Literature DB >> 24476770

The current state of NCAA Division I collegiate strength facilities: size, equipment, budget, staffing, and football status.

Lawrence W Judge1, Jeffrey C Petersen, David M Bellar, Bruce W Craig, Michael P Cottingham, Erin L Gilreath.   

Abstract

Strength and conditioning training programs are essential components of athletic performance, and the effectiveness of these programs can be linked to the strength and conditioning facilities (SCFs) used by athletes. The primary purpose of this study was to provide a statistical overview of National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) Division I SCFs, equipment and maintenance budget, and the relationship between SCF budget and staffing space, and equipment. The secondary purpose was to note differences in SCFs between those schools with and without football programs. An 84-item online survey instrument, developed with expert input from certified strength professionals, was used to collect data regarding the SCFs in NCAA Division I universities. A total of 110 valid and complete surveys were returned for a response rate of 38.6%. Results of Pearson's χ2 analysis demonstrated that the larger reported annual equipment budgets were associated with larger SCFs (χ2 = 451.4, p ≤ 0.001), greater maximum safe capacity of athletes using the facility (χ2 = 366.9, p ≤ 0.001), increased numbers of full-time coaches (χ2 = 224.2, p ≤ 0.001), and increased number of graduate assistant or intern coaches (χ2 = 102.9, p ≤ 0.001). Based on these data, it can be suggested to athletic administrators and strength and conditioning professionals at the collegiate level that budgets need to be re-evaluated as the number of personnel available to monitor student-athletes and the size and safe capacity of the facility are related to the ability of the strength and conditioning staff to safely and adequately perform their duties.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24476770     DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000000368

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


  4 in total

1.  KINEMATIC AND KINETIC VARIABLES DIFFER BETWEEN KETTLEBELL SWING STYLES.

Authors:  Garrett S Bullock; Abigail C Schmitt; Jason M Shutt; Gray Cook; Robert J Butler
Journal:  Int J Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2017-06

2.  Longitudinal Body Composition Changes in NCAA Division I College Football Players.

Authors:  Eric T Trexler; Abbie E Smith-Ryan; J Bryan Mann; Pat A Ivey; Katie R Hirsch; Meredith G Mock
Journal:  J Strength Cond Res       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 3.775

3.  The Size and Scope of Collegiate Athletic Training Facilities and Staffing.

Authors:  Andrew R Gallucci; Jeffrey C Petersen
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2017-06-26       Impact factor: 2.860

4.  Fat-Free Mass Index in NCAA Division I and II Collegiate American Football Players.

Authors:  Eric T Trexler; Abbie E Smith-Ryan; Malia N M Blue; Richard M Schumacher; Jerry L Mayhew; J Bryan Mann; Pat A Ivey; Katie R Hirsch; Meredith G Mock
Journal:  J Strength Cond Res       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 3.775

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.