GET THE INSIDE SCOOP EVERY DAY WITH YOUR PREMIUM SUBSCRIPTION!

GD: I agree it felt bigger than that. There are a number of reasons. Like you said, 4-2 sounds better than 3-3. But I'd picked them to go 3-3 in the first six and so did almost everyone else (as far as media that covers the team). But South Carolina isn't as good as we thought. And Kentucky and Florida are better. So the reason it seems like it's worse than just one loss is because now you look at the schedule and think 7-5 is the most likely outcome. If you'd said they were going to be 3-3 before the year with a competitive loss to Georgia and a two-point loss on the final play at South Carolina, I'd have said they're going 8-4 at worst and maybe 9-3. But right now, it doesn't look that way.

I'll say this: I think the coaches and players actually feel better about this than we do. Don't get me wrong, they're pissed they lost. But I get the feeling from talking to them, they feel like they're really close. They're taking the glass half full approach of "we made all those mistakes and we're still like three or four plays from 5-0." Whereas I'll admit to taking the glass half empty approach of "they've made all these mistakes, which makes me think they're going to keep making them and end up 7-5." Fortunately nobody plays games on paper and we'll see where they're at in two months.

As far as the running game in the red zone, Drew Lock did make some mention of maybe throwing less and running more in bad weather. It wasn't red zone specific, but it was an interesting comment. That said, largely by the time we talk to them on Tuesday, they're kind of done with the last game and ready to look ahead.

GD: I don't know if either is more challenging. They're just really different. In football, you've got 85 guys and 12 coaches to write stories on potentially. In basketball, the number is like one-sixth of that. So basketball is a little harder to keep fresh between games. That said, basketball gives you a game every three or four days, so you've got more on-field product to write about whereas so much of your football stuff is analyzing what happened or previewing what's going to happen. Basketball is far easier on game day just because it's so much shorter and there are generally fewer storylines. But football is probably easier day to day because there's just so much more you can write about.

GD: I'd say this one is worse. The 2013 loss felt worse in the moment. But what did that really cost you? Nothing. Missouri went into the SEC title game knowing a win would put it in the national title game. The South Carolina game cost you an unbeaten regular season, but it cost you nothing in the big picture. In addition, that was a really good SC team. I'd argue if they played Missouri ten times, the teams might have split. That's not the case here. I rarely walk away from a game thinking the better team didn't win, but I really think Missouri wins seven out of ten games it plays against South Carolina this year. Saturday just wasn't one of them.

I don't have access to the drops by the wide receivers. I can give you targets and catches, but there's really no way to know which were drops and which were bad throws and which were just good defensive plays without going back and re-watching it. There have been some drops. There have also been some bad throws. I thought Lock was better against Georgia than he was against South Carolina. I didn't think the receivers were particularly good either time. Below are the numbers of targets and catches in the last two games.

GD: As to the first paragraph, I understand the frustration and the question. They did come back in this game. Last year, they just folded when adversity hit. This year, they've shown an ability to fight back against it. They just didn't show an ability to complete overcoming it. Derek Dooley said on Tuesday that last year Missouri wasn't in these games. This year, they're in them and that's a step. The next step is learning to win them. The thing is, Missouri doesn't have another year to learn to take that step. It needs to happen now. Beat Kentucky or beat Florida. Beat somebody that's good. Carolina is okay. They'll probably make a bowl game now. Purdue might too. But you'd like to see a win with more substance than we've seen.

As far as the defense, you're right. It's bad. And it's really, really hard to understand. If he ends up losing his job, the fact he couldn't field an average defense in three years is going to have a lot to do with it.

GD: Everybody coming back alive with all their limbs attached. I mean, I joke, but I can't remember the last time I covered a Missouri game and thought there was zero chance the Tigers could win. I've covered games where I thought it was unlikely. But I don't know if I've ever covered one where I just can't come up with a scenario where Missouri wins. And that says more about Alabama than it does Mizzou. Bama lost to Auburn last year. A&M and Ole Miss have beaten them. So it's not impossible. But this Bama team seems better than the ones we've seen previously. Sports are weird so I'm not going to say there's no chance. But it would be absolutely stunning, and that's not really a strong enough description.

GD: I think every football coach should get four years given very extenuating circumstances. There are two things to consider:

1) The main reason Odom is taking the heat he is from fans is that they're terrified of the quarterback position next year. I understand why that's true. If Connor Bazelak was a year older or if we'd been hearing great things about one of Lock's backups, I don't think the takes would be quite so scorching hot. But I think a lot of people are saying "We're going to be worse next year. So if we only win seven this year, we're only going to win four next year and that means he's going to get fired next year anyway so just do it this year." And I understand that line of thinking. I really do. I said earlier this week it's better to make a move a year too late than a year too soon. So I think getting a grad transfer QB would be gigantic...but that's not a thing we're going to know before Jim Sterk has to make the call about next year.

2) When Gary Pinkel really struggled in year four and a lot of people wanted him fired, the guy who was going to make that decision was the same guy who hired Pinkel. That's not the case here. If Mike Alden had fired GP in 2005, there's a chance he'd have been signing his own pink slip too. But Jim Sterk has no loyalty to Barry Odom. He didn't hire him. Who knows if he would have hired him if he'd been here in 2015? You hear all the time when a new AD comes in that the major coaches better watch their backs because he wants to get one of his guys. Sterk says all the right things...but nothing can change the fact he didn't hire Odom.

GD: I've got absolutely no idea. But considering Campbell's name was mentioned when it looked like Ohio State might need a coach, my guess is he might be in line for a much better job in the next two years.

GD: I'm sure there have been instances of it, but I don't know. Missouri has had a lot go against it. The calls in the UGA game were bad. The injuries, the overturn of the Crockett run, etc. Teams that have good seasons win in spite of those things a lot of times (not against Georgia, but against SC). I mean, let's remember, the Gamecocks played without their starting QB in the same weather and even had a dropped punt snap AND a blocked punt. Did more things go against Mizzou in that game? Probably. But some of them were Missouri's fault.

As far as a scale of weirdness, yeah, that one's probably at the top. And everyone else I talked to seemed to agree, including a lot of people who have seen more football than I have.

GD: Nebraska 1995. I've always said I think that was the best college team I'd ever seen. The closest game the Huskers played all year was a 35-21 win over Washington State. Oddly, that Cougar team went 3-8. Nebraska beat No. 8 Kansas State 49-25, No. 7 Colorado 44-21 and No. 10 Kansas (seriously) 41-10. They destroyed Florida 62-24 in the Orange Bowl to win Tom Osborne's last national title in a game that included the best run I've ever seen.

I hate to label a team "the best team ever" before the season is over. Remember when Miami was that and lost to Ohio State? Or USC before it lost to Texas and Vince Young? I think there's a good chance nobody comes within 14 points of Bama all year long. But let's let them do it before we crown them.

GD: I mean, it's kind of impossible to compare eras in a lot of cases. How many homers would Babe Ruth hit if he played in the 1990's? How many points would Wilt Chamberlain have had if fouls were called the same way they were when Michael Jordan played? There's no right answer to "Who's the greatest?" which is what makes it fun. Drew Brees has thrown for more yards than anyone ever has in NFL history. That's pretty amazing. It doesn't mean he's the best QB ever, but it's a cool record to have. And, for my money, I've always thought John Elway was the best quarterback in NFL history. Man, I hated him.

GD: I think Missouri's offense could use a big time wide receiver. So I'll go with Colorado's Laviska Shenault, who is averaging 141 yards per game, which is 17 yards more than any other player in the country.

The defense needs a pass rusher. I don't really know anything about Jordan Brailford from Oklahoma State, other than he has eight sacks in five games and so I'd take that.

For your second (weird as hell) question, I'll still take Lock. I know what people will say. But I think Mauk was good mostly because of what was around him. Lock is a better quarterback in every single regard. In his career here, Mauk did come from behind to beat South Carolina 21-20 in 2014 (in a game that is the opposite of what we watched last weekend. Missouri was AWFUL for three-and-a-half quarters, made about four plays, and won). He won five other games that year by ten or less, but honestly, I don't remember him being a huge reason for them necessarily. In 2013, he came off the bench to beat Georgia, but the clinching play was a touchdown pass by Bud Sasser. He also lost close games to Indiana and South Carolina in which he was pretty bad down the stretch. It's a fair question, given that the win over Purdue this year is the only time Lock has ever really come from behind and won a close game. But I'd still take Lock. Give me the guy with more talent over the guy that people think is good because of some intangible mythical quality.

GD: We do this dance pretty regularly. I'm not going to go there yet. There's a lot of football yet. If it gets to a point where I think it's a little bit more pressing question, I'll certainly answer it (for example, if Missouri loses to Memphis, you can ask me and I'll give you a list). If we reach a point where we need a list, we'll have one ready. I'm not there yet.

GD: Kentucky and Florida. Missouri should win the other four. If they lose any of them, then we've got a decent chance to be looking at 6-6 and a busy offseason. Kentucky is a very good team with a strong defense and a good running game. The positive person says "Missouri can stop the run so it's strength against strength and I like Missouri's chances." The negative person says "A blind one-armed quarterback could throw for 250 and three scores against Missouri right now, so I don't care if Kentucky doesn't look like it can throw the ball, it will be able to in that game."

I actually think Florida is a tougher matchup. I think Florida has guys who can lock up Missouri's receivers one on one and make things really difficult on the Tigers. I haven't written off the chances of 5-1 in the last six. I've got a hard time seeing 6-0 because I just haven't seen anything out of this team that tells me it's consistent enough to do that.

GD: It's an interesting question and one I hadn't really thought about. He has the redshirt year available. He could. Does he want to? I've got no idea. I'd say if he's not ready to go 100% by the Kentucky game, it's something you have to ask about. But if he's back by then, there's still enough season to play and be helpful.

GD: I've never heard it called a "furry" but I think I'd want to be the Phoenix Suns gorilla. That seems like the least ridiculous one of all of them that I can think of. Also, you get to use a trampoline.

2) I don't know and I've never really thought about it. Some guys just like white shoes I guess. I think they think it makes them look faster.

GD: It's a great question and I think if you asked ten different people you would get ten different answers. I think it's important that a guy can motivate the guys in his room and get through to them. But I've never thought one position coach knows some secret drill that none of the others know. I mean, was Craig Kuligowski teaching some technique that nobody else taught? I doubt it. That doesn't mean he's not a very good defensive line coach. He obviously is. The second thing is that so many coaches move around and coach different positions. Derek Dooley has coached just about every position on offense. Cornell Ford went from corners to running backs and Mizzou's running backs are probably the strongest position on the team. If you can coach football, you can coach football.