Nebraska S/C

[Guest guest]

Given the recent interest in this group regarding Nebraska S/C, the following

article may be of interest.

<http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-nebraska31dec31.story>

------------

Raising The Bar

.......Epley takes particular pride in the giant machine to the left.

" This is our newest toy, " he says. " This is our Husker Power Transformer. "

This beast combines two of Epley's preferred exercises at one station. In the

squat, the athlete starts with

the weight bar across his shoulders, bends his knees, then returns to the

standing position. In the hang

clean, the athlete lifts the bar from the top of the knees by shrugging the

shoulders, drops below the bar

by squatting, then stands up, keeping the bar just below the neck.

By stepping on a pedal, the lifter can raise or lower the platform to the

appropriate level to begin the exercise.

Or he can press another button to move the bar to the correct position for

squats.

Even if you wanted to spend the $20,000 it takes to buy one of these machines,

you couldn't. Epley has an

agreement with the manufacturer to build them exclusively for Nebraska.

There are other unique machines in the room, including a group that looks like

red oil derricks swinging back

and forth during a workout. " These are machines that work both sides of the body

in a unique way, " Epley says.

" It's called reciprocal training. "

[This sounds suspiciously like ' " Hammer Machines " - the son and

rival of his dad, Arthur

. Nothing new about this at all. Mel Siff]

You push with one arm while pulling with the other, which forces the torso to

stabilize the body and uses more

muscles. He has two similar machines for the legs; one side works the hamstring

while the other works the

quadriceps.

[Quite a few concentric-eccentric isokinetic machines have been offering this

sort of training and testing for

many years now. Mel Siff]

One thing is conspicuously absent as your eyes scan the room: the good, old

bench press. " The upper body is

very overrated, " Epley says. " Very much so. " He concentrates more on the torso,

and exercises that involve

multiple joints in muscles, with routines that replicate moves made during

competition.

[boyd surely must recall the limitations of simulation training which attempts

to use exercises to

imitate exactly every sporting movement. The most specific exercise for a given

sporting movement is that

movement itself, not some machine imitation which produces different motor

patterns. Really, Boyd!

Anyway, why so much emphasis on machines which remove a great deal of the

stabilisation and overflow processes involved

with free weights? After all, Boyd started the NSCA with a huge emphasis on

free weights. However, he soon discovered

the commercial aspects of machines, on which you can make far more profit than

free weights that the Chinese are now

making more cheaply than America can extract iron from iron ore. Anyway, it is

far easier to live on profit than on

philosophy! Mel Siff]

Later, up in his office, Epley uses his laptop to make a PowerPoint

demonstration of the workouts and their applications.

It shows clips of players using the " jammer " machines, which have the players

extend from their hands to their toes

with their body at a 45-degree angle. Then it shows that same motion in action:

an offensive lineman blasting an opponent

five yards down the field, a baseball outfielder diving for a catch, a

volleyball player spiking the ball......

----------------

Iain Styles

Birmingham, UK

[Guest guest]

Ben Freeman <benfreeman@a...> wrote:

> Todd:

>

> <As for being a great lifter " not hurting " one's chances of being a

> great football player. Yes it can. If one spends too much time working

> on lifts and not enough on on-field skill work, their play will

> suffer. Likewise, if they develop strength deficits too great in a

> certain area of strength (i.e., spped strength, absolute strength,

> strength endurance, etc.) as a result of overemphasis of a specific

> lift, or " weightroom " goal, then that again can hamper on field play.

> And this is one of the areas that the poor strength coaches I

> mentioned earlier have no clue about.>

> **** Todd - would you mind discussing any other 'areas that the poor

> strength coaches I mentioned earlier have no clue about' ?

### Well Ben, First let me clarify that when I say " Poor strength

coaches " I mean " poor " in their execution of their job, at least in my

opinion. There are many fine strength coaches out there, but there are

just as many if not more bad ones. Again, this is strictly my opinion.

I feel that coaches today (primarily talking about American college

and university strength coaches) are too ignorant about what they

should be trying to do. Most base their too heavily on either

bodybuilding, powerlifting, or weightlifting. Now there is a time and

place for all three " types " of lifitng within most athletes training

cycles throughout a year. But working almost exclusively on 3 lifts or

working almost exclusively trying to get bigger is detrimental to

athletic success. Case in point, many too many football coaches and

strength coaches are obsessed with the bench press.

First, I have never seen a player bench press on the field. Second, I feel to

many

injuries come from it as a result of poor prgram design. Players

literally " bench press their brains out " (forgive my little saying) to

the point of shortening the internal rotators of the humerus, as a

result of not performing enough work for the antagonist such as the

external rotators, scapula retractors, or the extensors of the humerus

with movements such as various types of chin-ups and rowing movements.

Now, there is nothing wrong with the bench press (i.e., it alone is

not a dangerous movement), but even if it was not overused, I

personally feel that more players would benefit from varying the

inclination (and even the declination) of the bench to work the

shoulder joint in many different angles of motion as it is used on the

football field. The shoulder flexes at over 180 degrees; everything

from overhead presses, incline, flat, and decline presses, to dips.

Why not work it in all ranges of movement? Is the bench press the

" optimal positoin of shoulder flexion?

I feel that many coaches do not pay nearly enough attention to acute

exercise variables such as rest periods between sets, frequency,

workout duration, precise loading for a given exercise. Very few take

into account what the athlete is doing with their sport coaches and

how this affects the athlete metabolically. Spring training could

potentially be more physically demanding than the in-season portion of

the schedule for a football player in the Southern United States as a

result of high heat and humidity. This is when so many coaches start

their " periodized " program, with set/rep/routine protocols designed

for building hypertrophy. Why, when the athlete will spend 2 hours in

80+ degree heat running, jumping, etc.?

I've seen many coaches allow athletes to execute movements with poor

form, or even instruct athletes improperly. I know of one school where

the " power clean " is nothing more than a dynamic reverse grip barbell

curl from the floor.

In the last 5-30 years, agility, plyometric training, stability

training, etc. have all at various times gained popularity within

various circles. And all perhaps have their proper time and place, but

again, I feel that most coaches use various methods without any real

understanding of how to properly implement them. A great example is

the growing popularity of " Dinosaur " or " strongman " training today. It

is an absolutely fabulous way to train, but not if the acute exercise

variables are adhered to. Maybe I'm a weak athlete, but pushing a car

for for sets of 1/4 mile at a time around a track between squat days

is not my idea of active rest. I know of a school that does this.

I suppose my thesis is that coaches implement potentially good

training methods, but are ignorant on their proper implementation.

Because Louie produces impressive powerlifters, does not mean

that box squatting will improve a volleyball players jumping ability

as a result of improved leg strength. It may, or it may not, there are

many factors to consider. I also feel that few coaches proper asses

their athletes needs (i.e., the needs analysis) nor do they properly

work on their weaknesses.

Also, I feel that few can show measurable results. I have known too

many athletes who have gone through college strength programs and made

little to no significant gains in size, strength, speed, jumping

ability, etc. Even though they had never trained seriously with

weights, and were in their late teens to early twenties, a time for

most people, of significant strength and athletic development.

And I won't get into assesment and measurement too much, but just to

give you an example........I know of a coach (a strength coach for a

basketball team) who after a " conditioning session " of approximately

20 line drills (a.k.a. suicides, 4-liners) tested his players squat

1RM, vertical jump, and bench press 1 RM. Can anyone explain the logic

behind that to me? And these are RMs used to calculate training

pecentages for their " periodized program " which uses linear

periodization which I am a staunch opponent of as I feel it is not

very beneficial for virtually any athlete.

Sorry, for my longwindedness Ben, but after having played and coached

on the college level and seeing strength programs and talking with

coaches (both strength and sport coaches) from around the country, I

just personally feel that most schools leave a lot to be desired. And

that the level of athleticism displayed by athletes throughout the

country may be attributed to genetics and the marvelous human body.

Todd

Hattiesburg, MS