry

Good chance: Jalani Williams, Shammond Cooper, CJ Boone, Arvell Ferguson, Moses Okpala

Some chance: Danielson Ike, Maurice Massey, Martez Manuel

Not much chance (or not much interest on Mizzou's side): Nathaniel Peat, Jameson Williams, Kyren Williams, Cam Coleman, Etinosa Reuben

So let's set the over/under at 6.5.

GD: Not that tough. In the conference realignment story, yeah, I wanted to throw some things out there. But I also didn't want to plant the seed for somebody else to start working on what I was working on. I do look forward to the publish date on some stories like that because they're fun to write and they're the types of stories you get in this business to write (hope I don't kill anyone's illusions here, but nobody gets into this to write recruiting updates on Johnny Jones). But it's better just to wait and publish them. Because you also don't want to over promise and under deliver if a story isn't as well-received as you hope it will be.

GD: I think it's a combination of the two, but I lean more toward there being a lot of offers that aren't really offers. There are a lot of kids you're talking about (and it's not exclusive to Missouri kids, it's true everywhere) that might have 25 offers, but don't have 10 places that would take their commitments today. It's how recruiting is now (and it's stupid).

But your last sentence is really what happened. I said at the beginning of 2018 that what would happen with that class is a lot of schools that don't normally recruit St. Louis would come in to see those kids and then find some 2019 and 2020 kids that they like. So the state is getting recruited more heavily than it's ever been recruited before.

GD: They'd both still be very good. I mean, they're good players. If they had access to the same training and strength and conditioning these guys have, they'd be fine. Put Corby in a spread option offense? Hoo, boy. I didn't ever see Phil Bradley play so I'm not as qualified to talk about him, but he was an all Big Eight QB at the height of the Big Eight's greatness, so I think he'd be just fine. And Steve Bieser sure could use him.

GD: I'll be honest: I don't really know what it means either. And I'm not sure a lot of the kids who say it knows what it means. You hear it a lot around Mizzou, but I bet if you read commitment stories from other schools consistently over a few years, you'd hear it a lot there too. It's one of those buzz phrases that kids say all the time. I think what it means is "The coaching staff really seems interested in me as a person and not just as a football rental." Which most do. But most say it too, and whether it ends up being true or not if you don't pan out as a player, I don't really know. Call me a cynic.

GD: Most do because it's not worth their time to chase a kid who almost certainly isn't going to school there. You might shoot the kid a text or a call now and again and if he responds and seems open to continuing a conversation, then you do it. But for the most part, if a kid says "I'm done," coaches are going to move on to kids they have a chance to sign. I'm sure there are exceptions, but as a general rule, why invest your time in something that isn't going to happen?

GD: Whenever I talk to journalism students (believe it or not, some people actually have deemed me a good person to do that at times), this is almost always the very first question I get. How do you develop sources?

The answer is easy: You're just there all the time. There's no magic to it. You show up at every single thing they let you show up at. Games, practices, booster club meetings, recruiting camps, media days, whatever. If you're allowed to be there, you go. And then you do your job the right way. Over time, people get to know you and trust you. People like to see their names in print. They like to be the source in "source says" even if nobody else knows it's them.

It's a process. I'll be honest: Most of the stories we get now aren't because we've spent a ton of time asking and chasing things down. Most of it comes from info that someone volunteers to me and then we go chase it down. Sometimes it's from someone I've gotten a lot of information from in the past, sometimes it's from someone I've never met or heard of. In fact, I have people I would call very credible sources that I've never met in person. Quite a few of them. And in doing what we do, the definition of a source is going to change. For instance, some people may be a source for a lot of things over a period of time. Some others may be a source in one specific instance where they have a connection to a story, but they don't in general tend to have a lot of information.

Sources are hard to develop and easy to lose. Because you only have to screw them once to lose them. I've got sources that have told me, "I'm going to tell you everything and I'm going to trust you to handle things the right way. And the first time you burn me, I'm never going to tell you anything again." Which is why you don't just go posting every rumor and everything you're told. Because in this business, if you don't have sources, you're worthless.

GD: Q39 is tops for me. Arthur Bryant's is what I was raised on and will be in my top five till the day I die. I'd go with LC's and Rosedale in there too. The fifth spot just depends on the day and what I'm feeling like. I like Gates. I love the beans at Jack Stack. I'm not nearly as high on Joe's as most. My dad and I ate at the McGonigle's Meat Market truck last weekend and they might have been the best burnt ends I've ever had. But really, KC BBQ is hard to screw up. I've rarely had a bad barbecue meal in KC.

GD: 1) I really can't think of people that were far different when I covered them versus when they retired. I mean, Gary Pinkel and Mike Alden are quite a bit different when I see them now than they were when I covered them. But that wasn't because they were bad guys or anything, they just weren't going to say too much. But after I did the realignment story, I did tell some people, "If Pinkel and Alden were that honest when I covered them, my job would have been so much more fun." But for the most part, guys are who they are. Especially college aged people.

2) If I have to choose, I'd say Michael is better. A lot of people have forgotten that 12 months ago he was a consensus No. 1 overall pick. That talent is still there. Are there question marks? Yeah. Maybe a few more than with a lot of elite guys. But he's got the talent. If I had to guess, I'd say he's a multi-time all-star, but not an all-time great. I'd say Jontay has a long career, may make a couple all-star games along the way.

3) Two things I pay no attention to: Pro wrestling and music. If I've heard a song, the likelihood is it came out before 1998.

GD: We hear most of the time. Usually it's not a big secret. He just wanted to go somewhere else more. But if there is some specific reason, we usually end up hearing something about it.

GD: I honestly don't have any idea. The qualifications for being an all-American are so different. In some sports like wrestling and track, it's solely based on performance and where you finish. In the revenue sports, it's very subjective. I'd say you're doing well to have more than a couple in any given year, but that's just a guess. I also don't think that's a good way to judge the athletic department on how it's doing.

GD: Neither. It's not one thing. It's everything. And really, I don't tend to make any judgments about recruits coming in. I've seen enough five-stars bust and enough two-stars be great that I'd rather wait and see what they do in college. Recruiting rankings are a good guideline on a big picture scale. They're worthless on an individual basis.

GD: I'm paying no attention to any of them right now. Did glance at the standings last night after the Herrera trade to see where Washington was. I just don't care. I'll watch the playoffs and if the Brewers get there, I'll root for them. Big LoCain fan. But my team sucks and I don't care about any of the rest of them much.

GD: Some of both. It's much easier to get the information because kids are their own reporters on Twitter and Instagram. But it's much harder to get them on the phone to talk about it. And it's much, much harder to have any sort of exclusive information. That's true in recruiting, but it's also true in covering the team because access has changed so much. I don't get much access (a little bit, but overall not a ton) that every student reporter doesn't get. Most of our interviews are in group settings where everyone is working with the same quotes. So to be able to do stories that make you stand out from the crowd is harder.

But what you mention is by far the biggest — and the worst — change. When I started, we'd find out something on Tuesday and hold it for the Chamber on Friday. Now, we have to post it immediately, no matter where we are. Because if we don't, somebody else will. Before I get too far into this, I want to be clear that my job is better than the one most people have and I don't want this to come off as whining. But a lot of jobs, when it's 5 p.m., you're done until eight the next morning. I've always said the best thing about this job is that there are no hours. I can do my grocery shopping at 10 a.m. on Wednesday. I can play golf on Friday. I can more or less set my own schedule. But the worst thing is also that there are no hours. If I'm at the grocery store when something happens, I've got to take care of it then. I don't have any idea how many hours a week I work. Sometimes it's far less than 40. But by the same token, there are almost no days where you're just "off." I try to take about a week a year for everyone on our staff where I say, "Do nothing. Don't read the board. Don't check Twitter. Just check out." Because you have to do that for your sanity. But most days, if I'm sitting around the house, if I'm waiting to pick my kid up from swim practice, if I'm sitting at his swim meet, whatever, I'm scrolling through Twitter and the board to make sure I'm not missing anything. Because we bill ourselves as the only place you need to go for Mizzou news. If we're going to be that, we better make sure we have all the Mizzou news.

There are limits to that. I mean, if a kid tweets an offer and we don't post it right away, I'm not worried. Or when a kid tweets an offer and I retweet it and inevitably have someone say "What are our chances?" I'm not gonna answer because, well, I found out 30 seconds ago the kid had an offer and I'd never heard of him before that. How would I know what the chances are. But the 24/7 nature of it is driving a lot of people out of the business. It's not hard, but it is demanding. You're never off.

Best way to sum this up, I had a friend text me on Sunday before Memorial Day and ask what we were doing on Memorial Day. I said, "Nothing. I'm home every Monday. This isn't anything special. Every day is a weekend and a holiday. A lot of that is good. But some of it sucks because every day is a potential work day too.

GD: So much more boring than you probably think. Home or road, I'm trying to get up and work out early because the day is better if I do that. I make sure our preview story is posted, check the board, tweet out all relevant links, etc. I'll generally get to the stadium probably about 90 minutes before kickoff for a home game. On the road it's probably a couple hours early depending on the game time because really there's not that much else to do. I laugh when I see people tweeting pictures of an empty stadium three and a half hours before kickoff. Like, what are you doing? Just proving how early you can get there?

Anyway, I'll usually try to line up a tailgate to stop by. I have my usual one at home games, but on the road I'll try to find somebody I know who's doing something because the food at tailgates is almost always much better than it is in the press box. I'll usually walk down on the field at a road game for a little bit just to kind of check things out, see if anybody's missing from warmups, maybe talk to a few people. Try to be in my seat all set up at least 30 minutes before kickoff to get the game thread and live update thread going. Just follow the game throughout. When it's over, we immediately try to have something new on the front page, either a quick recap or five thoughts or something before we start post-game interviews. That's not always possible. Then we do all our interviews and head back to the press box. Generally take anywhere from two to four hours to write, post videos and photos, etc, just depending on how the game went and how many people we have there.

After that, if it's a home game, I'm headed back to my house. If it's a road game, a few of us will usually go grab food and drinks and then head back to the hotel. Unless it's a night game, then I'll grab a beer at the hotel bar and be pissed off it's 2 a.m. and I have a flight in six hours.

GD: I did have one. It was my first beer. It was okay. Too fruity for me, but I didn't hate it. Just not something I wanted to drink, especially when there are a ton of other good choices. I think it would be a solid beer for the ladies at a big lake gathering or something. If I'm going to be drinking out in the heat I'll go with a Boulevard Wheat, a KC Pils, or if I want to really be able to drink all day, some PBR. That said, the number of times I drink all day anymore is a very small number.

GD: Covering recruiting is far different from being involved in recruiting (at least it damn well should be). I've never been on an official visit, never sat in a living room with a kid and a coach, never even sat in on a staff recruiting meeting. So I can't say what will work to tell the kids or not tell them.

I can say that every kid pretty much says he has three things on his list:

1. Family atmosphere

2. Education

3. Preparing for life outside of football

I can say that every kid pretty much has three things that are really on his list (in this order usually):

1. Playing time. The sooner the better

2. Getting to the NFL

3. Winning games

The best recruiting tools are to go win and to put players in the NFL. Period. Are there things you can tell parents and kids that will be more effective than others? Yeah. But in the end, you've got to win and establish your program as a place kids want to go and can reach the NFL. The rest is window dressing.

GD: I'm not sure we have a tree yet. It's more of a sapling. Pete Scantlebury was working at SEC Country and will do something good in his next stop (most likely involving being punny on Twitter). Alex Schiffer is at the Kansas City Star. Colton Pouncy was at The Tennessean and recently took a job with The Athletic covering Michigan State. I'll keep Keegan Pope and Mitchell Forde around as long as I can, but something tells me they're both destined for things bigger and better than our little corner of the Internet.

As far as fall camp access, I have hope and belief the access is going to improve. But I want to be clear on my definition of access. What I want is to be able to talk to as many players and coaches as possible. As far as standing around watching practice? I honestly don't care a whole lot about that. If I can write about it, great, let me in and I'll write about it. But if I can just go, but can't really pass on any information from practice, then I'd just as soon not spend two hours every day standing around watching. Because it's not all that fun. I'm there because it's my job and I want to put out information. If I can't do that, I'd rather not be there. But to the original question, I think we'll have better access. One of the things Barry Odom has felt his way through for a couple years is dealing with the media. I've had multiple conversations about it with him and with others at Mizzou. He's evolving as he gets more experience doing it. I think we're coming to a place that can be more beneficial for both sides rather than it being an adversarial thing. And that's good for everybody, including the readers and viewers.