I’m very much in agreement. In this vein I also suggest having a special section of the forum that is only open to those who have at least the Level 1 certification to ensure that people posting there are on the same page and understand the basics of the system.
One of the things that made the forum so productive when it first started was that most of the initial members had read Speed Trap and CFTS and knew both books fairly well. So people tended to be on the same wavelength in discussions. A lot of the newer members that have joined over the years have not read these books (or the newer ones), and threads often get bogged down by misunderstanding or the need to get people up to speed (no pun intended).
Number Two, I am with ESTI and some others on this. I love the idea of filling in the holes in my CFTS understanding. I am not much of a certification guy per se, but I would love to learn with others from the ground up. It serves the purpose of helping many coaches become better and at the same time, help Charlies teachings survive though a broader out reach. In this day and age of so much “piss poor” training, it would be great to see a bunch of Charlies supporters have his methods reach every nook and cranny on this planet. That is the one of the most noble things about your undertaking, letting Charlies body of work live on in us, those who truly care about doing things the right way.
Like speedcoach and ESTI, Im not much of a certification guy (alot of them dont mean jack) but they look good on a resume and as we all know there’s TONS, I mean TONS of WANNA BE coaches and trainers out there. At least a CFTS certification would give even the idiots a excellent ground base.
The thing that I have trouble with is, as has been said by many, taking the overall conceptual framework and applying it with confidence to various situations.
To give specific examples, the following are a few questions that I think about fairly often.
How should a track and field program for students in grade 3-6 differ from a program for students in grade 7-8?
How should a high school program progress?
What does an acceptable level of fundamental general fitness look like, and how do I get people there?
How should I plan a masters program, (especially for athletes with average or below average genetic potential, because hey, track needs more athletes of all ages and backgrounds)?
What I’m hoping for is a program that early on, teaches understanding of the overall framework so we can get specific examples once we have demonstrated we are ready for specifics, and can understand examples contextually within the overall scope of a CFTS program.
Please keep all the great ideas and feedback coming. It will be a great help in the production of the final program.
As far as the “certification” concept goes, it will be more of a means to identify how far you have come with regard to understanding Charlie’s concepts and methodology. I don’t know if any of us will be putting it on our resumes. In a perfect world perhaps. But it would be nice if athletes could go to someone with CF-Certification and have the utmost confidence that they will be provided the best training possible and treated with the utmost respect and a positive attitude (i.e. like going to train with Charlie).
If it can be made easily accessible then I’m up for it. Don’t think a certificate would mean anything to most people here in the UK but I would be proud to have it, but more importantly a chance to increase my knowledge of Charlie’s ideas is a chance not to be missed. Thanks number 2, your efforts are always appreciated.
Derek,
You know who might be of help in regard to this is Ian King. Ian has KSI University where he has King coaches. Bascially deeply knowledgable people in his methodology. He has differing levels of proficiency and milestones that need to be eclipsed to move to next level. People have the choice to stop where they see fit. Obviously this forum has some solid out reach even if Charlies teachings are not mainstream. The beauty of this system is that due to regionality of athletes, peoplecould be referred to a CFTS coach, therefore further strengthening the justification to follow the program. It incentivizes the investment and gets CFTS spread further. Just a thought. I did some intensive work with Ian and it accelerated my career path by at least a decade. I just want to see Charlies extrodinary work live on and also help Angela and James solidify the business they have been a big part of forming.QUOTE=NumberTwo;246147]Please keep all the great ideas and feedback coming. It will be a great help in the production of the final program.
As far as the “certification” concept goes, it will be more of a means to identify how far you have come with regard to understanding Charlie’s concepts and methodology. I don’t know if any of us will be putting it on our resumes. In a perfect world perhaps. But it would be nice if athletes could go to someone with CF-Certification and have the utmost confidence that they will be provided the best training possible and treated with the utmost respect and a positive attitude (i.e. like going to train with Charlie).[/QUOTE]
Getting back to course content, in the case of planning and especially adjustments, if possible I would love to see examples of how Charlie dealt with interruptions in training (e.g., illness, weather, access to facilities) while maintaining or reestablishing the planned progression. And it might not necessarily mean all training is interrupted. For example, you might have four or five days of thunderstorms (or severe cold/snow, etc.) and no indoor facilities, which precludes speed work. How would you compensate with other high intensity components so that speed work can be resumed with minimal disruption to the progression? The indoor tempo videos provide an excellent example of alternate approaches to tempo and general fitness, but it’s easier to compensate in the case of general components by their very nature. What are some ways to handle disruptions to the specific stimulus?
Even full time athletes have to deal with occasional interruptions. Therefore, anyone else with additional responsibilities such as school, work, families, etc., have to deal with this all the time.
I just went to a strength and conditioning clinic this weekend at Michigan State and talking to several College & NFL coaches, they knew or at least heard of Charlie Francis. So in my opinion, Im like Flash, if they can do it Charlie most definately can.. With that being said, why not put it on a resume?
I would be interested in attending something like this. As a BC teacher who mostly coaches teenage school & club track, I can also partially subsidize my travel/registration costs using professional development funds available. It would also be nice in that I’d have confidence in the instructor(s), as opposed to when I did my level 1 nccp certification a few years back and the the instructor was very good with throws, but not very good with sprints.
Something I mentioned to NumberTwo privately: for right or for wrong Charlie Francis is pretty polarizing in the track and field world for what should be obvious reasons.
In their own ignorance, many still think of him as nothing more than a d**g coach even if we know the truth.
And that means that the unfortunate reality is that association with Charlie’s name has as much potential to backfire as anything else. that might be one reason not to put it on a resume.
Imagine presenting yourself to a school as a Charlie Francis certified coach for example: if you get a dingleberry head of the department, you’re likely to get dismissed out of hand because they’ll figure you’re just a d**g pusher.
And no, I’m not saying that the above is ‘right’ by any stretch. But I think it is the reality in which we live.
Unfortunately, Lyle has a perfectly valid point, especially in the case of schools. On the other hand, in the general S&C community, it seems like everyone and his brother has tried to take credit for Charlie’s work or claim to know more about his methods than they really do (e.g., Ben squatting before the Seoul 100 final). It depends on who your target clientele are. Successful marketing depends on knowing your customer base.
When I think of Charlie Francis, I don’t think of certification in the traditional sense. He wasn’t “certified”, and pretty openly regarded this fact as an advantage.
I think the word certification implies something official, and seems almost anti-Francis in nature. Is there a different word that could be used? I see a Francis education as asking the question, “Do you want a certification that will impress people, or do you want to impress people with their own results?” I think we all know what Charlie would say.
In a similar sense, I don’t think many of those interested in learning Charlie’s methods are necessarily interested in trading on his name to gain clients. I think they are interested in getting results, and may or may not put their Francis certification on their resume, but would surely not hesitate to tell those they helped get fit in a hurry where the training methodology came from.
When my elementary school kids smashed all previous results in track and field last year despite a distinct lack of talent, I was constantly telling parents that we were using Charlie’s methods. Most people may be misinformed, but reasonable. Show them results, and they get even more reasonable. All they needed was to be educated.
Another thought is that it can be very limiting to restrict a certification to the uber-nerd track coaches. This kind of training needs to reach the mass market, and therefore it is worth considering creating a highly prescriptive version of his programs for certain markets (education, personal training, etc). Yes, the teacher / trainer may not know why they are doing what they are doing, but you can be damn sure they will be into anything that shows obvious results.
For example, I teach a highly successful (and very structured and prescriptive) reading program to grade 1 and 2 students, and even though I had no clue why I was teaching the things I was teaching them at first, the results were phenomenal (kids going from grade 1 to grade 4 reading level in 16 weeks). This created huge buy-in. I have no doubt a Francis program would do the same. I would love to see this philosophy built at a variety of levels.
T-Slow, Valid point about the whole certification thing but unfortunately most people aka those who dont know look and see what type of “CERTIFICATION” you have. Meaning it looks good on a resume. I’ve met a ton of CSCS guys and alot of them dont know JACK, but because they have that piece of paper, people think they know something.
The most important thing is education and learning. The certification is simply a way to establish some structure to the process and needs to be kept in that perspective. Too many people (both buyers and sellers of services) become focuses on credentials for their own sake rather than what those credentials should ideally represent: competence. This is true of many professions.
. With that being said, why not put it on a resume?