Literature DB >> 11708706

Strength and conditioning practices of National Football League strength and conditioning coaches.

W P Ebben1, D O Blackard.   

Abstract

This article describes the results of a survey of the practices of National Football League strength and conditioning (NFL S&C) coaches. The response rate was 87% (26 of 30). This survey examines survey participant (a) background information, (b) physical testing, (c) flexibility development, (d) speed development, (e) plyometrics, (f) strength/power development, (g) unique aspects, and (h) comments. Results reveal that 18 of 26 (69%) NFL S&C coaches follow a periodization model (PM). Of these coaches, 14 of 16 (88%) who responded to the question reported their athletes used Olympic-style lifts, and 17 of 18 coaches (94%) employed plyometric exercises. Coaches who reported following a PM tested an average of 9.8 variables of fitness, which is an average of 3.55 times per year. Seven of 26 (27%) NFL S&C coaches did not follow a PM (NPM). Five of 7 (71%) of these coaches reported following "high-intensity training" (HIT) principles. None of these coaches reported using Olympic-style lifts. Two of 7 (29%) reported using plyometrics. NFL S&C coaches who follow an NPM reported testing an average of 2.12 variables of fitness, which is an average of 2 times per year. A variety of other strength and conditioning practices were examined.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11708706

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Strength Cond Res        ISSN: 1064-8011            Impact factor:   3.775


  23 in total

Review 1.  Power athletes and distance training: physiological and biomechanical rationale for change.

Authors:  Marcus C C W Elliott; Phillip P Wagner; Loren Chiu
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 11.136

Review 2.  Professional practice in exercise science : the need for greater disciplinary balance.

Authors:  Jeffrey C Ives; Duane Knudson
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 11.136

Review 3.  Does plyometric training improve vertical jump height? A meta-analytical review.

Authors:  Goran Markovic
Journal:  Br J Sports Med       Date:  2007-03-08       Impact factor: 13.800

4.  Short Durations of Static Stretching when Combined with Dynamic Stretching do not Impair Repeated Sprints and Agility.

Authors:  Del P Wong; Anis Chaouachi; Patrick W C Lau; David G Behm
Journal:  J Sports Sci Med       Date:  2011-06-01       Impact factor: 2.988

5.  Using bench press load to predict upper body exercise loads in physically active individuals.

Authors:  Del P Wong; Kwan-Lung Ngo; Michael A Tse; Andrew W Smith
Journal:  J Sports Sci Med       Date:  2013-03-01       Impact factor: 2.988

Review 6.  Unique aspects of competitive weightlifting: performance, training and physiology.

Authors:  Adam Storey; Heather K Smith
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2012-09-01       Impact factor: 11.136

Review 7.  A review of the acute effects of static and dynamic stretching on performance.

Authors:  David G Behm; Anis Chaouachi
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2011-03-04       Impact factor: 3.078

8.  PERFORMANCE OPTIMIZATION AND INJURY PREVENTION STRATEGIES FOR THE ARMY PHYSICAL FITNESS TEST: TECHNIQUE MATTERS.

Authors:  Mark Thelen; Shane Koppenhaver
Journal:  Int J Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2015-06

Review 9.  Neurophysiological Mechanisms Underpinning Stretch-Induced Force Loss.

Authors:  Gabriel S Trajano; Kazunori Nosaka; Anthony J Blazevich
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 11.136

10.  The effects of different durations of static stretching within a comprehensive warm-up on voluntary and evoked contractile properties.

Authors:  Jonathan C Reid; Rebecca Greene; James D Young; Daniel D Hodgson; Anthony J Blazevich; David G Behm
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2018-05-02       Impact factor: 3.078

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.