You can end up with so many models that it’s hard to narrow it down based on:
Type of season- duration and number of games.
Level of team- playoffs, all-star game appearances by individual members.
Type of sport- amount of contact, etc.
Type of training emphasized by the head coach through the regular season. This can include the number of plays used by a football team, which determines the number of technical and timing run-throughs that might be needed in practice, etc.
S and C coaches must respond to the existing realities of their environment.
Let’s take an example:
The Chicago Bulls, in their prime, concentrated on lifting rather than plyometrics because they got so much plyometric work in their game schedule already. A National team might be in a different situation because they often gather ALL the talent in one place for a prolonged period, forcing them to rely on international events for competition, which are expensive and may be few and far between.
So with James’s example, non-professional athletes, would a need for the development of specific physical qualities (acceleration, and Max strength) not be vital for the execution of quality tactical skills? You can only execute the tactical skills at the speed in which your physical skills will allow once you have learned the technique!
Are the realities of the situation created by knowledgeable experts or based on traditional views and methods. In looking at James’s situation there seems to be room for improvement.
Even my experience working with NHL players, changing the existing conception of athletic development and regeneration have allowed for consistant and improved performance with these players.
Incorporating your vertical integration model and focusing on the physical qualities in which performance is built on has lead to great results physically and psychologically for these athletes.
Why focus on the qualities that are being developed and maintained by the practice sessions or games, focus on the qualities which are vital to performance improvement but cannot be developed during those sessions and competitions.
James would you say the most opportune times to improve these qualities would be June through mid of August (summer holidays) and Jan through May.
[b]Ultimately, as in the vertical integration model, the training of the abilities that have the highest impact towards the attainment of positional mastery is always conducted. The difference being the degree to which the concentration of the load targets the training of those tasks.
The concentration taking place the time periods that most closely precede spring ball and training camp[/b]
Can you develop a program for athletic development at you college during the summer holidays through your physical education department that would not violate any NCAA (No Clue About Athletics) I think that’s what it stands for, or (the SS) I meant the Compliance Officer at your institution. Focusing on the development of qualities necessary to perform high quality tactical maneuvers?
[b]Yes, we have the athletes throughout the entire year with the exception of the three week break that is currently taking place and the week they are provided for spring break.
It would be more optimal, however, to have more than the eight hours per week that we are technically supposed to adhere to over the summer[/b]
I also think with the inclusion of your vertical integration model you have an opportunity to manipulate some of the variables necessary to develop those qualities. Power reserve and speed reserve (acceleration) go a long way to improving athletes “endurance” or repeat performance of tactical maneuvers, and at a much greater out put level.
[b]I agree, however, we must not ignore the fundamental importance of improving cardiac efficiency and cardiac power (thickening of left ventricle) first- through the training at intensity levels lesser than that required to enhance power and speed reserve.
The heightening of the cardiac capacity serves to formulate the strengthening of the biological power that facilitates a greater potential to be gained via the more intensive training to follow in the subsequent blocks[/b]
I would assume the quality of work would be more important at the college level than the quantity of work and all development models would reflect this. Regardless of what coaches wish accomplish in practice and training sessions, the human body adapts in a specific way, and training should move along side it and not against it.
I agree, however, I would use the word ‘should’ as opposed to ‘would’, with respect to what the developmental models reflect, because the state of industry affairs is, in my view, horribly misdirected
Hi James,
Excellent points, I see your dilemma not easy to change.
Nap, by drill work are you referring to drills that I would construct or the drills ran in sport practice?
The drills ran in practice do not develop aerobic/oxidative capacities any where near as efficiently as lesser intensive training because the stress to organism is much higher than necessary.
Yes, I understood your joke/acronym about the NCAA. It is true.
The thickening of the left ventricle via lesser intensive drills (eg 130-140bpm) is a much more efficient means of training this capacity vs power training, while the efficiency of the cardiac system is more effectively addressed via work performed at approximately 120-130bpm.
You may be surprised to know that the serial block approach/Block periodization (RE Issurin) is very similar to Charlie’s vertical integration.
Issurin explains block periodization differently than Verkhoshansky. While both authors describe the serial nature of block sequence- Issurin prescribes greater retention loads (similar to vertical integration in which contents of the load are ever present with only volumes varying) whereas Verkhoshansky will prescribe nearly no work other than that which directly supports the contents of the particular block emphasis. Both methods, however, relying on training residuals from previous blocks.
(I am fortunate to be in communication with both Verkhoshansky and Issurin. This has provided me with great clarity as to both of their methods)
While I subscribe to both Verkhoshansky’s and Issurin’s models depending on many factors, as well as Charlie’s, I have constructed what I think is a bit of an aggregate of all types of thinking into the model that makes sense to me for American football.
Nap I should also note that, as I explained earlier, the elements of sport practice that can be performed frequently do not occur frequently enough throughout the year- only during the highly concentrated stage of spring ball and training camp.
After that it’s largley an after the fact existance as the competition stage has already began.
It’s for these reasons why I make it my responsibility to integrate the drills that develop aspects of the special work capacity into the ‘conditioning’ program.
what’s your opinion on footballer/track combo guys in the high school/college ranks and the efficency of it in comparision to just pursueing one(perusmably football).
Not sure I understand the question.
Are you asking what method of programming the training I would suggest for a two sport athlete vs a one sport athlete?
Nah, not what programming, let me rephrase the question.
Basicly, do you think doing both up to a point(reggie bush being the prime example), or only doing football is more effective in their development.
I think that American football and T&F compliment one another extremely well throughout high school specifically if football is the athletes possibility for scholarship and the T&F activities are limited to the field events and the short sprints/hurdles. Beyond high school, however, I think that the scholarship athlete is wisest to specialize only in one sport.
I do not think that a T&F scholarship candidate is wise to play football due to the injury risk.
I should also note that I do not support the multi-sport athlete in highschool in most cases. Sports that exist in opposing seasons are more favorable, however, in general- beyond the sophomore year I suggest that athletes who are scholarship candidates to specialize in the one sport.
Football and the T&F events I mentioned just happen to be extremely complimentary, again for the football player, both from the standpoint of opposing seasons and the needed and shared requistite biomotor abilities such as strength, power, speed, reactivity, etc.
so, guys who dabble in, or pursue 2-3 sports that arn’t exactly complimentry, i.e. football, and basketball, as a hypothetical aren’t doing themselves any favors?
Absolutely not.
The exception being those who are participating in sport for the fun but have no chance at getting a scholarship.
The time for multi-sport participation for all individuals is prior to high school in order that a broad skill set may be developed.
The problem is that most high school coaches and college recruiters believe that particpation and high accolades in many sports is to the athletes benefit.
The high school coach obviously wants all the talented athlete he/she can get.
The recruiter naively thinks that a talented multi-sport athlete is the finest prospect.
What both sides are forgetting is that the athlete is getting scholarshipped in only one sport.
For that reason it must be the athlete’s objective to be as highly prepared as possible for that one sport when they arrive to college.
The participation in multi-sports, especially later in high school, only serves to take time away from the preparation for the scholarship sport and increase the risk for injury while practicing/competing in the non-scholarship sport which, this late in the game, is doing nothing to heighten the preparedness for the scholarship sport.
While the specialization may be more optimally reserved for the later teenage years, depending on sport, the reality for most athletes in America who aspire to be collegiate athletes is that their directive must be to raise their scholarship candidacy as high as possible.
cool.
so playing a bazillion different sports is only worth while until say age 10 or 12 or such? and after that it should be tapered to eventually just one?
Can i get your thoughts on some specfic cases?
-
Destinee Hooker, she’s top 15 in the world in the high jump, and also has a decent shot at making the USA 2008 olympic vollyball team, just making a wild conjecture, do you think had she focused on one or the other from say age 14 on, she’d be top 5 in the world as either an outside hitter in VB or in the high jump.
-
bryshon nellum was the top high school 400 runner last year, and played football as well, but he’s dropped football, do you think this will contribute to a major drop in his PB, provided of course he adjusts to college life, the new coaching plan, is healthy ect ect.
i was also gonna ask about trindon holliday, but couldn’t really word the question the way i wanted.
I would suggest multi-sport and proper physical preparation up to 12-14 depending on different factors. After that, begin to narrow the sport based upon what the athlete demonstrates high potential for. This, of course, necessitates the educated eye and assessment of a qualified coach (unfortunately there aren’t many at the highschool level in US)
-
VB and HJ are very complimentary from physical standpoint and seasonal standpoint. I wouldn’t necessarily object to both all the way through highschool unless the athlete is going to only jump in college. If the athlete is jumper only then I’d drop the VB after sophomore year, junior at the latest.
-
As I stated earlier, I think the T&F athlete is wise to drop football after sophomore year.
Got ya on the complimentry part on vollyball and high jump, hooker continued to jump and play VB in college, so one has to wonder if it limited her ceiling in either.
Nellum ran top ten US HS all time times in the 200 and 400, so his playing football didn’t seem to bite him, he won’t be pursuing it at USC, i was just wondering if changing from both sports, to just track and finally dropping football would help him run alot faster in track, potentally?
One can only speculate since both athletes chose to participate in two sports up to a point that is later than I, personally, would recommend.
One can only wonder what times and jumps the athletes might have been capable of attaining had their adaptive reserves, especially in the footballers case, not be so heavily taxed by practicing and playing football when he could have otherwise been hightening his sprint potential via the immensely lesser structurally demanding training associated with T&F practice.