Re: Football Prep

[Guest guest]

DB,

Over the past two years I have worked with many high

level high school, collegiate, and professional

football players in preparation for their upcoming

seasons. Even though this is not a huge amount of

experience I have drawn some general concepts on how

to successfully prepare these types of athletes.

One huge thing to keep in mind is what you and the

athlete are preparing for.

1. The rigors of an upcoming season or

2. A scouting combine/ tryout.

I have found that training for one (especially combine

events) does not necessarily guarantee a successful

carryover to the other. So, it is my feeling that

every strength, speed, or athletic coach should

evaluate the training purpose before training

individuals. A combine setting would not only focus on

deficiencies of strength and speed but specific

deficiencies of the test drills. Believe it or not

there are several ways to " cheat " at each test in

order to post bigger numbers, which could mean an

improvement in draft status as well as millions of

dollars. So " mastering " the technical aspects of each

test will indeed help.

The " off-season " setting is usually a less pressure

oriented situation where building on an individuals

weaknesses as well as strengths (conjugate method)

should take place, with emphasis on individual

weaknesses.

As far as evaluating deficiencies goes I feel that

the first thing explosive athletes, like footballers,

need to learn and " know " how to absorb force

efficiently. It is well known that the more force an

explosive athlete can absorb the more potential they

have to deliver it effectively and efficiently. This

also plays a huge role in minimizing major injuries as

well.

As far as training mediums go. I feel that each

athlete has his/her individual needs. So to lump every

player in a program based solely on their position

(which many pseudo-athletic coaches do) would be

detrimental to each athletes success. In this

situation a few may progress, some will regress, but

most won't improve. I do understand that most coaches

are in a situation where they must group athletes for

time efficiency. That is fine as long as you use more

specific criteria to sort them. (and that just does

not mean how much each guy can bench).

As far as training mediums go I regard any athlete I

train as " Healthy " so I train them as so. This means I

am not a huge fan of the wobble boards, little rubber

bands, and beach balls that are rampant " tools " of the

functional training community. I can't see wasting

time on exercise that do very little for building

absolute strength, explosiveness, and dynamic

flexibility, I nor my athletes have the time. I can

see a use for this type of training if an athlete has

a severe " imbalance " issue. I usually evaluate this

week to week and ask each athlete if there are any

unusual pains. If there are I work closely with a

sport rehab team which consists of an AK, Chiro, and

several PTs. I trust their expertise in this instance

over mine and it has worked well for the longevity of

my athlete over the grueling season and over the

years.

The bread and butter of what I do is deep rooted in

the conjugate method which includes different forms of

absolute strength training, explosive training, G.P.P.,

and mental attitude training (which usually means doing

something like isometrics or conditioning tests). As

far as exercise selection goes I use the bang for the

buck principal. (box squats, front squats, bottom up

squats, RDLs, GHR, Rev Hypers, weighted ab work,

pulls, snatches, cleans, Bench press (variations),

Overhead presses (variations), dips, chins and rows

with towels, and tons of different sled work).

Pete Arroyo

Chicago, IL

[Guest guest]

DB,

Over the past two years I have worked with many high

level high school, collegiate, and professional

football players in preparation for their upcoming

seasons. Even though this is not a huge amount of

experience I have drawn some general concepts on how

to successfully prepare these types of athletes.

One huge thing to keep in mind is what you and the

athlete are preparing for.

1. The rigors of an upcoming season or

2. A scouting combine/ tryout.

I have found that training for one (especially combine

events) does not necessarily guarantee a successful

carryover to the other. So, it is my feeling that

every strength, speed, or athletic coach should

evaluate the training purpose before training

individuals. A combine setting would not only focus on

deficiencies of strength and speed but specific

deficiencies of the test drills. Believe it or not

there are several ways to " cheat " at each test in

order to post bigger numbers, which could mean an

improvement in draft status as well as millions of

dollars. So " mastering " the technical aspects of each

test will indeed help.

The " off-season " setting is usually a less pressure

oriented situation where building on an individuals

weaknesses as well as strengths (conjugate method)

should take place, with emphasis on individual

weaknesses.

As far as evaluating deficiencies goes I feel that

the first thing explosive athletes, like footballers,

need to learn and " know " how to absorb force

efficiently. It is well known that the more force an

explosive athlete can absorb the more potential they

have to deliver it effectively and efficiently. This

also plays a huge role in minimizing major injuries as

well.

As far as training mediums go. I feel that each

athlete has his/her individual needs. So to lump every

player in a program based solely on their position

(which many pseudo-athletic coaches do) would be

detrimental to each athletes success. In this

situation a few may progress, some will regress, but

most won't improve. I do understand that most coaches

are in a situation where they must group athletes for

time efficiency. That is fine as long as you use more

specific criteria to sort them. (and that just does

not mean how much each guy can bench).

As far as training mediums go I regard any athlete I

train as " Healthy " so I train them as so. This means I

am not a huge fan of the wobble boards, little rubber

bands, and beach balls that are rampant " tools " of the

functional training community. I can't see wasting

time on exercise that do very little for building

absolute strength, explosiveness, and dynamic

flexibility, I nor my athletes have the time. I can

see a use for this type of training if an athlete has

a severe " imbalance " issue. I usually evaluate this

week to week and ask each athlete if there are any

unusual pains. If there are I work closely with a

sport rehab team which consists of an AK, Chiro, and

several PTs. I trust their expertise in this instance

over mine and it has worked well for the longevity of

my athlete over the grueling season and over the

years.

The bread and butter of what I do is deep rooted in

the conjugate method which includes different forms of

absolute strength training, explosive training, G.P.P.,

and mental attitude training (which usually means doing

something like isometrics or conditioning tests). As

far as exercise selection goes I use the bang for the

buck principal. (box squats, front squats, bottom up

squats, RDLs, GHR, Rev Hypers, weighted ab work,

pulls, snatches, cleans, Bench press (variations),

Overhead presses (variations), dips, chins and rows

with towels, and tons of different sled work).

Pete Arroyo

Chicago, IL

[Guest guest]

Pete,

Thank you for sharing your " coaches perspective " . I am sure your

insights are appreciated by the readers of this forum.

Now, let's dig a bit deeper...

How would you suppose that strength, speed, and " test drill "

deficiencies be acquired? I think that the group understands what

you mean by enhancing the technical aspects of the combine tests, so

what other assessments do you make to assign deficient-specific

programs for each athlete under your guide. In other words, how do

these findings alter your programming, specifically, from athlete to

athlete. In this case, we are still referring to combine prep.

You implicitly mentioned the proficient build and release of kinetic

energy(mechanical and neuro-electric); what do you do, specifically,

to deliver this requirement to your athletes. And, then, how do you

develop from ability to ability- assuming you have a life-long

progressional model to work with? Or, do you just assume a

difference in training applications off of the sole factor

of " intensity " ? If so, how is this intensity based?

You touched upon individual uniqueness; let's take a linebacker and a

quarterback. Walk us through the process you would take with each of

them from the instant they walk into your training complex to the

moment they are up and running, so to speak. Moreover, what

assessments would you make as they go along? And, what typical

adjustments would you anticipate, if any? And how would you test for

the validity of needs? And then how would you go about delivering

these needs for each athlete in question? Specifically, compare and

contrast their programs for us; as their sporting requirements are

undeniable extremes.

You mentioned a nice grouping of exercises which you are partial to.

On that note; what are your feelings towards respective variable

dominance? Meaning, if you are to adjust your athletes regimes, how

do you assess priority as to what gets switched up? Do you look to

augment the modality, method, movement, or, say, rep and set counts

first? Or, do you prefer to mix up all of these at once? In any

case, how do you make this determination? And if each is

independently adjusted; how do you assign priority to each? What

other training variables do you look to manipulate? How are these

engrossed in the ultimate training complex?

I appreciate you taking the time to share with us a coaches

perspective on the matter. I believe that the many coaches as well

as athletes that read this forum will benefit from the various

coaching perspectives and athlete perspectives that are brought to

light with these discussions.

That is the purpose, after all, with this particular thread; welcome

many opinions so as to allow for a wonderful list of training options

to surface at the tail end. Hopefully this individual thread can

spare emotive debate for the time being, as it hopefully welcomes

more opinions to join the scene. Debate is not what this discussion

is about. Again, can we please limit ourselves to simply presenting

opinions based on experience on this thread? I think that it will be

a welcomed change- a lot of times debate causes us to get on the

defensive and, consequently, lose sight of the ultimate objective.

That objective being to share experiences and ideas in effort to

better sports training, at large or a specific portion of its

intricate process(from research to teaching to application). I thank

all of those who elect to cooperate ahead of time.

Anyone else wish to chime in? Your opinions are welcome!

Evolution,

Dietrich Buchenholz

Hamburg, Germany

> DB,

>

> Over the past two years I have worked with many high

> level high school, collegiate, and professional

> football players in preparation for their upcoming

> seasons. Even though this is not a huge amount of

> experience I have drawn some general concepts on how

> to successfully prepare these types of athletes.

>

> One huge thing to keep in mind is what you and the

> athlete are preparing for.

> 1. The rigors of an upcoming season or

> 2. A scouting combine/ tryout.

>

> I have found that training for one (especially combine

> events) does not necessarily guarantee a successful

> carryover to the other. So, it is my feeling that

> every strength, speed, or athletic coach should

> evaluate the training purpose before training

> individuals. A combine setting would not only focus on

> deficiencies of strength and speed but specific

> deficiencies of the test drills. Believe it or not

> there are several ways to " cheat " at each test in

> order to post bigger numbers, which could mean an

> improvement in draft status as well as millions of

> dollars. So " mastering " the technical aspects of each

> test will indeed help.

>

> The " off-season " setting is usually a less pressure

> oriented situation where building on an individuals

> weaknesses as well as strengths (conjugate method)

> should take place, with emphasis on individual

> weaknesses.

>

> As far as evaluating deficiencies goes I feel that

> the first thing explosive athletes, like footballers,

> need to learn and " know " how to absorb force

> efficiently. It is well known that the more force an

> explosive athlete can absorb the more potential they

> have to deliver it effectively and efficiently. This

> also plays a huge role in minimizing major injuries as

> well.

>

> As far as training mediums go. I feel that each

> athlete has his/her individual needs. So to lump every

> player in a program based solely on their position

> (which many pseudo-athletic coaches do) would be

> detrimental to each athletes success. In this

> situation a few may progress, some will regress, but

> most won't improve. I do understand that most coaches

> are in a situation where they must group athletes for

> time efficiency. That is fine as long as you use more

> specific criteria to sort them. (and that just does

> not mean how much each guy can bench).

>

> As far as training mediums go I regard any athlete I

> train as " Healthy " so I train them as so. This means I

> am not a huge fan of the wobble boards, little rubber

> bands, and beach balls that are rampant " tools " of the

> functional training community. I can't see wasting

> time on exercise that do very little for building

> absolute strength, explosiveness, and dynamic

> flexibility, I nor my athletes have the time. I can

> see a use for this type of training if an athlete has

> a severe " imbalance " issue. I usually evaluate this

> week to week and ask each athlete if there are any

> unusual pains. If there are I work closely with a

> sport rehab team which consists of an AK, Chiro, and

> several PTs. I trust their expertise in this instance

> over mine and it has worked well for the longevity of

> my athlete over the grueling season and over the

> years.

>

> The bread and butter of what I do is deep rooted in

> the conjugate method which includes different forms of

> absolute strength training, explosive training, G.P.P.,

> and mental attitude training (which usually means doing

> something like isometrics or conditioning tests). As

> far as exercise selection goes I use the bang for the

> buck principal. (box squats, front squats, bottom up

> squats, RDLs, GHR, Rev Hypers, weighted ab work,

> pulls, snatches, cleans, Bench press (variations),

> Overhead presses (variations), dips, chins and rows

> with towels, and tons of different sled work).

>

> Pete Arroyo

> Chicago, IL

[Guest guest]

DB and group,

I'll try to answer your questions in order. And I

do apologize for the tardiness of this response

training myself and my athletes often consumes much

time.

In the combine situation the assessments are concrete

regarding strength (225 for reps), speed (40 yd dash),

and agility (short shuttle). Even though I think most

of the test are poor indicators of said criteria, it

is a necessary evil to teach and execute them. As far

as " test drill " deficiencies you can assess an athletes

ability to change direction, body control, and

technique via video or " eyeball " assessment. Obviously

the easiest drill to asses is the bench for reps

because it is a slower speed drill. I usually have no

trouble picking an athlete apart in warm-up attempts.

Being a competitive powerlifter I am a bit picky with

regards to the execution of the big three. For me it

is not uncommon to see a young athlete put 10-30 lbs.

on his/her bench within a month of practicing with

proper technique. The higher speed drills (the 40 and

shuttle) are a bit more difficult to eyeball so I tape

an athlete if they are in combine situations. In the

40 you want to look for things like a relaxed upper

body, a fluid motion, technique of the start, area of

the foot strike, and hip flexibility (can the knees

get high enough?). In the shuttle I look at the start

(do they turn and run or crossover step) and change of

direction (do they hit the line quickly or do they

seem to " get stuck " ). This last criteria " change of

direction " brings me to my next point, FORCE

ABSOPTION.

As I stated in my original post if an athlete cannot

absorb force properly then they will not deliver it

efficiently or effectively. This can easily be assessed

through watching an athlete perform drops from

different depths upon where the athlete must " stick "

and control the landing in the weakest joint angle/

position in a strong but soft manner. This test also

can help determine any " muscle imbalances " in respect

to posture and which muscles an athlete relies on.

Example: In the squat drop if an athlete lands toward

the front of the foot and the knees go way beyond the

toes. This usually means that the hamstrings are

nowhere near strong enough. With regards to program

placement in a combine situation the assessments will

give me a time table of how far out each athlete is.

Some (the elite ones) athletes can be ready to test

well within a month or two but most must be ready to

take more time say 6 mos. to a year to test well.

As far as the building and releasing of kinetic

energy (I assume you are referring to force absorption

and delivery) goes I utilize many different reactive

methods like overload or overspeed eccentrics,

overload or overspeed eccentrics with an explosive

concentric, the afore mentioned with accommodating

resistance, active isometrics into high speed

dynamics, and so on. As for adjusting what I do from

athlete to athlete there is a progression system that

each must go through. Now as I said each athlete tests

differently not only in regards to strengths and

weaknesses but in regards to level and ability. The

reality is some are just better than others. So the

better ones are further up the progression ladder than

the remedial ones. For example I would not train one

of my high level collegiate athletes (who have

participated in competitive sport for years) like I

would one of my grade school athletes who have never

done anything more physical that play Madden

football and is just starting out. The high level guy

would obviously be doing more challenging work in

regards to volume, intensity, exercise execution, and

work capacity development. Whereas the remedial guy

would do more general work developing the whole system

with less concern of volume and intensity. In this

case quality of work must be mastered.

Unfortunately I have a client right now. So I will be

happy to answer the rest later.

Pete Arroyo

Chicago, Il

[Guest guest]

Pete,

Respectfully, I think we all understand the combine testing

procedures and that a good " score " doesn't prove much. On that note,

I think that the best way for you to share your ideas would be to

either compile a list of training principles for other football

conditioning coaches to discuss, and to please us with your different

strategies of training a linebacker versus a quarterback.

I thank you for your time to share with the group your training

methods! It appears you are the only coach with any experience

training footballers! Or maybe you're just the only one willing to

share?

Two other possible discussion points:

(1) What do you consider knee placement as being " too far " over the

toes? Do you believe athletes should land in a position much

different than that to which they jump? Explain in relation to

activation sequences, technique, and performance at the individual

specific level.

(2) If you increase " pliometric velocity " / " stretching speed " then you

will incur escalating neuro-electric activity and, consequently,

escalating neuro-muscular activity until you reach your " breaking

point " (the point where you can no longer " absorb the shock "

proficiently enough) at, ironically enough, the " braking point " . How

does this fit into your " overload eccentric " training philosophy,

abiding by this principle? What parameters do you set so as to

ensure that each athlete is working at or below their

specific " breaking point " ?

Evolution,

Dietrich Buchenholz

Hamburg, Germany

[Guest guest]

DB and group,

I apologize once again for breaking up my

answers to your questions in bits and pieces e-mails,

but things are busy around here because most of my

high school players are returning. In the training of

players of different positions one must take into

account the nature of each position. (offensive or

defensive, ballhandler or combative, skill or general)

I will use your example of the QB and LB (assuming we

are talking about pro style players because in the

high school and college level QBs can often act as a

running back in an option style offense). A QB is an

offensive player whose intangibles are often more

important to the teams success than his athleticism.

A QB must not only have ballhandling skills (arm

strength, pass accuracy, hand eye coordination) but

also must demonstrate durability, proper footwork, and

overall body strength. In working with a pro style QB

for athletic development a coach must immediately

draw concern for " arm " strength. This does not just

mean developing the throwing muscles of the arm but the

entire body must be in " athletic harmony. " Now as I

said before I am not a big fan of wobble boards and

balance balls. As these do seem like " safe " and proper

exercise for a skill player I feel opting to rely on

such mediums would be a mistake. For overall strength

development I would choose exercises in which

coordination of the neuro-muscular system is heavily

required. Things like overhead squatting, snatch

balance, power snatches, deadlift variations, box

squats and front squats work well. Accessory work

would include pulls, chins, rows, GHRs, rev hypers,

dumbbell and barbell complexes for the lower and upper

body, as well as thick bar work really help with

strengthening and conditioning the upper back, posterior

chain, hands, and the core. Specialized work would

include ladder drills for proprioception, footwork,

and dynamic balance. The inertial/ impulse trainer for

delivering and absorbing horizontal forces. This

device helps not only with muscle speed-strength but

can also make intricate movements, like the release

point in a throw, more powerful and efficient.

Sorry for cutting it short again but I will answer the

rest later,

Pete Arroyo

Chicago, Il

[Guest guest]

DB,

Here is my continuation of the previous reply

about training footballers in particular positions. In

contrast to a quarterback, the linebacker is much

different. As far as football players are concerned

the linebacker must have the total package of speed,

strength, power, agility, intelligence, awareness,

toughness, durability, and athleticism. Linebackers

must not just be able to hit but be hit as well. I

often see today's linebacker as a lion in the wild in

pursuit of their prey. Lions on the hunt must display

a tremendous amount of speed, agility, explosiveness,

reactive ability, and persistence. Not much different

from an Urlacher or tracking down ball carriers

across the field.

The training of a linebacker consists of many mediums

of work with emphasis on individual weaknesses. In the

previous post about quarterbacks I mentioned the need

for " athletic harmony. " Many times an offense clicks

because the quarterback is in a certain rhythm or mode

of timing with the other skill players. A linebacker

functions differently because the defense must react

to the offense's actions. So, a coach must address

athletic skills like reaction time using both audible

and visible stimuli. On " conditioning days " with my

defensive players I often use different agility and

kinesthetic drills in conjunction with different

stimuli. I also believe the need for starting and

accelerating strength is in order. If you don't have

the ability to immediately turn on your maximal

strength then what good is your reaction ability. For

this I use high block work for pulls, snatches, and

cleans; suspended bar squats or good mornings with

bands, without bands, or with manual overspeed; low

pin presses, floor presses, excessive pause squat,

bench, GHR, and plate toss. In a nutshell this is what

I do with the majority of my high level athletes for

specific work.

I consider the knees " too far over the toes " when the

balance of force in the knees favors shear forces over

compressive forces. Now obviously I have no fancy

machine or EMG to determine this so all you

therapists, kinesiologists, biomechanists, and anyone

else please feel free to rip this apart. But my

general rule of thumb is to not let the knee go past

the toe " knuckles. " I feel this not only puts less

shear on the connective tissues but this also

optimizes recruitment of the posterior chain.

As for landings (I assume you mean from depths or

other " plyometric " activities) I feel athletes should

land in joint angles that closely simulate the

positions they undergo during the sport. So, landing

in " jump " position would be one way to land or absorb

force.

In abiding by the breaking point principle a coach

must occasionally see where that breaking point is. By

this I mean testing the ability to absorb force. If an

athlete has been practicing drops from a certain

height for some time and has improved his ability to

absorb force from that height then the coach should

raise the height or accelerate the eccentric portion.

As far as working below the breaking point the athlete

should be able to land or complete a rep with optimal/

perfect technique for every rep. The athlete would

cease exercise if technique suffers. By this I mean

any postural breakdown, ability to absorb force is

lost, or the redirection of force is slowed

significantly. (For this I occasionally use weight

releasers and measure bar speed with the tendo device.

I would end the session if the athlete drops blow 85%

of their speed max for the day.)

hope this helps,

Pete Arroyo

Chicago, Il

[Guest guest]

Pete Arroyo:

I thank you, PA, for the way you were not only able to answer my

questions but that you are the " rare breed " on this forum who can

even answer those questions! It tells me a lot about you as a

person, as a coach, and I respect that greatly. It is persons like

you that I was told flooded the ST forum- " they " were wrong- which is

why I joined the forum in the first place. Please consider that the

highest praise on your behalf. But, let me leave you with some

concluding " Super " " Training " thoughts.

Why don't you have your QB's throw? Seems to me that their priority

at that level is their ability to read defenses, and get the ball to

where it needs to be, when it needs to be, and how it needs to be

(i.e. zip it in there or guide the ball between DB traffic).

Athleticism, itself, is not tangible; but even though I know what you

mean, I say it as such because I believe that a quarterback can,

indeed, be developed. You can teach him to read defenses. You can

teach him to throw harder or farther if needs be, or teach him to

gain touch on his passes if that is his major throwing deficit. You

can teach him to operate as a machine, unlike a man, if you have an

athlete who lacks " improvisational " ability (Montana vs Vick)- that

way he will think less and do more (react, react, react- that is the

intangible you speak of). But if you have him snatch instead of

throw, if you have him squat instead of practice footwork relative to

his playbook, then you have failed- and he will follow.

The X Factor is marginal at that point, and can be raised up

supportively- thus, that is the place for additional training means.

But, snatch's, deadlifts, squats, rows, chins, etc, do not and will

never increase throwing ability- " strength " as you call it. As

dramatic as it may be, if you pull an athlete from sport entirely

then you must do so for psychological reasons. If his mind is not

restricting performance then you need to center all training around

throwing for his upper body. Again, read my post " What is Sport

Specific, Anyways? " to understand this.

Better alternatives? Various ball weight throws. Throws with

restrictive bands for acceleration development (Antagonists must be

developed and technique sound prior). If gym work is needed to step

away from DC and bring it back, OI work is suggested, along with RFI,

RA, and REA methodics. Follow the suggestions given in the post

mentioned to see what my recommendations for exercises should be.

Instead of ladder work he should be doing drop backs, roll outs, and

other such work to " dance " his way around the field- this will teach

him where his body's at, give him quicker drop back times, and assure

him of balance in sport more than any equipment gimmick ever will.

For instance, Any QB will score much better on a drop back split

than any other non-related agility drill, for instance- this is

partial benefactor of sport specificity (and it spares us discussions

of " carryover " ). But, I do step outside of this thinking with an

athlete just-out-of-diapers; then is the time to give them basic

motor conditioning via ladder work, dot drills, cone work, balance

boards and pillows, and so forth (but, sorry, foam rollers are even

inappropriate at this time, too). The impulse trainer

for " horizontal " forces? Like how? Release point more efficient in

the throw? Negative. The theory of momentum release, friend. Thus,

overspeed pliometric throws are superior means. An example of this

that may hit home; athlete A may be able to bench 300 kg and move 150

kg for 5 reps in 5 sec and free weight throw 125 kg for 30 cm

(straight bar, lying on bench). Athlete B may be able to bench 250

kg and move 165 kg for 5 reps in 5 sec and free weight throw 100 kg

for 30 cm. This is partially defines each athletes unique

neurodynamic profile. And as you can see, athlete A is stronger and

better at developing acceleration with said weights, but athlete B is

better at moving said weights if the release is non existent. A real

life example; I have two athletes right now: one both press 170 kg

for one rep. One athlete weighs closer to 70 kg and the other closer

to 125 kg. The lighter athlete can move 90 kg at 37% greater m/s

than the heavier athlete. But, and this is important, the heavier

athlete can throw 100 kg 17 cm higher than the lighter athlete. Not

only is " strength " relative to the task at hand, but

one's " acceleration-strength " , as I'm guessing what you'd call it, is

also clearly a by product of these intricate developments (augmented

ND profiles). A price tag doesn't measure effectiveness!

As for the linebacker, the best way to train visual reactions is

via " hand simulation " ; no pads, no gear, no shoulders or helmets

used, just hands- increasing one's responsiveness in play requires

more repetition than the body can manage! So not only do we limit

striking forces and teach our players, lineman and linebackers

especially, to learn how to use their hands efficiently and

productively, we additionally use this opportunity to teach our

defensive players how to react. Now, it's not as patty-cake as it

may sound- even this work has an optimal limit. So, then what? In

this starvation for repetition, we have them watch film before and

after they, you guessed it, watch film, and integrate psycho-

physiological training so that this " spectator sport " carries over

onto the playing field with a greater efficiency. For these gridiron

warriors, they need isometric work for joint stability, reactive work

of different sub-regime's for deficiency gain, neuro-magnitude modes

such as high intensity muscle-stimulation, and so on. As for turning

it on, those previous will do it.

Manual overspeed? I'd be interested to learn how you regulate this

work. Obviously the overspeed factor would eventually result in

negative loading, and you are loaded for a reason, and reducing load

isn't what you are striving for, and manual assistance negates any

chance of rapid force development of the athlete, so what is the

purpose/reasoning/regulatory methods? You said; " (I do)low pin

presses, floor presses, excessive pause squat, bench, GHR, and plate

toss... with the majority of my high level athletes for specific

work. " Specific to what? Powerlifting? Again I trust you will read

my post on sport specific training, correspondence carryovers, and so

forth.

Moving on, Pete, you say that you don't let the knees pass over the

toes but then go on to say that athletes should land in positions

that replicate joint angles in sport. And the " jump position " is said

by you to be okay in this realm of training. Hmmm, do your athletes

jump with their knees back, rear-ends up? Do you actually teach them

to jump with their backs(i.e. erector spinae) opposed to the

musculature of their legs and hips? Otherwise, I can't envision what

you mean- type error maybe?

You hit it on the head when you said that an athlete increase

dropping amplitude when their force absorption ability exceeds a

certain measurement, or he can increase the rate of the fall. But a

15% drop in velocity, however measured miometrically via the Tendo,

is quite excessive- and how does it tell you anything about

transitional ability when it only measures miometric/concentric

velocity? Let me give you guidance; One " breaking point " method,

outside of visual/technical(as you suggested) involves increasing the

drop height until the reactive height achievement begins to plummet.

In other words, the best drop height is the one that allows the

athlete to achieve the greatest reactive jump height(generally

speaking)- aside from AMT work, et al! If the athlete's reactive

ability is so poor that if they drop from a SuperTraining book, per

say, and can't increase their jump height compared to a standard no-

step pre-stretch jump(down and up), then they need to work on

landings, landings, and then once they finish with those they can

include some more landings. Upon graduation, and dependant on

ability level and training purpose, the same absorption drops may be

carried out with overspeed bands(i.e. like AMT minus the reactive

jump).

I hope this helps you formulate some new ideas for training football

players.

Evolution,

Dietrich Buchenholz

Hamburg, Germany

> DB,

>

> Here is my continuation of the previous reply

> about training footballers in particular positions. In

> contrast to a quarterback, the linebacker is much

> different. As far as football players are concerned

> the linebacker must have the total package of speed,

> strength, power, agility, intelligence, awareness,

> toughness, durability, and athleticism. Linebackers

> must not just be able to hit but be hit as well. I

> often see today's linebacker as a lion in the wild in

> pursuit of their prey. Lions on the hunt must display

> a tremendous amount of speed, agility, explosiveness,

> reactive ability, and persistence. Not much different

> from an Urlacher or tracking down ball carriers

> across the field.

>

> The training of a linebacker consists of many mediums

> of work with emphasis on individual weaknesses. In the

> previous post about quarterbacks I mentioned the need

> for " athletic harmony. " Many times an offense clicks

> because the quarterback is in a certain rhythm or mode

> of timing with the other skill players. A linebacker

> functions differently because the defense must react

> to the offense's actions. So, a coach must address

> athletic skills like reaction time using both audible

> and visible stimuli. On " conditioning days " with my

> defensive players I often use different agility and

> kinesthetic drills in conjunction with different

> stimuli. I also believe the need for starting and

> accelerating strength is in order. If you don't have

> the ability to immediately turn on your maximal

> strength then what good is your reaction ability. For

> this I use high block work for pulls, snatches, and

> cleans; suspended bar squats or good mornings with

> bands, without bands, or with manual overspeed; low

> pin presses, floor presses, excessive pause squat,

> bench, GHR, and plate toss. In a nutshell this is what

> I do with the majority of my high level athletes for

> specific work.

>

> I consider the knees " too far over the toes " when the

> balance of force in the knees favors shear forces over

> compressive forces. Now obviously I have no fancy

> machine or EMG to determine this so all you

> therapists, kinesiologists, biomechanists, and anyone

> else please feel free to rip this apart. But my

> general rule of thumb is to not let the knee go past

> the toe " knuckles. " I feel this not only puts less

> shear on the connective tissues but this also

> optimizes recruitment of the posterior chain.

>

> As for landings (I assume you mean from depths or

> other " plyometric " activities) I feel athletes should

> land in joint angles that closely simulate the

> positions they undergo during the sport. So, landing

> in " jump " position would be one way to land or absorb

> force.

>

> In abiding by the breaking point principle a coach

> must occasionally see where that breaking point is. By

> this I mean testing the ability to absorb force. If an

> athlete has been practicing drops from a certain

> height for some time and has improved his ability to

> absorb force from that height then the coach should

> raise the height or accelerate the eccentric portion.

> As far as working below the breaking point the athlete

> should be able to land or complete a rep with optimal/

> perfect technique for every rep. The athlete would

> cease exercise if technique suffers. By this I mean

> any postural breakdown, ability to absorb force is

> lost, or the redirection of force is slowed

> significantly. (For this I occasionally use weight

> releasers and measure bar speed with the tendo device.

> I would end the session if the athlete drops blow 85%

> of their speed max for the day.)

>

> hope this helps,

>

> Pete Arroyo

> Chicago, Il