functional strength

One machine we purchased was from HAMMER STRENGTH it was the JAMMER....I love it...you can start from a 2 pt. stance (pass pro) and explode through...to full extension...I think it is good to be creative but am a strong believer in old fashioned core lifts..bench squat POWER CLEAN...if done correctly I think they are very sport specific to football. If one of our players claims to be pushed for time I always tell them to at least get in 3 sets of cleans.

GOVERTICAL.......

I tend to disagree. First of all, let's talk about the bench press. While benching you are pressing forward away from the chest while your back is against a base. So regardless how much you bench, when do you press forward in a football game while your back is against a wall, or a bench, or some other bench. It just does not happen. Your only base comes from your hips and core. So you must develop tath through cleans or the lift I mentioned.

Also, when you are benching, especially when benching heavy weight, the lifter presses forward with a very slow/steady movement. As an OL coach and player for 20+ years, I would never teach any lineman to press forward with a slow steady movement and I surely never played like that. It is so contrary to what we are actually teaching on the practice field. Short, quick, powerful jabby punches is what we preach. So if benching is going to be apart of the workout, then I suggest close grip with light weight and multiple repst.

As far as my exercise I mentioned, the player has weight on his upperbody, he bends at the waist, does a full squat and pushes to the top while exploding through his toes, his ankles, his legs, his hips, and ends it with a follow through of a push from the shoulders and arms. Now this sounds like something a FB player does every time he comes out of his stance. The progressional teaching of blocking sounds a whole lot more like what I have suggested than a bench press or squat. This also sounds like the movements we are demanding when we are teaching form tackling: low, wrap, drive and lift.

I am not an expert at all. But I feel that I am very lucky to get advice from those who are proven winners year in and year out. When I look at my players, I dont have big kids. There is noone that is going to bench 300 and squat 500 around here. And even if I get that kid or a few like it, I am not going to gear my workout towards those kids, while 40 other 180 LB kids suffer. I am attempting to make my 180 LB players as strong as possilble. And I would take some of my kids who are throwing 60 lb dumbells over their head and running a 4.7 40 over any kid who can bench 350 and run a 5.3. So, I have dropped squats and bench from my workout and have noticed more change in my players than ever.

I agree with you GC almost 100%....I believe you need to vary your workout but heavy weight and strength is important. You must stress explosiveness (like on bench) The motion may seem slow but if it sintent is explosive it will be more explosive without the weight (if that makes sense) Also I do disagree with you both about not having big or strong kids....I know everyone including myself does not have the 6'4+ 300+ kids ..but everyone can get and be strong...it is our teams goal to haev everyone benching 300....we start them lifting light weight in 7th grade and we have many of our sophs close if not benching 300lbs Strength is not genetic....it comes from hard work.

I would like to say something about powercleans. I believe they are completely overrated. Yes they help somewhat with explosion but I have seen way to many injuries caused from cleans. My head coach feels the same way on this subject. He once told me that when he was at the University of Tenessee playing football that the football team actually had more shoulder injuries which were cause by doing cleans...than the baseball team had. We just dont do cleans at all...to big of a risk with very litte to gain. Now, I know that coaches all over the place swear by cleans...that is there way and that is fine...but I would much rather have a kid be able to deadlift or squat a large amount of weight than I would have him doing cleans.

I agree that cleans are somewhat overrated. I believe squats are WAY more important in developing strength, which leads to speed in sports. For a 3 month period when we were really trying to put size on our kids we did not power clean. We found the results were good. Also during this time we taught everyone how to power clean right which is key. If I had to choose between squats and cleans I would most definitely choose the former. If you check DeFranco's site I am pretty sure he talks about cleans and how they are not the "end all be all" when it comes to strength development. I think they play a role in power development. Cleans do not enhance your squat, but having a big squat can enhance your clean. To me cleans are like doing plyos with wieght.

awesome feedback guys. Thanks for the info.

Coach Pierson........ you mentioned that your sophomores are benching 300 lbs. I would like to know your secret. I have one kid out of 50 who can bench 275 and that is it. Part of the reason is that I am in my first year and previou coaches did not stress the weight room. So a i am starting from scratch. but even at my former school - we had big kids and few benching 300 +. This is why I have changed my philosophy. I am not going to go back because my new routine works with my kids and works with the equipment and space i have.

We, too, have tons of 8th graders and 9th graders showing up and that is the key to building the total program. They are improving every day.

As far as the cleans go, I do hang cleans - not power cleans, but just once a week. I have never experienced any injuries nor seen an injury as a result of it. As far as comparing FB to Baseball in regards to injuries, not a good comparison. Injuries based on throwing a baseball compared to injuries by getting drilled by a linebacker are two different situations. Some great baseball players will continue to be great witout lifting a single WT at the HS level. But if you are going to experience success on the FB field, you need the strength to deliver the blow and the size and muscle to accept the blow without being injured.

I have seen many guys lift unbelievable weights in squats and benches. The majority of those guys never played a lick. I remember seeing an OL squat 785 on day in the weightroom. That guy ran about a 5.5 40 and never saw the field. As a former lineman, I can remember our Left OT maxing out well under 300 LBs and this guys was as good a player as there was in our league.

TIGER ONE....... If you have guys benching that kind of weight - I am assuming you are at the college level or a big time school. I would assume that my situation is a bit different. We have 200 boys in the school, have 5 coaches paid (including the Fr and JV) and a weightroom the size of a classroom. We have not had a winning season in 15 yrs. This is my first year and I am doing what I feel is best.
I do like the way of having them set goals every two weeks. Do they keep a journal?

I would like to know more about your school.

tiger one, never mind - i just read that you are in a minor league.

Quote

---

Originally posted by: GCTIGERS57
I have seen many guys lift unbelievable weights in squats and benches. The majority of those guys never played a lick. I remember seeing an OL squat 785 on day in the weightroom. That guy ran about a 5.5 40 and never saw the field. As a former lineman, I can remember our Left OT maxing out well under 300 LBs and this guys was as good a player as there was in our league.

---

Football is a game of relative strength (how strong a player is in relation to his bodyweight). Absolute strength (how strong a player is regardless of bodyweight) has NOTHING to do with predicting success on the football field.

For example, take two 225-pound kids. One kid can squat 405 and bench 315. The other kid can't do 1 bodyweight squat to parallel and can only bench 135. Chances are VERY good that when these two kids line up, the strong one is going to whip the weak one's ass.

Of course, there are exceptions, but I'll take a 225-pounder with a high relative strength ratio over a 225-pounder with a low relative strength ratio any day!

I put the best players on the field. At the hs level you can't go by numbers. And at those higher levels, going by the numbers gets you players that are just workout warriors at times. Aundray Bruce types.
Give me a Dan Klecko or a Mike Vrabel. They might not have the best measurables, but they can flat out play.

Quote

---

Originally posted by: TIGER ONE
Good Morning, Vertical

I hear exactly what your saying, but check this out. In this day and time when almost everything is done by computer profile (Body size and strength ranking right up there) the lesser strength guy will in all likehood never gat a chance. Personal example: When my son played at Clemson, the 1991 season they had the #1 defense in the nation. (9 of the starting 11 went right straight to the NFL , Lavon Kirkland, Ed McDaniel, etc.) But, the very best player of them all was their nose guard, a young man by the name of Rob Bodine, who was a tweener size wise. When all the scouts came to test, he was not drafted simply because he did not fit the computer profile. If you think I'm joking, I'm not. Talk to scouts yourself on the Div.1-A college level and the NFL and see if what I'm telling you is not gospel. To me it is ridculous, but thats exactly how it is!

Coach Easton

---

Coach -

You have posted about Rob Bodine in the past. My guess is that one of the reasons that he was such a tremendous player was due to the fact that he had a very high strength-to-weight ratio. Players that are very strong in relation to their bodyweight tend to be fast, explosive, and have monster vertical jumping ability. The fact that the NFL didn't draft him does not take away from that.

Generally speaking, a high strength-to-weight ratio is a pretty good predicter of the ability of a high school athlete. Now, of course there are many other factors (grades, coachability, intelligence, heart, etc, etc), but kids who are weak in relation to their bodyweight will NEVER achieve their full athletic potential.

Coach -

I agree with you.

Heck, look at the roster of the NE Patriots for proof of what you just discussed. No "computer superstars" there, but I think that it is pretty hard to argue with what they have accomplished!

That is awesome. I have discussed the idea of a FB class. Why hell, they can sing and blow the freakin' trumpet for a grade, but they cannot lift a weight - something that is ignored in gym class. i wish i had your situation.

the main idea from this discussion is not just what you are doing - but how you are doing. sounds like your guys is on their butts and i do the same. it cracks me up when i hear about guys letting their players just come in and check their names off and go on their way.

when we lift - we do a cycle-style workout that forces kids to constantly work, no breaks, no chatter, challenges them mentally, etc... so that even if they cant bench 300 - they are mentally tougher than the day before.

FOOTBALL CLASS---AWESOME! We lift 2 days week in-season. Pushing the kids to be stonger by playoff time than in August. Hey if you can spare any of those 300# benching sophs I would gladly get them enrolled at my school!