OK. I admit it.

I got suckered into watching part of the NFL draft on ESPN this week.

Despite having to put up with the ego of Mel Kiper and the obnoxiousness of Chris Berman, curiosity got the best of me.

I didn't watch the whole thing. Once the NHL playoff games came on, I gladly changed the channel. But during the few minutes that I did watch, a couple of things came to mind; things that didn't make sense.

For example, why is it that the first team gets a few minutes in which to make its actual selection? After months of research, combines, interviews, background checks, video reviews and comparisons, doesn't the team with the No. 1 pick — in this case the Carolina Panthers — already know who it's going to pick when it arrives at the draft? It's not as if some other team could jump in front of the Panthers and pluck Cam Newton away from the Panthers. Panthers' officials arrived at Radio City with the intention of picking Newton. Why the extra five minutes?
Likewise, it's unlikely that the second-pick Broncos were going to pick Newton so they must have had already decided on Von Miller. So why were viewers subjected to an additional five minutes of Berman, Chris Mortenson and Jon Gruden who did nothing more than repeat what they had been saying for the previous eight days?

And here is another gripe. What's the sense of announcing the pick when ESPN cameras are already focused on the player whose name is going to be called? Doesn't that kind of take the suspense out of it? Obviously, ESPN doesn't care about that. One of the ESPN talking heads was intrusive enough to announce the incoming area code as one draftee's cell phone was ringing. If ESPN needs to have its nose in everything, why not just make the announcement to ESPN and let the anchors make the announcement for us. I liked the draft when you didn't know who was going to be picked until the official announcement was made.

Lastly, why do some players subject themselves for possible embarrassment by even showing up at the draft? ESPN wants a would-be early pick to get stuck waiting and waiting for his name to be called. Do you think ESPN had any sympathy for Jimmy Clausen, who hung around for hours waiting for his name to be called in the 2010 draft? There were a handful of quarterbacks in this year's draft, including Missouri's Blaine Gabbert. You can bet there were some flunkies within the ESPN umbrella who were hoping Gabbert, Newton, Jake Locker or some other talked-about quarterback would be this year's Jimmy Clausen.

ESPN's dream came true, not as one of the aforementioned quarterbacks but in the form of Arkansas' Ryan Mallett. Mallett wasn't as highly touted but coming out of the draft as the 74^th overall pick was good enough for the egotistical all-sports cable network.

It was no surprise that two Missouri Tigers went in the first round of Thursday night's NFL Draft. That had long been expected.

Aldon Smith went seventh to San Francisco and Blaine Gabbert tenth to Jacksonville. They became the fourth and fifth Missouri players to be drafted in the first round over the last three years.

Before Jeremy Maclin and Ziggy Hood were picked in the first round in 2009, it had been eight years since a Tiger was picked that early (Justin Smith in 2001). In fact, from 1977-2008, six Tigers were taken in the first round. Combined.

Gary Pinkel said that he did not necessarily think the lack of draft picks was a hindrance in his early years at Missouri. But the fact that the Tigers are now regularly putting players in the NFL can be viewed as nothing short of a major benefit to Pinkel's recruiting efforts.

"As you build your program, certain things have to take place if it's growing and maturing in the way that it should. Really, this is where it should be going right now," Pinkel said on Friday morning. "My first couple years here, coach (Don) James, I was talking to him and I said, 'We're doing everything right.' He looked at me and said, 'Gary, when you start getting more guys drafted, you're going to start winning more football games.' Well, ding, ding."

And the success could not come at a better time. The Class of 2012 in Missouri may be the best crop of high school talent the state has ever produced. Witness:

Dorial Green-Beckham has a chance to be the No. 1 prospect in the entire country.

Durron Neal is a likely top 250 player with 22 offers already, including the likes of Alabama and USC.

Evan Boehm has 13 offers, recently adding Auburn and Michigan to his list.

Michael Scherer's next offer will be his tenth with programs such as USC, Stanford and Boston College already on board.

Ondre Pipkins has offers from Michigan and Michigan state among his early haul.

All told, Missouri has extended 11 offers in the state, the highest early total we can remember. And to all of them, Pinkel hopes Thursday night put the exclamation point on a simple message:

"The top players in the country want to go to a place where they're recognized and they know they can reach excellence and be a first round pick, be a top ten pick," Pinkel said. "If you're in the state of Missouri, why in the heck would you go anywhere else?"

Frank Haith had no sooner been named the head coach at Missouri than he had to move on to the next task:  Recruiting.

The Tigers have nine scholarships to fill over the next 13 months and Haith knows it is no easy task.

"That's a lot of work, man," Haith said.  "We got to get it done.  I don't look at it positive-negative.  I just look at it as a lot of work.

"I'm not afraid of working.  That's who I am."

As for what the new coach is looking for?

"We're going to be patient in terms of what we do in recruiting," he said.  "Understand this, we're not going to take guys just to take guys."

Haith's work on the recruiting trail actually didn't even wait for his formal introduction.  He had already made calls to coaches prior to his initial press conference.

"I talked to a couple coaches in St. Louis and I've got a couple coaches on my docket to call in Kansas City," Haith said.  "I've recruited this state before."

Step one is getting to know Otto Porter, the senior at Scott County Central High School outside Sikeston.  Porter had Missouri atop his list for a long time, but things have been in flux since Mike Anderson went to Arkansas.  Porter has visits to Georgetown and Kansas scheduled, but has told us he will wait to get to know Haith before making a decision.

In addition, Haith has to figure out who will help him recruit those players.  He does not yet have any assistants, but former Western Illinois coach Derek Thomas and former Duke player and St. Louis native Chris Carawell have been mentioned.  Haith said he hopes to have a staff in place some time next week.

I'll say two things right off the bat, and they are diametrically opposed to each other. First, I hate the "opening round games" of the NCAA Tournament. Second, I watched every single second of both of them on Tuesday...and will do the same on Wednesday.

I want the tournament at 64 teams. That's what it should be because, well, that's what I am used to. That's what it was when I was growing up. If they go to 96, it will make me mad and I will cry about the NCAA ruining a great event in the name of the almight dollar.

I mean, with 96 teams, not only are Colorado and VCU no-brainers, along with Colorado and Virginia Tech and Harvard, but you're still going to need 29 more teams. Just looking at standings, here would be my guess at this year's 29:

Vermont
Duquesne
Boston College
Maryland
East Tennessee State
Nebraska
Baylor
Oklahoma State
Montana
Coastal Carolina
Northwestern
Hofstra
Drexel (welcome to your five bid Colonial Athletic Association)
UTEP
Tulsa
Cleveland State
Milwaukee
Kent State
Western Michigan
Missouri State
Wichita State
Colorado State
Murray State
Alabama
Charleston
Oral Roberts
St. Mary's
North Texas
Boise State

Now, come on. Is there ONE team on that list you need to see in this tournament? Of course there isn't. North Texas was .500 in the SUN BELT. None of the major conference teams on that list except Alabama even won half their league games. But if you want 96 teams, you have to get them from somewhere.

Now, that said, I'm going to present the reasons tournament expansion might not be the worst thing in the world. And really, there's only one reason: It's happened before. From 1951-1974, the tournament accepted only 16 teams. For the next six, there were only 32 teams in the tourney. If you didn't win your conference, you probably weren't going. Then in 1980, the Dance expanded to 48 teams. In 1983 it went to 53 and in 1985 to 64.

1985 was the year of Villanova, an eight seed, beating Georgetown with what many called "The Perfect Game." If expansion doesn't happen, the Wildcats might not even be in the tournament.

Without expansion, we don't get Bryce Drew or George Mason or LSU as an 11 seed or a million other historic moments.

If they go to 96, we'll all bitch and moan for a while. It won't seem right. They're watering down our favorite event! And then some kid from Hofstra or Milwaukee or Colorado State will hit a 40-footer at the buzzer to knock out Kentucky or Carolina or Kansas. A 17 seed will make history and advance to the Elite Eight and maybe further. And in a few years, we'll all be talking about how the NCAA Tournament is the greatest spectacle in all of sports and someone will start talking about adding more teams and giving more kids a chance to be a part of it.

And that brings up my only necessity if they're going to expand...or even if they're going to stick with 68. If you're going to have these play-in games, then make the UAB's and the Clemson's and the USC's play them all. Don't force Arkansas Little Rock and UNC-Asheville to play in that game. Those kids DID what they were supposed to do to dance. They won their league tournaments. Technically, they'll get to say they played in the Big Dance. But do you think those kids from UALR who are flying home from Dayton on Wednesday morning, some 36 hours before a meaningful tournament game has been played, really feel like they were a part of the Madness? I don't. Those kids got robbed. You want play in games? Make them true play-in games. Put in the last eight at large teams who didn't do enough over the course of 33 games to prove that the truly, beyond question, belong in the tournament. Don't get me wrong. I watched UNCA and UALR. And it was actually a far better game than Clemson-UAB. It felt like a tournament game. But I feel bad for those kids from Little Rock. They ought to be playing Pitt or Duke under the lights on Thursday night. Make Richmond and Gonzaga and Missouri and Marquette play that extra game. I'm fine with it.

But whatever they do, by Thursday at 11 a.m., I'll be jacked. The Madness has begun. It is, and will remain, the best spectacle in all of sports.

It is Selection Sunday, which means the best week of the year is officially underway. Over the next few days, I'll have a chance to check out Otto Porter Jr. (the next Missouri Tiger commit?) chase another state title, I'll be in attendance with scouts and front office personnel from 32 NFL teams as Blaine Gabbert and Aldon Smith take the next step toward being multi-millionaires. But the highlight of this week is clearly the NCAA Tournament, of which the first four days mark the four best days in sports.

Missouri is going to be a part of that tournament again, the third straight year it has happened. And that probably should be the story today. Where is Missouri going and who will it play?

Alas, it seems it is not. Last night, Trey Biddy, who is the publisher of HawgSports.com, the Arkansas site on the Rivals.com network, sent out the following message via Twitter: "Sources say the paperwork on John Pelphrey's buyout is done and an announcement will be made next week." Arkansas television stations have since corroborated the tweet, saying the University will fire Pelphrey in the next few daya.

And, with that, my friends, Missouri Tiger fans hit the panic button. Again. A friend of mine and a Tiger fan posted the following on his Facebook page: "And so it begins....Mike Anderson the next head coach for Arkansas." The vast majority of the 50 comments since have bemoaned the fact that the man that drug Missouri basketball from the depths of depression within minutes of the Final Four is now headed to greener pastures and the school at which he coached for 17 years.

Except he's not. I mean, I guess it's possible that he eventually is, but Mike Anderson has done nothing to induce such panic. A little more than a week ago, Anderson was asked about the rumors Pelphrey was out and that Anderson would replace him. He initially offered a non-committal and disheartening statement about focusing on Kansas and not his future destination. But the next day, Anderson told the Columbia Daily Tribune: "I plan on being at Missouri for a long time, retire here. I'm happy. I think that's the most important thing. It's always about being happy."

Anderson went further: ""In this day and age, speculation always runs rampant all the time, and it seems like every year, we get to this stage and speculation starts growing. So people are saying something - people that I don't even know. One thing, I don't deal in speculation. So it's getting old, really.

"My point to you is that No. 1, I'm a Missouri Tiger. We love it here. I said we're going to win a national championship. We're going to do it here. I plan on being at Missouri a long time. That's where I'm coming from."

We have been unable to confirm whether Anderson sealed the deal by pinky-swearing that he is going to return to Mizzou. But at some point, the man has earned the trust that he means what he says. Based on things I've heard, I expect Anderson to be the coach at Missouri next year.

But the best news is, we'll all know for sure in the next few weeks. If Pelphrey is indeed out-and there is no reason to believe he is not-the Hogs will get their short list together, make some calls and move on a coach. Some of the names speculated to be on that list (Anderson, Mark Turgeon from Texas A&M, Buzz Williams at Marquette) are going to be in the NCAA Tournament. It doesn't seem likely any will still be coaching when the Final Four rolls around, which is where much of the coaching movement takes place.

But finally, we'll have the answer to the question most Missouri fans have feared since Anderson was hired five years ago: What happens when Arkansas is looking for a coach? If the Hogs don't hire him now, that makes three times they've passed him by. They did it first when Nolan Richardson was let go and they hired Stan Heath in 2002. They did it again when they opted for South Alabama's Pelphrey in 2007. Thumb your nose at him again and it's over. For good.

One way or another, we will know by early April whether Mike Anderson will ever be the coach at Arkansas. And that, for two fanbases, is the best news of all.

The Big 12 Tournament tips off in about three hours. Over the next four days, 11 games will determine the league champ. I will have a courtside seat, at least for as long as Missouri hangs around. Here are 12 thoughts for the Big 12 tourney:

*Missouri got the best draw it could have hoped for. Texas Tech isn't very good, A&M is the weakest of the top four seeds and the Tigers won't have to face Kansas or Kansas State until the title game at the earliest.

*Realize, that doesn't mean I think Missouri is going to win the thing. The Tigers have hardly proven they're capable of winning four straight games against decent competition. I'm just saying IF they're going to make a run, they got the most friendly draw to do so.

*The Tigers hopes hinge on Ricardo Ratliffe. Marcus Denmon has been his usual self during Mizzou's three-game losing streak. Laurence Bowers has averaged 16 points and eight boards, while getting five steals and blocking five shots. Those guys have been good enough to win. But Bowers needs help. Over the last three games, Ratliffe has a grand total of 12 points and eight rebounds in 66 minutes. Not gonna get it done.

*Jacob Pullen is the most valuable player in the tournament...and maybe in college basketball. If he's as good as he was the last ten games, K-State can win the thing easily. If he's off, they can lose to Colorado.

*Five teams are in the NCAA Tournament regardless of what they do. Kansas will be a one seed, Texas a one or two. K-State and A&M are locks and should be favored to win their first tournament game. Missouri is in even if it loses to Tech, but can really help its seeding with a win or two. Baylor, Colorado and Nebraska have varying levels of tournament hopes. The Buffs MIGHT get in with one win. Baylor and Nebraska need at least two, maybe three. Everyone else has to win the tournament to get in.

*Mark Turgeon did the best coaching job in the league. I have no problem with Bill Self being the coach of the year, but Self has guys who rarely see the floor who would be A&M's best player. Turgeon doesn't have a star, doesn't have a major inside presence and generally doesn't have as much talent as many teams he beat in the league standings. No wonder his name comes up for other jobs all the time.

*Iowa State is one of the best last place teams in the country. The Cyclones won just three Big 12 games, but had seven losses by nine points or less. Colorado better watch out. The Clones can win on Wednesday.

*Baylor is dangerous. After watching them at Mizzou Arena, I just couldn't figure out how they were so bad. Lace Dunn is the Big 12's all-time leading scorer, Quincy Acy is a monster and Perry Jones III is going to be a top-three NBA draft pick. How that team finished 7-9 in this league is beyond me. But if they can put it together at the right time, they can wreck the bracket.

*This is the last Big 12 tournament we will see. Next year, only ten teams remain. No one knows how the tournament will work, but I'd think the 7-10 seeds and the 8-9 seeds play on day one with the top six getting byes. That would leave eight teams in a tournament that will be the same as the final three days are now.

*Are we seeing any Big 12 coaches besides Pat Knight coach for the final time at their schools? I've got to think that seat for Jeff Capel is pretty hot. Scott Drew, Turgeon, Doc Sadler and Mike Anderson will all be mentioned for other jobs prominently, but I think Sadler is the only one who may go anywhere.

*Thank God the tournament is back in my home town. I've been to this event in Oklahoma City and Dallas. It just isn't the same. Kansas City just does this thing right. The Big 12 Tournament MATTERS to Kansas City. It should be there every year (plus it reduces my travel costs to cover it ten-fold).

*Time to pick some winners. Wednesday's winners will be Colorado, Nebraska, Missouri and Baylor. Day two puts Kansas, Kansas State, Texas and Mizzou in the semis. The Cats pull the upset, the Tigers don't and then Kansas State takes down Texas in the final on Saturday night.

It doesn't garner a lot of headlines, but Missouri's best team doesn't play on a football field or a basketball court. No, the Tiger softball program is the best Mizzou has to offer right now.

Coming into this year, Ehren Earleywine's squad has been in back-to-back Women's College World Series. But this team might be his best yet.

The Tigers have won four straight games over Missouri State and UMKC by a combined score of 31-0. They are now 11-3 on the year. And, yes, you read that right, Mizzou's pitchers haven't given up a run in their last four games.

In fact, they haven't given up much of anything. Chelsea Thomas, who missed most of last season with an injury, has thrown two perfect games in a week. The last Tiger to throw a seven-inning perfect game before Thomas was Karen Snelgrove back in 1991. Thomas has an earned run average of 0.60 and has 57 strikeouts and five walks in 35 innings this season.

Not to be outdone, Kristin Nottelmann, who made a name for herself as the Tigers' ace after Thomas' injury last season, moved her record to 6-and-0 this season with four one-hit innings against UMKC. Oh, by the way, Nottelmann threw a no-hitter earlier this week as well.

Over the last six games, Thomas and Nottelmann have given up eight hits, three walks and one run. Total. That's an ERA of 0.19.

The Tigers were No. 17 in the country in the most recent rankings. Look for that to go up. And look for Missouri softball to continue to carry the banner for Mizzou in relative obscurity.

On Tuesday night, Missouri beat Texas Tech 92-84 in front of 10,488 fans at Mizzou Arena. It was the smallest Big 12 crowd of the season in the Tigers' six home games. In the hours since, Tiger fans have hotly debated the topic of attendance, as they do virtually every year.


PowerMizzou.com wanted to see how Mizzou stacked up against the rest of the league. Every team in the conference has played either five or six home games. Below is the attendance information from each school so far this season.

So the question becomes, what does that tell us. First of all, it tells us that Kansas and Kansas State have sold out every league home game. You expect it out of the Jayhawks. The Wildcats had sky-high expectations that they haven't fulfilled, but the fans have still been showing up. Texas has sold out four of five home games and was only 135 short of capacity in the final one. The Horns are in line to be the nation's No. 1 team next week. These three have clearly separated themselves from the rest of the league in terms of attendance, and two of them have separated themselves in terms of performance as well.

The next tier in attendance has Texas A&M (90%) of capacity and Missouri (89%). These teams, over the last few years, have attendance in line with their performances on the floor. The Tigers and Aggies have been a step below the Jayhawks and Longhorns in the Big 12, but right there with Kansas State as the next most successful programs.

Colorado, Iowa State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and Nebraska are all between 79.7% and 84.9% of capacity this season. That puts them sixth through tenth in the league. The Cyclones are 12th in the league standings by two full games, but the others are all right where they belong when you look at attendance versus performance.


Baylor is 11th in the league, filling just 70.9% of seats at the Farrell Center. The Bears are the true outlier in this study. They are coming off an Elite Eight performance. Recruiting is better than it has ever been. They are tied with Missouri for fourth in the league. And nobody is showing up.


Texas Tech brings up the rear, with an average attendance of 9,029 in an arena that seats 15,020. That is just 60.1% of capacity, more than ten percent behind the next lowest team.


So, as it relates to Missouri, the attendance is not as poor as some may paint it to be. Yes, ideally the Tigers would be selling out every game. But, in the Big 12, only three teams are doing that. And two of them will be No. 1 seeds in the NCAA Tournament. The attendance at Mizzou Arena is right in line with the Tigers' place in the league standings. That doesn't explain why only 69.6% of the seats were filled for a critical league game against Texas Tech on Tuesday. However, at this point, that game seems to be more of an anomaly than the norm.

Much has been discussed about Missouri's winless road record in the Big 12 this season. I'm not here to defend it. THIS Missouri team has struggled on the road mightily. You can understand losses at Texas, Kansas and A&M. Maybe even Colorado. The Oklahoma State loss is the one that really jumped out to me. Five losses in five games is no good no matter what the circumstances.

But I've heard some talk that Missouri has struggled on the road for a long period of time under Mike Anderson. So I want to see if that's true.

Here are Mizzou's road records under Anderson in league play:

2007: 3-5
2008: 2-6
2009: 4-4
2010: 4-4
2011: 0-5

Overall: 13-24

That's not good, but again, let's take this year's team out of the discussion. The Tigers are 13-19 on the road. To see how that stacks up, let's see what the home records were.

2007: 4-4
2008: 4-4
2009: 8-0
2010: 6-2
2011: 4-0

Overall: 26-10

Take this year out of the equation and the Tigers are 22-10 at home. That means in 32 games, Missouri is nine games better at home than on the road in four years under Anderson.

Now, to compare this adequately, we have to look at the splits for the rest of the league. Again, we'll deal with 2007-2010 and give you each team's record in league games at home and on the road.

Baylor

Home: 20-12
Road: 9-23
Difference: -11

Colorado

Home: 12-20
Road: 1-31
Difference: -11

Iowa State

Home: 14-18
Road: 4-24
Difference: -10

Kansas

Home: 31-1
Road: 25-7
Difference: -6

Kansas State

Home: 23-9
Road: 17-15
Difference: -6

Nebraska

Home: 15-17
Road: 7-25
Difference: -8

Oklahoma

Home: 22-10
Road: 10-22
Difference: -12

Oklahoma State

Home: 24-8
Road: 8-24
Difference: -16

Texas

Home: 27-5
Road: 16-16
Difference: -11

Texas A&M

Home: 24-8
Road: 17-15
Difference: -7

Texas Tech

Home: 18-14
Road: 5-27
Difference: -13

So here's what that shows me. Not only has Missouri not been terrible on the road under Mike Anderson, but they have actually been well above average. The smallest differential between home and road records over the last four seasons belong to Kansas and Kansas State. The Jayhawks have won or tied for the league title every year, so you'd expect that. Their 25-7 record on the road is far and away the best in the Big 12. Kansas State has been the league's second best road team, along with A&M, but has gone 23-9 at home, worse than each of the top three home teams (Kansas, Texas, A&M).

Texas A&M checks in third on our list at -7. The Aggies are two games over .500 on the road. They won 41 league games in those four seasons, giving them the third-best overall record in the conference in that time frame at 41-23.

Nebraska has a minus-8 differential, which puts them fourth. However, the Huskers are one of three league teams under .500 at home and finished an average of three games behind Missouri in the league standings each year. Oddly, two of the Huskers road wins came at Missouri.

Missouri is fifth. The Tigers are minus-9 road versus home differential. They won fewer home games than Oklahoma State and the same number as Oklahoma, but have a better overall league record in that time due to their road record. And we are dealing here with Anderson's first two years. In neither year did Missouri finish even .500 in the conference or make the NCAA Tournament.

After Missouri, Iowa State actually has the sixth best differential at minus-10, but has been so bad everywhere that they're far down in the overall record category. Texas, Colorado and Baylor are all minus-11. Oklahoma, Texas Tech and Oklahoma state are the three worst road teams in the league with differentials of 12, 13 and 16 games over the four-year span.

So, what did we learn? First off, if you're not Kansas, it's very, very tough to win on the road in the Big 12. Exactly three teams have a winning road record over the last four seasons, and two of them are just two games over .500. In addition, Missouri is not bad on the road in comparison to the other league teams. In fact, the Tigers are actually a little above average in road games over Anderson's career.

Again, this year sways the numbers. The Tigers are one of three league teams without a road win so far. But outside of Texas and Kansas, league teams are a combined 7-37 on the road. If Missouri wins at Iowa State next weekend, the Tigers will be 1-5 on the road...just about exactly the league average except for the Longhorns and Jayhawks.

Missouri has three road games left. Two wins ought to make everybody pretty much forget a storyline that seems to be much hubbub over nearly nothing.

The University of Missouri holds its Hall of Fame induction for the Class of 2010 this weekend. They ought to have two ceremonies: One for the bulk of the class and one for Brad Smith.

Most of the time in this profession, we try to separate ourselves from the fans. We are held to a little bit higher standard. We don't cheer in the press box, we don't get emotionally invested in the games and we don't publicly like or dislike players.

Well, for me, Brad Smith is an exception. I've never liked an athlete I have covered more.

There was all the on the field stuff. To watch Brad run was a privilege. He was one of those rare players: The defense knew he was getting the ball. He got the ball. And he still made them look stupid. A lot of sports is built on surprise and deception. Catch the other team off guard. Not Brad Smith. He lined up, you knew he was going to run the ball on probably a third of the offensive plays (at least) and you still couldn't keep him from doing it.

I was asked recently to pick my favorite Smith performance from three games. The choices I was given were the 2002 debut against Illinois, the 2003 win over Nebraska and the 2005 Independence Bowl. I responded that those would rank 2,3, and 4 on my list, respectively. Number one was a loss. I'll never forget watching Bad Brad nearly singlehandedly knock off No. 2 Oklahoma on a Saturday night in a 5-and-7 season that would have been fairly forgettable without this new kid at quarterback.

In 2002, I was just a fan. I was working in Rapid City, South Dakota and followed Missouri from afar. I read that Gary Pinkel had named this redshirt freshman from Ohio that I'd never heard of his starting quarterback. I'd be lying if I told you my initial thought was anything other than, "Sweet, guess Mizzou will be looking for another coach in five years because what in the name of all that is good and holy is this Pinkel dude thinking?"

The Tigers were televised nationally in that 2002 game against Illinois. I had little expectation, but Missouri wasn't exactly televised very often in the Black Hills so I watched. Wow. I don't need to recap the game. If you're reading this, you remember it. For the next four years, Brad Smith terrorized defenses.

The shame of Smith's legacy is that Missouri was never that good when he played. The Tigers went 25-23 with him at quarterback. By the time he was done, many fans were clamoring for another freshman to take his place, just as Smith had done with Kirk Farmer in 2002. It remains as stupid today as it was then.

Just think about this: Without Brad Smith, what is Missouri's record in those four years? I'll tell you one thing: It sure as hell isn't above .500.

Sometimes, the player that turns a program around isn't the guy that wins the conference championship or the national title. Sometimes, it's the guy that came before them. In the wall that is Missouri football over the last decade, the first brick was Brad Smith.

But Brad's legacy goes so far beyond the football field. Number 16 made a generation of young Missourians Tiger football fans. His last home game was against Baylor, a 31-16 win in which Smith ran for 161 yards and two touchdowns. I had gotten my son (then eight) a ticket to that game. The next day, he was crestfallen when I told him it was Brad's last game at Faurot Field. The way I tell the story, he cried. I don't know if that's really true or not, but it makes the story a little better.

The point is, kids his age never knew Missouri football as what I did when I was a kid. The Tigers were never a laughingstock to them. They had a chance to win every time they stepped on the field. That was all because of Brad Smith.

Ultimately, we all know Brad Smith, and love Brad Smith, because of what he did on the football field. But what he did off of it may have been better. He met his wife in Bible study. His idea of a wild time was going fishing with his buddies. He is the anti-New York Jet, but Rex Ryan has called him one of the most valuable players on the team.

After the first time I interviewed Brad, at Big 12 media days in Kansas City prior to the 2003 season, I told a friend, "If my sons grow up to be half the men that Brad Smith is, I've done my job as a father."

So, hats off to my all-time favorite. Brad Smith is a Hall of Famer, in every single sense of the phrase.