Yes I do pioneer.
You could give anyone the reigns for a year and likely not miss a beat.
This would be the sign of a great program. If the program can run itself, it will last a year regardless.
I think Dave Kennedy was doing great things at pitt esp with the wr larry.
No comment
Come on now. I know the job he did with osu and how bad the pats wanted him.
So in two years can you guarantee Pitt will have a .500 record and actually be competitive for a conference title? If not, what does that reflect on your program?
What will the injury report look like? You guys have had a share of quality recruits–esp. since western PA often gets overlooked–and a lot of those guys haven’t really been developed.
As for your love of the Russians, why, with all of their vast resources, talent identification, nefarious activities with young and old athlete alike, and superior coaching did they struggle to compete on the men’s side with the west? Don’t tell me it’s genetics…
he will have no excuse if that rb isnt a top 15pick. 
ANYONE?
So if the program is/was truly great, is the greatness simply from the high level of talent flowing into the program, the s & c program, the program as a whole, the lasting effects of a good s & c program, or what exactly?
I simply can’t imagine that the “any schmo personal trainer” could go into a top cfb program and that team would “compete with the best of them.”
For me, this pretty much an unbelievable statement.
Please clarify.
Then maybe you should know about the laundry list of pelvic girdle and knee trauma, among other things that his program left behind.
Performing 1RM barbell lunges instead of squatting…
Borderline criminal.
You asked me to compare our physical preparation program and that is what I did.
We are in complete control of the physical preparation. We are not in control of every other aspect of preparation. For this reason, I cannot nor will not make predictions as to what our competitive record will be. I am confident, however, that our future is very bright.
Yes, talent + physical preparation program + sport coaching program and all the residuals that this combonation leaves behind (all at high levels) is a program that can run itself for a short while.
Alright, I’m off to spend new years eve with my wife.
All the best
at osu he never perform 1rm lunges, but he did squat heavy on mon and lunge heavy on thur. joey and shawn springs loved the heavy lunges i remember those guys doing 3x5 at 315-365
For a short while possibly but please define that.
If the staff at a highly successfuly program left immediately after the season(one you deem as highly qualified or even average) and were replaced by a staff of “any schmo personal trainers”, what would be the result, in your estimation? I think the predicted effects would be not at all good for that program.
I certainly don’t believe the residuals would be so long lasting as to get them through the next season. What do you think?
ok kool, i was waiting to see what you had plan for your athletes.
This is a pretty sensitive discussion. I’d love to rank all the NCAA Div 1 S&C programs, but it’s not something that can be done based on simply:
- Wins and losses
- Injuries
- East vs. West philosophies
- Number of platforms in a weight room
I sat down with Chris Carlisle of USC for about 60 minutes to go over what he does with his guys. He was pretty honest with me and was smart enough to say right up front that, “We don’t do anything special around here. We try to keep it simple and not get too cute.” I think USC’s win-loss record does speak volumes. There are other schools who get top recruits and don’t have the same consistent success year-in, year-out. I realized that the S&C program may not be doing anything special, but it certainly was not detracting from the football program. It seemed to complement it well enough.
And, if you did drop a personal trainer in at USC to lead the program, I suspect there would be imediate problems if this personal trainer decided to change things. Yeah sure, if they just kept the current program and kept running workouts as is under a personal trainer, it might very well continue to be successful. Things would inevitably deteriorate as the players started to ask questions and didn’t get answers that made common sense. But I doubt that a personal trainer would leave well enough alone.
But if I was the SC coach at USC and I read James Smith’s comments, I most certainly would be offended. I think we can all agree on this. Obviously James is happy with what he is doing at his school - which is great. As a college S&C coach, this is all you can do. Put in your best effort. There are so many other variables for football, basketball, soccer, etc. If you publicly start taking credit for wins, less injuries, recruiting, etc. as a S&C coach, I think you are heading down a dangerous path. Coach Carlisle took no credit for USC’s success in my discussions with him and pointed it all towards the athletes and the football coaching staff. He was a “professional” about it.
If someone starts to publicly criticize your coaching or your program, then you can stand up and defend your results and what you are doing. As a college S&C coach, this is why I collect data on athlete progressions in the weight room and in other testing protocols. Additionally, I volunteer my time to coach sprinters so that people can see the tangible results of my work with no other interference from other coaches. Every time my sprinters run a race, my credibility is at stake. This isn’t as true for football, basketball, soccer, volleyball players that I train, as there are too many other variables at play - variables that I have absolutely no control over.
Having said all of this, I still think we can take shots at Reggie Bush for doing cartwheels on a treadmill in the off season.
Derek you bring up good points, however, what’s important to realize is that the only reason USC was even mentioned is because it came up in this thread prior to my involvement and I simply referenced it because it is a power house program, just as Ohio State, LSU, and on and on.
What’s also important to note is that I walk the talk- remember I said I would welcome a stranger into my seat after I felt the program was established.
Regarding anyone being offended, first off, this is a message board in which we all write words and some, relative to perception, appear to take on much more a life of their own than others.
Regardless, being offended, or assuming the defensive can only possibly result from some remnant of self recognized inadequacy.
I have none therefore you’ll notice that it would take something really spectacular to get me going.
I am certainly in a position to yield criticism as was our program prior to the WVU win- and we did- to the tenth power. It’s all part of the deal.
At any rate, I criticized no one in this thread. I’m not responsible for interpretation.
My thinking regarding who could take whose place and we’d still see positive sporting results, at least for a while, and mentioning USC in the process means nothing more than me making my point with an internationally recognized program.
If someone were to mirror my statement and say that Buddy and I could be replaced by Richard Simmons would only be a compliment.
Who could ask for more than a car that drives itself regardless of who has the wheel.
Perhaps what demands clarification is my, apparently minority, perception of our profession.
The self sustaining program is, in fact, a result of the whole existing greater than the sum of the parts. Meaning- remove a piece here a piece there and it still goes because there are too many strengths to succumb to a far lesser volume of deficiencies.
Regarding the physical preparation program, if it is, in fact, completely solid and the coach did his job by inspiring, connecting with, and forging an iron impression on his athletes, then it doesn’t matter who replaces that coach as time moves forward because the athletes know what to do.
The exception to this idea is if you have a new coach who mistakenly demands that there will be no flexibility in regards to doing it his way or no way.
This is why my example makes perfect sense. We all know that there are a myriad more bullheaded ‘strength and conditioning’ coaches out there vs personal trainers.
Between the two, and let’s think of any powerhouse program as the example since some of the readers of this board are far too eager to assume a defensive posture when the slightest opportunity presents itself, who do you think is going to leave well enough alone- the personal trainer from the local gym who may barely know his ass and likewise has very little to prove or the S&C coach from wherever whose agenda is to make his mark via what ever his philosophy is, that is not scrutinized by a qualification process.
Here’s a great example that further supports my claim:
The program that I left at the high school is very successful. Was the year or two before I got there, continued to be while I was there, and was again this year after my leaving. The fellow who replaced me is a good guy, however, he asked for my guidance, read my manuals, etc and he and I didn’t really share much that we both agreed upon other than some of the bigger points. I have had some of my players, who I still keep in contact with, tell me that they preferred the program that I had them on and so they did what the needed to to in their own time.
It’s a program that runs itself because the athletes are willing to do what it takes to progress regardless of whose driving. That is an example of the strong residuals that I was talking about to Pioneer.
The strong residuals are just not the ones of the physiological nature but psychological.
I have long since wrote about the individualization of training. If the coach actually makes the effort to do this then the result is an athlete or team of athletes that are truly inspired and recognize the ‘way’ from the phonies.
I’ll be the first to state, and I realize I got the ball rolling, that this discussion is gobbling up far to much virtual space as it would have otherwise been over long ago had we all had the opportunity to speak in person.
But men, I speak from experience. I work with some highly gifted athletes who might as well play ping pong and they would still run circles around their opponents on the field.
Take our half back Lesean. He is an incredibly gifted athlete and I work with him at a very close basis. His junior year of high school he was ranked #1 in the nation. This year he broke all kinds of records and when he goes in the first round within the next couple years I could in no way take credit for anything other than connecting with him and continuing to foster the best that his potential has to offer.
Alternatively, I GUARANTEE that regardless whose supervision he could be under that his progress would be fantastic, perhaps not as fantastic as it could be, but heads and tails above his peers none the less.
I also worked with our first round draft pick, the approximate 8 weeks prior to his leaving, Darrelle Reevis who now plays for the Jets. I prepared him for his camp with the Jets but I would in no way claim to have created anything because he was phenomenal from the start.
There’s an example of a couple super gifted guys that were/are here vs a great deal of depth consisting of great athletes at the national powerhouse teams.
I assure you that a great deal of the depth at the national powerhouse teams is very well suited to succeed, especially amongst the collegiate ranks, regardless of the S&C guy.
Have none of you thought of how undermined the S&C profession is?
Consider how most schools require that the S&C staff is responsible for working with over 20 sport teams. This is insulting to the profession, but alternativley appropriate because so many S&C people are underqualified.
How many sport coaches share the duty for coaching disciplines other than there own at the collegiate level…NONE. But the S&C coaches can handle hundreds of athletes from different sports?
This is the problem with ‘strength and conditioning’. The scope of vision is far too narrow.
Strength, power, speed, blah blah blah
I suppose from that perspective you might as well task a small staff with training over 20 sport teams if there only vision is strength, power, speed, work capacity, durability.
Too much competition of weight numbers, jump heights, sprint times, meanwhile very few understand how to most meaningfully assist the athletes in raising their special preparation.
Remember, there is too little time pre-season to develop technical mastery. The physical preparation coach must pick up the load.
But how many are qualified? How many speak of this at the various conferences? Very few
But how many think that the national powerhouse teams attain their status simply because of the development of gross abilities? If you do you are wildly misinformed.
As I have continually stated over at EFS and here since I’ve started posting again recently, the scope of the industry’s vision must greatly widen to accepting the responsibility of more directing impacting the SPP development.
This, however, requires knowledge and far too many industry people won’t set their ego aside to learn more than what lifts, jumps, throws, and sprints have to offer.
Hence my studies of the Soviet and Eastern bloc methods. Unifications of all forms of preparation.
Davan while my interest and respect for our superior overseas counterparts seems to offend you I would like to think that you are not so confused as to compare the west’s success in the sprints to the more total domination that our overseas counterparts have won in total medals at varying disciplines.
Have a look Davan: something I wrote at EFS
The US has one of the most powerful economies and cross-cultural populations on the planet. For this reason it’s almost a given that we should do well at the Olympic level even if everyone of our coaches were sub-par.
Given these factors, consider the following:
It’s pitiful that we don’t dominate the Olympics and take gold in every discipline.
Take a look at how other countries with not a fraction of our economy, social possibilities, cultural cross-cultural populations rank in the top three medal categories dating back to 1952:
Country- Gold- Silver- Bronze
Athens
USA 35 39 29
China 32 17 14
Russia 27 27 38
Sydney
USA 40 24 33
Russia 32 28 28
China 28 16 15
Atlanta
USA 44 32 25
Russia 26 21 16
Germany 20 18 27
Barcelona
Russia 45 38 29
USA 37 34 37
Germany 33 21 28
Seoul
USSR 55 31 46
GDR 37 35 30
USA 36 31 27
Los Angeles was a crock because the Russians and other communist block countries absolutely raped many of the ‘’’‘records’’’’ set in LA when the countries that boycotted competed in the Friendship games
Moscow
USSR 80 69 46
GDR 47 37 42
Bulgaria8 16 17
Montreal
USSR 49 41 35
GDR 40 25 25
USA 34 35 25
Munich
USSR 50 27 22
USA 33 31 30
GDR 20 23 23
Mexico City
USA 45 28 34
USSR 29 32 30
Japan 11 7 7
Tokyo
USA 36 26 28
USSR 30 31 35
Japan 16 5 8
Rome
USSR 43 29 31
USA 34 21 16
Italy 13 10 13
Melbourne
USSR 37 29 32
USA 32 25 17
Australia13 8 14
Helsinki
USA 40 19 17
USSR 22 30 19
Hungary 16 10 16
Clearly it is in your interest to study Olympic history acknowledge the fact that Russia won the medal competition (regarding the Olympics dating back to 52)in Barcelona, Seoul, Moscow, Montreal, Munich, Rome, and Melbourne.
Let’s not forget that over the last half century the USA has offered a level of opportunity that eclipses that of Russia and all other countries to the tenth power.
All I have to say is that if coaches from the former USSR, East Germany, Bulgaria, China, Hungary, Poland, etc took over the training of our western athletes and sport teams the world would witness a level of sport performance so high, at the Olympic and professional levels, that it would have previously been thought to be unattainable.
I criticize the state of sport training here because it is so poor that it borders on the criminal.
Physical education is not a unified system across the country and, in fact, many elementary schools have removed PE from their curriculum.
Most of the schools that do require PE utilize a PE curriculum that is so misdirected it also borders on the criminal (I know because I re-wrote the PE curriculum for a high school and saw the state handbook that almost inspired me to vomit)
Any type of physical training beyond PE is hit or miss at the high school level- another borderline criminal non-activity.
There is no qualification process for coaching at any level of any type.
And the list goes on…
So can anyone out there provide any other possible explanation fueling our athletes sport success other than the fact that our athletes succeed IN SPITE of a nearly non-existent and grossly misdirected PE and sport training system.
Don’t waste your time- there isn’t one.
I’ll reiterate the situation, given the few exceptions of excellent coaches of physical preparation that are dotted around the country, we succeed in spite of ourselves.
I do not have anything more to add to this thread.
I won’t go thru all the good points of JS that I agree with, but being in the trenches of a couple of team sports, I agree pretty much with everything he wrote.
In team sports where you can buy/recruit the best talents according to the club/college economical power, the ladder is this:
- Technical component (Players)
- Tactical component (Coach)
- Mental component (dependant on the very game situation but based on the club/college organization and the coach)
- S&C component
Yes, you can go from top S&C to schmo personal trainer and still win, as long as the first three components remain top level.
It is not like in individual sports, where what you put in as a S&C coach is pretty much what you get out.
I would certainly agree that in Olympic sports, the US succeeds in spite of itself due to the colossal number of athletes and scholarships available. The same few American coaches succeed year after year and 99% of the talent is squandered.
That said, there are multiple reasons for this and a principle one is technical instruction.
Another is an emphasis on performance enhancing and injury preventing hands-on therapy that is totally lacking in the US system.
Comparisons of physical prep methods must consider this.
Additionally, there are areas where the general strength approach in the West is superior to the specific methods preferred by the Soviet system- specifically, the sprints.