Podcast appearances and mentions of mike goff

Justin Michael talks about a wonky Week 0 for the Mountain West, a successful on-campus hosting of JoJo McIver for CSU men's basketball and plays audio from Jay Norvell before previewing the 2024 offensive line. He talks about the addition of Mike Goff to the staff and why the former SDSU offensive line coach is a big addition for the Rams. He talks about an experienced starting group that possesses more than 100 starts of collegiate experience. He also lays out why it's a good sign that the homegrown players from the past two cycles are really starting to pop on the field. An ALLCITY Network ProductionPARTY WITH US: https://thednvr.com/eventsALL THINGS DNVR: https://linktr.ee/dnvrsportsMERCH: https://store.allcitynetwork.com/collections/dnvr-lockerSUBSCRIBE: https://www.youtube.com/c/DNVR_SportsIf you want to learn more about inspiring patient stories from UCHealth, you can head to https://uchealth.org/tomorrow to learn what it means to live like there is a tomorrow.Visit Your Front Range Toyota Stores at a location near you - Toyota is the official vehicle of DNVR.UCHealth wants to help you and other Coloradans be your healthiest selves in the Ready. Set. CO challenge. If you want to join the challenge, go to https://www.uchealth.org/readysetcoGet Coors Light delivered straight to your door with Instacart by going to https://coorslight.com/DNVR. Celebrate Responsibly. Coors Brewing Company, Golden, Colorado. Download the Circle K app and join the Inner Circle or visit https://www.circlek.com/inner-circle! Exclusively for our listeners, Shady Rays is giving out their best deal of the season. Head to https://shadyrays.com and use code: DNVR for 35% off polarized sunglasses. Try for yourself the shades rated 5 stars by over 300,000 people.Download the Gametime app, create an account, and use code DNVR for $20 off your first purchase. Terms apply.Check out FOCO merch and collectibles here https://foco.vegb.net/DNVR and use promo code “DNVR10” for 10% off your order.Rugged Road: Gear up for your next adventure with Rugged Road Coolers - Your ultimate outdoor companion! Head to https://ruggedroadoutdoors.pxf.io/allcity and use code DNVR for 10% off!When you shop through links in the description, we may earn affiliate commissions.Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.

✈ A quick note: I will be traveling through the middle of the month and will be posting a bit less than usual and perhaps a bit shorter than usual.After decades of resistance to nuclear power, growing concern over climate change, rising electricity needs, and a desire for greater energy independence are spurring renewed public interest in a future powered by atomic fission (perhaps fusion, too). Today on Faster, Please! — The Podcast, I talk to Dr. Mike Goff about the state of US nuclear power, the developing advancements in nuclear technology, and what it will take to reach our vast potential.Goff is the acting assistant secretary and the principal deputy assistant secretary for the Department of Energy's Office of Nuclear Energy. He previously spent over 30 years at Idaho National Laboratory, including a major advisory and management role. He has written over 70 publications on the nuclear fuel cycle.In This Episode* Atomic Age 2.0 (1:31)* Major concerns (7:37)* Out of practice (11:04)* Next-generation policy (17:38)* Human capital (21:48)* Fusion forecast (23:12)Below is a lightly edited transcript of our conversationAtomic Age 2.0 (1:31)The Energy Secretary recently spoke about adding a lot more nuclear capacity, tripling it, I think, by 2050 or so. And before we get into whether that's possible, I wanted to ask you: As you understand it, what is the current consensus explanation for why the Nuclear and Atomic Age of the '50s and '60s, why that kind of ended? Because when the secretary spoke about building more capacity, I thought about the — and this is something maybe a lot of people are unaware of, that President Nixon had a plan to build a lot of more nuclear reactors in this country back in the '70s during the oil crisis; that didn't happen, and we all know about Three Mile Island. But is there a consensus as to why Atomic Age 1.0 came to an end? Obviously we still get a lot of energy from nuclear, but not what people had imagined 40 years ago.There are a variety of reasons. We did build a lot at one point, and we were building 10 plants a year, pretty extensive builds out there. We did then have Three Mile Island in the late '70s, and then we got costs started going up, and schedules started increasing on the builds, and we ended up not having a lot of energy growth, in fact, we went for a long period where we weren't having a lot of energy growth, and we had a lot of other energy sources, natural gas, coal, and all. We had a lot of other energy sources out there as well. So yeah, we became pretty stagnated around 20 percent of the electricity. But now, like you say, yeah, there's been a big change in what we think the needs are for nuclear going forward, for a variety of reasons.My background is journalism, and as a journalist I've written, I know, multiple stories in my life about a Nuclear Renaissance. So I'm wondering why this time looks to be different. You suggested in your previous answer that there might be some reasons. What are those reasons that we may be entering a new age where we will see an expansion in the nuclear sector?I do think we will see that expansion, and, in fact, I think we have to see that expansion, and it's because of a lot of the positive attributes of nuclear right now. Obviously there's a lot of focus on trying to get more clean energy out there, and nuclear is a large base load source of clean energy. And it's not just CO2 emission, but it doesn't emit particulates and all, as well, so it's good air, good quality of life. So it has those key attributes. But there are other clean energy sources as well: renewables, hydro, and all that. But I think the recognition that, if you are going to go toward decarbonization, you need still base load electricity too. You need base load electricity to help intermittent sources like renewables to be able to expand more as well. So nuclear is very good at enabling decarbonization, not just by adding clean electricity to the grid, but enabling you to expand out other renewables like wind and solar and all, as well.Additionally, nuclear is very reliable. Of the energy sources, it has the highest capacity factor of any of the energy sources. In the United States, we run 93 percent of the time, so the existing fleet that we have out there of 94 plants, they're producing a 100 percent of the power 93 percent of the time, which dwarfs what any other energy source does out there as well.Nuclear is safe. At times people are concerned about safety, but, in reality, it's actually one of the safest energy sources out there and continues to demonstrate that.It's resilient for different weather-related events. It can still produce electricity out there as well. It also has a lot of energy security. And as we've learned, unfortunately, from Russia's unprovoked and unjustified invasion of Ukraine, we recognize energy security is national security, so nuclear really does help us on that national security front. It provides an energy source that we can largely on-source from us and our allies. We've got assured fuel supplies, and provides that long-term power. You can put fuel in it and it can last for two years or so.And I guess one other thing I'll add out there as well, is it's a job creator. Of the different energy sources, the amount of jobs associated with nuclear are some of the highest on the amount of electricity produced. And when you actually start building nuclear, like we saw in Vogtle in Georgia where they were building the two plants, it creates huge amounts of jobs. In fact, I heard a stat recently that 35,000 union workers were trained as part of the construction of the Vogtle power plant, so it's a good job creator in all, as well. And again, the power density is great, it doesn't take up a lot of space, and with the advanced technologies that we've developed in the United States, you've continued to increase in the safety, you can have plants of a variety of different sizes that can be easily deployed to, say, retiring coal plants. It just has a lot of flexibility that it hasn't had in the past, but also it's that key recognition of its clean energy attributes, but its energy security attributes as well.Major concerns (7:37)I did not major in nuclear science, I majored in history and political science, but I remember I took a class as an undergraduate at Northwestern University on the nuclear fuel cycle, and I remember to this day that my professor — of course, this was obviously a while ago, and I think what most of the students knew about nuclear energy was probably Three Mile Island — and I remember to this day distinctly the professor saying, “If they wanted to build a nuclear reactor in my backyard, I would be totally fine with it.” He had zero fear on the safety issue. Now when you give that rap that you just gave me about the wonders of nuclear energy before regular people, what is their response? Do they worry about the nuclear waste? Do they worry about safety? Are they immediately sold, or what are the concerns that typically get raised to you?You brought them up. I mean, safety is brought up because you do see these high profile accidents like Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, Fukushima, which were accidents. They weren't good things that you want to have happen, but the industry's also a very learning industry. The improvements that come out of those events have just made the industry even safer and safer. And again, it's still safer than most any other electricity-producing industry out there as well.Waste does get brought up. We have not implemented a final disposal solution for the spent fuel from our reactors, but we have safely stored and managed the spent fuel over the last six decades, and the amount of fuel that's generated, I think the stat that gets tossed around, you could fit it all in a Walmart parking lot. This is not a lot of material because it's a high energy-density fuel. It's not a lot of material, and again, we safely manage that and store that. We have countries now that are moving forward with geological repositories, which we need to be doing in the United States. In fact, just last week, I went and visited the repository that hopefully will be operating next year in Finland for disposing of their spent fuel. We can do that, it's not a technical issue, so we can safely manage the spent fuel.The other issue that always comes up is still cost. We do have to demonstrate now that we can build these plants safely, and efficiently, and at a reasonable cost. On the Vogtle plant there were cost overruns and schedule overruns, but between Vogtle Unit 3 and Unit 4, there was about a 30 percent reduction in costs between those plants, so we are starting to get to where we can be deploying nth-of-a-kind cost plants out there as well. And hopefully with some of the small modular reactor designs and all that are going to rely more on modular construction, we can even get to nth-of-a-kind cost even quicker. It still takes some pushing and understanding to make sure that people do understand the advancements that have been made on nuclear technology, that it's not our parents' nuclear technology, there's a new round of technology out there.Out of practice (11:04)You raised two good points there. The cost issue, and that's a great stat about the Vogtle plant and the reduction between the two reactors. Is it your sense that the fact that we haven't been consistently building reactors and learning from the previous build, and having trained people who've worked on multiple reactors, that each one has become like this bespoke mega project? It's my sense, and it seems logical, at least to me, that that has been a cost driver, that we haven't been able to churn these out like 10 a year, every year, decade after decade, because clearly, if that was the case, I don't see how we don't learn how to build them better, faster, and more efficiently. But that's not what we've been doing, obviously.That's right. It's not. Even when I say with Vogtle, you had to stand back up the whole supply chain, you had to retrain the workforce, so there was a lot of learning in that process, even though, too, we did recognize on that plant you need to have designs very well finalized and standardized as well. One of the problems we realized from the buildout of the 90-something plants that we have now is no two plants were ever that similar. Everyone wanted to make a tweak in their plant, so we never got to where we had standardized designs. So I think now that we're getting that trained workforce, getting the supply chain up there, and our vendors are really saying, “We're doing standardized plants. If someone else wants to make a tweak on this plant, they have to go somewhere else,” that people are going to go with standardized designs so we can really replicate these and get that cost benefit from it. The challenges that you brought up, we have to overcome, and I think we're set up now to be able to overcome that. I appreciate all the effort that went into building Units 3 and 4 at Vogtle. We've got enough benefit from that learning there and hopefully build very soon here.There's a world where we have tripled our nuclear generating capacity, as Secretary Granholm said. Can that be a world where we get all our nuclear power from light water nuclear reactors, or must there be different kinds of reactors? You mentioned the small modular reactors, and I've interviewed startups doing microreactors, I don't know, maybe they'll be used to power data centers, but can that world of greatly increased nuclear generation, even with improvements in light water reactors, must there be different kinds of reactors?I wouldn't say “must.” I think there will be. I think we will have that variability. I think we will still have large plants being built. I think maybe five years ago you wouldn't hear that people were talking about building gigawatt-sizes plants again. I think we'll have the gigawatt-size plants, we'll have the small modular reactors that are water-cooled, but I think we will get some of those advanced reactors out there: the Generation IV reactors, the sodium-cooled fast reactors that have the capacity to be able to burn waste better and also increase the sustainability of the amount of fuel they use. I think you'll also have the high-temperature gas reactors that are helium-cooled, that use TRISO fuel. You'll have those because we need to not only decarbonize the electricity sector, we've got to decarbonize the industrial sector. That's much more challenging, and the high temperatures that can be provided from those reactors will help us in that decarbonization process. So I think we will have a mixture out there. There are cases where the Gen IV systems are going to be better than the gigawatt-sized plants for the needs that are out there, but large power plants are going to be needed as well. Especially, like you say, you bring up the data centers, the amount of growth that we're hearing for electricity right now, I think again, we'll see gigawatt-sized plants will be needed to be able to meet that growth.Yeah, I tell you, nothing frustrates me more than reading about what AI could perhaps do for our economy and then having people say, “Well, but we know we can't do it because we can't supply the power” or “We can't supply enough clean power,” I mean, well then it'd be sure great to have more nuclear energy. And I wonder, as you sort of tick off some of the potential advances and new kinds of reactors, maybe I look backward too much, but I can't help but wonder what nuclear reactors would be like today, where we would be today, maybe we would already have fusion reactors had we proceeded with this kind of momentum every decade since 1980. It drives me crazy, and you're a nuclear engineer, that must drive you crazy.It does, I've been doing this . . . my first job in the nuclear industry was almost 40 years ago when I was still in college, and there have definitely been ups and downs in funding. In fact, there were some periods where there was almost zero research and development dollars spent in the government on nuclear energy. Luckily, though, the thing that we have is, under the four presidential administrations, there's been a real steady climb in the recognition of the importance of nuclear, and the funding to support it. So I'm happy that we have had this period that goes back to the early 2000s that's been really steady growth in recognition of nuclear. If we would've not had some of those laws in the late '80s and '90s, yeah, we could probably be further ahead, especially on some of the advanced technologies. Because yes, some of those advanced technologies started on research that was back in the '50s, '60s and '70s: the sodium-cooled fast reactor, the molten salt reactor, all of those were based on R&D that we did back in the early days, as well.Next-generation policy (17:38)Which leads me to this question: You work for the government. I work for a public policy think tank, so of course I'm going to think about: Given where we are today, what government needs to do going forward, both on the R&D front and on the regulatory front, are we doing enough basic research for whatever the next, or the next next generation of nuclear is, and do we now have the kind regulatory framework we need for that next generation of reactors?I'll go to the research one first—and I should note, my background is, I'm an R&D person, I came out of the national labs, so of course we always need more research and development. But that said, we have been blessed by funding from Congress and the administration that there's a significant amount of money for research and development in the United States. And I'll say that's good, because the one thing I will note, I do believe innovation in the US, as far as the nuclear technology, we are the best. The technologies that we're developing and our vendors are deploying it, really, it is the cutting edge technology, so it's good we have that R&D, and it's important, as you know, we need to continue to have it to move forward on that next generation of technologies and continue to make improvements on the technologies out there. So I think we have a good research base.There's some infrastructure that we still need if we start deploying, say, when we mentioned that sodium-cooled fast reactor, we don't have a testing capability for that type of system. We shut down our last testing system on a fast reactor in 1994. We would probably need some additional infrastructure. But again, we have a pretty good base. And I'll say that also on the regulatory side. We do have a pretty good base as well. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is obviously focused on light water reactors throughout its history, but they've actually been doing a good job at being able to work with some of the developers. We have three entities out there that are working on Generation IV reactors. TerraPower did submit their construction authorization to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and they've accepted it, so they're working well with them, even though they have a water-based system. Hopefully X-energy, who's doing a high-temperature gas reactor, working with the government and all, as well, will be moving forward, as well. And we've had a third that's working in the molten salt space, a molten salt-cooled reactor that has already received a construction permit to go forward on a prototype reactor, a Kairos company.I'm sure there's got to be reforms still on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and make sure that we are timely and responding to license applications, but they are moving in the right direction. There's been a lot of interface with various laws, whether it's the NEICA (Nuclear Energy Innovation Capabilities Act), or NEIMA (Nuclear Energy Innovation and Modernization Act), two bills that were passed a little while back looking at reforming. And I think there still needs to be improvements and still need to be increase in the resource and capacity of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, but they're heading in the right direction.We have a good regulator, and that's one of the things that helps us make sure we feel that we can deploy this technology safely here, but also helps us in exporting our technology, where we can say, “Our technology has been licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission,” which has such a high view externally in other countries, that helps us. So I want them to continue to be that safe regulator, but again, they are continuing to work to improve and streamline the process. Hopefully we get toward where we're standardizing, that we don't have to have a lot of interface and we don't — that'll come to the utilities, too — we don't make changes once we've got something approved, so we hopefully can speed up the process from the utility side, and all is well.Human capital (21:48)Are we going to turn out enough nuclear engineers? I imagine that, for a while, that probably seemed like a hard sell to someone who had an interest in science and engineering, to be in this industry versus some others. Probably a little easier sell; are we going to have enough people going into that to build all these reactors?We are going to need to continue to increase it. We're already seeing the uptick, though, in that area. I'll note: Our office, the office of Nuclear Energy, we've really — going back to the 2010 timeframe — really recognized that we needed to do more in that area, so we actually started investing almost 20 percent of our R&D budget to the universities to hopefully foster that next generation. And in fact, this year we just hit the mark where we've now spent $1 billion since the start of those programs on the universities to make sure we're doing R&D there and getting that next generation of folks out there. It's something that we've got to continue to focus on to make sure that we do. Because yeah, if we triple, it's going to need a lot more nuclear engineers. But I also note, the thing I'm concerned about also is making sure we have the right trades and all, as well. If we're building these plants, making sure you have the welders, the pipe fitters, and all, that's going to be a big challenge, as well, especially if we're going to start building, say, 10 plants a year. That's a lot of people out there.Fusion forecast (23:12)I'm excited about the prospects for nuclear fusion, and I've talked to people at startups, and it has probably looked as promising as it ever has. How promising is it? How should I think about it as being part of our energy solution going forward, given where we're at? In fact, there are no commercial nuclear fusion reactors right now. Obviously people at startups give a lot of optimistic forecasts. How should I even think about that as being a partial solution in the coming decades? How do you look at it, at least?I think it can be part of the solution in the coming decades. I think some of the changes that's taken place, especially over the last two years where there is more of a change to focus on, not fusion as a science program, but fusion as deployment, as an energy producer, you look at it as an applied energy. I think that's an important change that's occurred over the last two years, and the fusion programs within the Department of Energy are much more focused to that. It's similar to what's happened somewhat with fission. Fission, about 15 years ago, it was government-driven, and you pull along industry, until about 15 years ago you started having industry investing a lot of money and pulling along the government. You're now starting to see that happen in fusion, where people are doing a lot of a private investment, they're pulling along the government, and the government's working to see, how can we use the resources of the government to enable it? So I think it will happen. I don't think fusion is going to be producing electricity to the grid this decade, but I think the vision that's been put forth by the government is their bold, decade-old vision to have a fusion pilot facility sometime within the decade. I think that is feasible. So maybe before the 2050s you can start having fusion generating some of our electricity. I'm a fission person at my heart, but I think fusion is, we're getting much more focused on moving it forward as an electricity source, and that'll help it be able to be deployed sometime here in our lifetime.Faster, Please! is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.Micro ReadsHow Elon Musk and SpaceX Plan to Colonize Mars - NYTWhat happened to the artificial-intelligence revolution? - Economist The EV trade war between China and the West heats up - Economist Defeated by A.I., a Legend in the Board Game Go Warns: Get Ready for What's Next - NYTPfizer pins hopes on daily pill to crack market for weight-loss drugs - FTRise of the Restaurant Robots: Chipotle, Sweetgreen and Others Bet on Automation - WSJSaudi Arabia's Trillion-Dollar Makeover Faces Funding Cutbacks - BbergAI Spending: Goldman Strategists Say Big Tech's Splurge Worries Investors - BbergIt's Time for AI to Start Making Money for Businesses. Can It? - WSJFaster, Please! is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit fasterplease.substack.com/subscribe

Harry Baird went from small town garage band drummer, to CPA student, then he discovered an EMT book. From that point on, his fate was sealed to become the BLS Program Manager for Chesterfield Fire and EMS. He went on to teach literally thousands of students both basic EMT and ongoing CEU classes. Along the way, he became best of friends with Mike Goff (listen to Episode 40 for Mike's full story). Today, Harry is working to keep Mike's memory alive with the Mike Goff Memorial Scholarship Fund. Listen all the way to the end of this episode to learn how you can support that effort, and enjoy some great music. Support this podcast at https://patreon.com/firehouselogbookpodcast Comments or suggestions? Contact us at: Email - FirehouseLogbook@gmail.comTwitter - @FDLogbookInstagram - @FDLogbookPodcastFacebook - www.facebook.com/FDLogbookPodcastWebsite - www.firehouselogbook.captivate.fm Intro music: "Tired traveler on the way to go home", Andrew Codeman via Freemusicarchive.comOutro music: "If I didn't have a dime", Ron Moody and the Centaurs, used with permission.

In this episode, Paul and Andre discuss the following: - Interview with Mike Goff, SDSU Football Offensive Line Coach (1:57) - Key takeaways from the interview (44:23) - FBS transfers coming into the OL this fall (55:26) - Which lineman stepping up can propel the unit forward in 2023 (1:03:08)

Hour 2 // 8.25 -- Mike Goff -- Did You Know -- Padres slumpin bad

Mike Goff gets us ready for Snapdragon Stadium

Hour 1- Marty sounds off Deshaun Watson and Jimmy Haslam's ridiculous press conference, ESPN's Alden Gonzalez talks Padres & Tatis, Aztecs offensive line coach Mike Goff returns to the show.

Aztecs offensive line coach Mike Goff discussed the excitement around SDSU as they prepare for their new home Snapdragon, Braxton Burmeister & how the new offensive line is coming together.

In this episode, Paul and Andre discuss the following: - Interview with Mike Goff (0:33) - Key takeaways from the interview (38:54)

On the fourth episode of Running for History powered by Lazy Dog, we take a look at the big guys up front. Without offensive linemen Kris Dielman, Mike Goff, Shane Olivea, Nick Hardwick and Marcus McNeill, LaDainian Tomlinson would have never set records he did in route to an all time MVP performance in 2006. Running for History is a six-part narrative podcast chronicling LT's historic 2006 season with the Chargers. Featuring: LaDainian Tomlinson, Antonio Gates, Nick Hardwick, Kris Dielman and more!

LOADED SHOW! Three guests as Kewanee senior QB Will Bruno and coach Brad Swanson break down the season with extra emphasis on the Princeton and Hall games as the Boilermakers (6-0) play Mendota (5-1) Friday.Then we catch up with Mike Goff who was inducted into the NewsTribune Hall of Fame after playing football with La Salle-Peru, University of Iowa, and three NFL teams during a 12-year career. Now, he's an assistant coach with San Diego State University.Intro: IHSA boys and girls golf postseason, MLB Wildcard, Chicago Sky, Chicago Bulls, NFL Week 5 picks

Reasons why Padres are losing right now and Mike Goff from SDSU joins the show

Aztecs Oline coach Mike Goff discussed the path that led him back to SDSU, how the young offensive line is evolving and excitement for the start of the college football season.

In this episode of The Sun Devil Source Report Podcast, host Mason Kern is joined by publisher Chris Karpman and staff reporter Jacob Rudner as they analyze Arizona State baseball hiring former Sun Devil, 14-year MLB veteran and Arizona Diamondbacks special advisor to the President/CEO Willie Bloomquist as its next head coach. Covered in this episode: -- The timing of ASU Vice President for University Athletics Ray Anderson announcing the hire of Bloomquist -- What Anderson said about the hire at ASU's introductory press conference -- Impressions of Bloomquist from his introduction -- Overall positives and drawbacks from the Bloomquist hire -- Bloomquist staffing decisions to hire MLB veteran coach Mike Goff as bench assistant, retaining pitching coach Jason Kelly and volunteer assistant Michael Earley not returning to the program -- Potential roster implications of staffing decisions -- Karpman and Rudner's take on the hire

Chris Eudailey's fire service career started as a young man in Chesterfield, VA, but let him to the City of Petersburg, James City, County, and ultimately to the Fire Chief for Spotsylvania County. While still supporting the fire service as the Executive Director for the Virginia Fire Chiefs Association, his story of being the dispatcher for a call in Petersburg is just the beginning of the Mike Goff story, more to come in future episodes about that fire. Drop me a note and let me know how we're doing and any questions or comments. Email - FirehouseLogbook@gmail.com Twitter - @FDLogbook Instagram - @FDLogbookPodcast Facebook - www.facebook.com/FDLogbookPodcast Website - www.firehouselogbook.captivate.fm Music: "Tired traveler on the way to go home", Andrew Codeman via Freemusicarchive.com

J.D. Runnels attended the Gary Rose Stadium Naming Ceremony to celebrate with his former #CarlAlbert #Titans coaches and teammates. J.D. talks with Mike Goff about his memories coaching J.D., Del City Eagles Head Football Coach Mike Dunn, Titans Girls Head Basketball Coach Kyle Richey, former teammate Jake Guerrero (guerreroelectrical.wordpress.com), former teammate and Titan coach Mike Evans, and J.D. reunites with Coach Gary Rose to reminisce about J.D.'s high school career, favorite memories, and much more!

Nick's former teammate and fellow offensive lineman Mike Goff was in Canton for LT's HOF induction and told us how special that night really was.

Mike Goff, who blocked for LT during all those years, joined Hardwick and Richards to talk about his time at the induction in Canton.

  Recognized by The Sporting News as one of the Top 100 most powerful people in sports, Mike Goff has created some of the most dynamic and far-reaching brand development in the sports industry. Goff talks about Premier Sports Management’s role in recalibrating the current Bowl Championship Series of college football after being hired by the NCAA Division I conferences to help define the identity, branding, marketing and operational structure of its new 2015 playoff system. Goff talks his 22-year-career as VP of Corporate Marketing for Sprint Nextel, about his expertise in helping strategic and implementation planning of Sprint and Nextel in 2005, creating a sponsorship marketing effort with the NFL, NASCAR, PGA Tour, NCAA and World Cup Soccer. Goff discusses the elusive millennial fan, efforts to sell to that new fanbase, and the emerging role of technology in live sports entertainment venues. Twitter: @RMGoff

Join us Jan. 17, for lunch at Brio on the Plaza (11:30 a.m. to 1 p.m.) with special guest Mike Goff, chief marketing officer at Premier Sports Management. Mike will share lessons for every business communicator based on his experience leading Sprint's efforts to partner with the FIFA World Cup. Register here: http://tinyurl.com/aswttjx More on Mike and his presentation When the cup came to the United States in 1994, Mike led Sprint's initiative to utilize international soccer as a platform for establishing the brand internationally, and building business and consumer loyalty domestically. Learn how Goff led a team that used this international platform to build Sprint's business and establish a roadmap for how the company used lifestyle marketing, both at a national level as well as locally, and with sports, entertainment and media properties. About KC/IABC The Kansas City chapter of IABC, 2012 International Chapter of the Year, includes approximately 200 members, in and around Kansas City, who are employed as communications professionals for major corporations, agencies and non-profit organizations. Many KC/IABC members are self-employed as freelancers or run their own companies. IABC Kansas City also welcomes student members and works with local IABC student chapters serving as a resource for young communicators entering the industry. In addition to our membership, our chapter's activities include hundreds more communicators who are not yet members but join us for luncheons, conferences or special interest groups. Non-members are welcome at all of our events.

On this episode, Farzin goes over OTAs from Thursday and talks about the return of Glenn Dorsey. Interviews with Dorsey, Todd Haley, Mike Goff, and Matt Cassel are also featured.