GET THE INSIDE SCOOP EVERY DAY WITH YOUR PREMIUM SUBSCRIPTION!

GD: In college, I want a mobile quarterback. There just aren't enough athletes across the board to contain him. Now, I want him to be able to throw, but I'd rather have a guy that's a threat to run for 100 yards every game than a guy who is primarily going to throw it but will take off and run if he has to. College defenses just largely haven't proven that they can contain those guys who are really good at it. Look at the great college quarterbacks who haven't done anything in the pros. There are tons of them. The NFL has great athletes all over the field on defense and you can't just outrun those guys. That simply isn't true of most college teams.

The second question is much harder. Nothing immediately comes to mind. Benny the Jet was pretty good in The Sandlot. I'm sure there's an easy answer here, but nothing jumps to my mind honestly. Actors playing professional athletes aren't usually super believable.

GD: I'm taking football every single time for a few reasons. From a selfish perspective, football drives the bus for business. Good football seasons are much better for traffic than good basketball seasons. Truthfully, I'd take scenario number one over a Final Four for hoops from a purely business perspective. To steal a phrase, it just means more.

From the school's perspective, football is the easy answer. Even bad years for football attendance average five times more than basketball does. You want the money. You want the attention. Football is more important than basketball everywhere except maybe three or four schools (Duke, Carolina, Kansas, Kentucky, maybe Indiana).

If scenario two had been a Final Four, from a selfish more fun to cover perspective, I'd go with that. But given what you laid out, this isn't even a question.

GD: Mount Rushmore Male Mizzou Athletes--J'Den Cox, Ben Askren, Chase Daniel (I think Brad Smith was more important, but Daniel was the best and is known by more), Derrick Chievous (there is plenty of room for debate here, but I maintain Chievous is the best and the most important player in program history)

Mount Rushmore Female Mizzou Athletes--Sophie Cunningham, Karissa Schweizer, Chelsea Thomas, ???. There's probably an obvious one for the fourth spot, but honestly, I don't know who it is off the top of my head.

Mount Rushmore Mizzou Coaches--Norm Stewart, Dan Devine, Don Faurot, Gary Pinkel

Mount Rushmore Mizzou Teams--1960 football. This team is one that could lay claim to a national championship if you're into that type of thing. 1994 basketball: Unbeaten in the Big Eight. Not the best team Missouri has ever had, but the most accomplished. 1954 baseball: They won a national title in a sport people pay attention to. 2007 football: I think it's the best team in school history that I saw. It brought Mizzou into the national consciousness. Some will say you can't have a team here that didn't win the conference title, but I think it was the most important Mizzou team of the last 25 years. Without question.

GD: First, the hypothetical. Yeah, I love the idea. I know it's never going to happen. No way the Big 12 signs off on a tournament that includes three teams that aren't there (and doesn't include five teams that are). In addition, nobody is going to schedule three more high major games I don't think. Especially when the Big 12 teams in it are essentially playing another conference game. I'd go to it every year and I'd love it, but it's not going to happen.

As to the first sentence here, you're right, there is no chance Missouri is ever going back to the Big 12. None. Zero. Nada. Zilch. Forget it. Never. Ever.

GD: Very good. Beer, beaches and mid-80s is better than beer, no beaches and mid-50s.

GD: Oh, man, that could be fun. The first thing you're going after is the best quarterback in the country. So I'm starting the team with Trevor Lawrence (I wouldn't argue at all if you wanted Kyler Murray and since I'm basing it off guys from last season, he'd be eligible, but I'll take Lawrence). I want a freak show with speed at wide receiver so I'm going to go with one of the guys from Bama. Give me Jerry Jeudy. I'll take Jonathon Taylor from Wisconsin at running back (though I actually think that's the least important position on the team). My other receivers are both from the state of Oklahoma in Hollywood Brown and Tywan Wallace. I don't know a ton about the tight ends, but I'll take Noah Fant from Iowa. I'm not going to pretend to be an expert on offensive linemen. Give me five really good ones from wherever, but I can't single out which five. Basically you're constructing an all-American team but I can't have two guys from the same team.

And you're right, defensive players are tougher. The first guy I'd pick is Quinnen Williams from Alabama, who I'd take with the first overall pick if I were the Arizona Cardinals. But I don't really want to run through the entire defense to be honest because I'd be guessing a lot.

GD: Maybe it's always been that way, I don't know. But, yes, it's ridiculous. The kids who play in the Mizzou/Colorado game in 2030 are probably finishing first or second grade right now. Sure, it's kinda silly, but I assume there's a reason everyone is doing it.

GD: The offense last year controlled the ball a lot better than the one the year before and it did help the defense. Not enough, but it helped. I don't think the time of possession has to go up any more. Ball control helps the defense, but so does scoring points. And Missouri did plenty of that last year.

Also, I like chicken, fish AND steak. But I really like pork.

GD: Quarters wouldn't eliminate that many TV timeouts. Right now, there are four per half. If you go to quarters, you've got one between quarters and one in the middle of each quarter. You're saving one TV timeout per half, or five minutes a game. The one way I think it could help is with fouls. You reset fouls at the ten minute mark. You're in the bonus at five and then you start over at the start of the second and fourth quarter.

You know what would help the most? Eliminate reviewing every damn thing. I saw a lot of tourney games where they're doing a review in the final 15 seconds to put .2 back on the clock. Does it matter? I guess probably to the team that's behind it does, but is it worth a three-minute delay and destroying all flow of the game? You're also giving coaches an extra timeout every time you do it WHICH IS THE LAST THING COLLEGE BASKETBALL NEEDS. When I'm watching games, it honestly feels like each team gets ten timeouts. I know they don't, but it feels that way. Two timeouts per half. Period. If you don't use the ones in the first half, you don't get them back. If you go to OT, you get one more. That's all. Also, you get one review per half per team. It has to be initiated by the coach. It can be possession, whether someone stepped out of bounds, shot clock violation, setting the clock, whatever. But you get one per half. So you better use it wisely.

GD: Gotta be honest, I didn't hate the Trop. It's weird because inside baseball is weird, but I didn't hate it. I counted and I've been to 22 stadiums. Many of them don't exist anymore. Here's where I've been:

Cleveland (it was Jacobs Field then, don't know what it is now), Kauffman (KC), the Metrodome (Minnesota), Tigers Stadium (Detroit), Old Yankees Stadium (NYY), Fenway (Boston), Camden Yards (Baltimore), SkyDome (Toronto), Tropicana (Tampa Bay), Wrigley (Cubs), Riverfront (Cincinnati), Three Rivers and PNC (Pittsburgh), Miller Park (Milwaukee), old and new Busch Stadium (STL), Turner Field and Fulton County (Atlanta), Old Shea Stadium (Mets), Veterans Stadium (Philadelphia), Coors Field (Colorado), Dodgers Stadium (LA).

I'd like to go to San Francisco, Seattle, Washington, Texas, San Diego and Houston the most among the ones I haven't seen.

GD: Sure, why not? Relievers are a dime a dozen. See what he's got. If he blows out, he was going to blow out anyway. That said, he's pitched one major league inning. So let's see if he can pitch another one before we put him in the rotation.

GD: No idea. I'd be more interested in how many of you finished high school.

GD: It definitely varies. I don't really know details because I've never been on a team flight, but it does vary. I know a big deal was made earlier this week about how UCLA was taking commercial flights. I can tell you some coaches show up at league meetings on swanky private jets and others are rolling in out of the Southwest terminal. So it varies for sure.

GD: I'd classify it in the "something that we're definitely monitoring to see what develops" category.

GD: I'm sure he will get some. But I think he'll also be the fifth quarterback in the five quarterback rotation since he can't play at all. I think he'll probably get a series or two, like the rest of the guys that are very unlikely to see the field.

GD: We'll do position reviews with projected starters at the end of spring ball. But the truth is, they probably won't be a lot different than the ones we did before camp. Very rarely are jobs won or lost in spring football. A lot is going to change between now and August. Spring ball is for many different purposes (as I've said before, the biggest one is having 15 days where you know your players aren't getting arrested), but it really isn't about determining starters or second-stringers or the depth chart. That's done in August and throughout the season.

As far as basketball, I know the coaches are out on the road recruiting, then they'll hit the Final Four and probably get back out pretty soon after that. News of visits could pop up at any time (well, at least as much as news of visits ever pops up in regards to Cuonzo's program). As far as transfers, that also could be at any point now. You're seeing announcements like that across the country. So if it's going to happen, the time is upon us where it could start happening.