just curious-what movement or technique on the football field mimics PCs or HCs. in fact I have never really seen a barbell used on the football field. usually the guys start from a standing position or a three point stance. don't you think they should practice that technique and use the gym to develop healthy bodies, which given football players game injuries, do you really want to aggravate a career by throwing weights around quickly. remember heavy weights don't hurt people-quick movements do.Dr. M said:If you're looking for explosive strength (I assume you're playing football? Correct me if I'm wrong here...), I HIGHLY recommend power cleans and hang cleans.
BUT, you need to make sure you have proper training (PC's and HC's are some of the most technical lifting I've ever done) otherwise you're just going to hurt yourself without any sort of actual improvement.
-M
stonecold54 said:just curious-what movement or technique on the football field mimics PCs or HCs. in fact I have never really seen a barbell used on the football field. usually the guys start from a standing position or a three point stance. don't you think they should practice that technique and use the gym to develop healthy bodies, which given football players game injuries, do you really want to aggravate a career by throwing weights around quickly. remember heavy weights don't hurt people-quick movements do.
stonecold54 said:just curious-what movement or technique on the football field mimics PCs or HCs. in fact I have never really seen a barbell used on the football field. usually the guys start from a standing position or a three point stance. don't you think they should practice that technique and use the gym to develop healthy bodies, which given football players game injuries, do you really want to aggravate a career by throwing weights around quickly. remember heavy weights don't hurt people-quick movements do.
stonecold54 said:just curious-what movement or technique on the football field mimics PCs or HCs. in fact I have never really seen a barbell used on the football field. usually the guys start from a standing position or a three point stance. don't you think they should practice that technique and use the gym to develop healthy bodies, which given football players game injuries, do you really want to aggravate a career by throwing weights around quickly. remember heavy weights don't hurt people-quick movements do.
the fact the "football players" do something does not make it a fact. olympic lifts teach you how to be good at-olympic lifts. using your logic we could train football players soley by using olympic lifts and no football till the age of 25 and then turn them loose in the NFL and they would be the best players there. obviously that is not true. and most NFL and college players usually just follow the advice of ignorant strength coaches, who is turn are manufactured by the weekend personal training certifications out there.dzuljas said:
all olympic lifts teach you to generate force from the ground up. You start with the legs and finish with the upperbody, football is the same thing, you come off the line and drive up and out.......if you think that olympic lifting and moving heavy weights doenst benefit football players talk to any college or nfl player
1. Explosive movements teach your muscles to become faster and better at those movements. This falls under the SAID principle-specific adaptations to imposed demands. the key word being specific. specific means exactly the same, not kind of like or sortof-EXACTLY. an explosive lineman does not have a barbell in his hand when he is on the line so is that specific or sort of like.slobberknocker said:
Wrong. Explosive moves performed in the gym make you faster and more powerful. They teach your muscles and CNS to generate massive force in an instant.
I think it was back in the 70's that one country tested all of its Olympic athletes in the 10 meter dash. The athletes with the best times were the weightlifters and not the sprinters, because their training made them extremely explosive.
I'd agree that you can't do ONLY gym work for football. You need sport specific exercises to learn how to apply your strength with speed and force. But to say that gym work can't make you a better athlete is ignorant. Do a little research on WSB, soviet sports science, and the like.
"remember heavy weights don't hurt people-quick movements do"
Quick movements performed with weights (i.e. oly lifts and dynamic powerlifts) will enable you to "hurt people."
stonecold54 said:the fact the "football players" do something does not make it a fact. olympic lifts teach you how to be good at-olympic lifts. using your logic we could train football players soley by using olympic lifts and no football till the age of 25 and then turn them loose in the NFL and they would be the best players there.
slobberknocker said:You can't be serious. Explosion doesn't come from a pill. It's come from heavy power moves, dynamic moves, and plyos.
Come to the training board, we'll hook you up. You play FB? Where? I'm walking on at DT for Penn State in the spring.
stonecold54 said:the fact the "football players" do something does not make it a fact. olympic lifts teach you how to be good at-olympic lifts. using your logic we could train football players soley by using olympic lifts and no football till the age of 25 and then turn them loose in the NFL and they would be the best players there. obviously that is not true. and most NFL and college players usually just follow the advice of ignorant strength coaches, who is turn are manufactured by the weekend personal training certifications out there.
stonecold54 said:using your logic we could train football players soley by using olympic lifts and no football till the age of 25 and then turn them loose in the NFL and they would be the best players there. obviously that is not true.
have you ever taken a course in logic? I will gladely tell you that I dropped out of school. I am proud of that for all the bullshit they teach in school. Having a degree does not mean JACK SHIT. logical arguement does not come from a piece of paper. yes most coaches have all the "normal" credentials but who among them has taken a philosophy course and understands what knowledge actually is. I will just say that you are using Argumentum ad Verecundiam-which I am sure you know means, an argument to reverence and appeal to authority, it is a fallacy to the authority of others. in other words truth is not found in the facts but in what other people say. also you used appeal to laughter- this fallacy attempts to refute by turning ridicule against the other party such as snickers or names hoping to udermine the other person.dzuljas said:
You clearly took my post out of context. I was trying to get the point across that Olympic lifts generate the most explosive power out of what you could do in the weightroom, so I would definately make them a part of the training. Also I disagree with you on most strength coaches being ignorant...Most strength coaches at major division 1 universities have degrees in exercise physiology, kinesiology, and other fields......What big time division 1 school do you play for stonecold?? Mr knowledgable....
stonecold54 said:
Scenario 1. deadlifting 250 pounds for 1 minute and 30 seconds of TUT-time under tension. the movement is began delibrately with no jerking twitching heaving. the movement has a 4/1/4 cadence.
scenario 2. power clean with 250 pounds. the weight is jerked off the floor. no muscle is actually achieving a quality contraction. I think we can agree. then the weight, using momentum, body leverage and every other technique BESIDES ACTUAL MUSCULAR TENSION, is flung upwards.
now tell me what movement will achieve more strength. and besides that which movement will not hurt the athlete. what point is there at explosive lifting when you are guaranting yourself an injury.
stonecold54 said:have you ever taken a course in logic? I will gladely tell you that I dropped out of school. I am proud of that for all the bullshit they teach in school. Having a degree does not mean JACK SHIT.
1. soreness is never an indication of ANYTHING. you can sprain your ankle and it will be sore.slobberknocker said:
Actually, both of those would be good to do together. The high rep deadlifting will strengthen slow twitch fibers, and the low rep cleaning will strengthen fast twitch fibers. I'm in favor of hitting the muscles in as many different ways as possible. High reps, low reps, speed work, strongman work, plyos, and GPP.
The thing about deadlifting for 90 seconds is that it isn't going to teach your body how to deliver maximal force. But it would be good for hypertrophy, which is valuable.
Have you ever cleaned 250? I've done over 3 plates and felt it very much in my abs, low back, calves, and traps. I disagree that oly lifting won't work your muscles, if that's your argument. Oly lifting is all concentric, there's no eccentric. So that's why it won't make you very sore, and isn't very good for hypertrophy.
stonecold54 said:have you ever taken a course in logic? I will gladely tell you that I dropped out of school. I am proud of that for all the bullshit they teach in school. Having a degree does not mean JACK SHIT. logical arguement does not come from a piece of paper. yes most coaches have all the "normal" credentials but who among them has taken a philosophy course and understands what knowledge actually is. I will just say that you are using Argumentum ad Verecundiam-which I am sure you know means, an argument to reverence and appeal to authority, it is a fallacy to the authority of others. in other words truth is not found in the facts but in what other people say. also you used appeal to laughter- this fallacy attempts to refute by turning ridicule against the other party such as snickers or names hoping to udermine the other person.

why not? I would put my knowledge of more worldy topics against most of this board how many books have you read in your life? do you understand Philosophy is the most important subject in anyones life and yet most people couldn't argue their way out of a wet paper bag? school is a guide to learning. but what happens when the guide falls of the course do you just keep following it. wouldn't that be rather wrong and what if you don't need a guide should I waste my money to please people with a piece of paper.DaddyX said:
not something to brag about or be proud of
once again Appeal to laughter. you have much to learn. How does it feel to be so insecure?dzuljas said:
stop trying to be a smartass you are WRONG! And you are a dumbass for dropping out of school, was the homework too much for you?![]()
stonecold54 said:have you ever taken a course in logic? Having a degree does not mean JACK SHIT
stonecold54 said:why not? I would put my knowledge of more wordly topics against most of this board how many books have you read in your life? do you understand Philosophy is the most important subject in anyones life and yet most people couldn't argue their way out of a wet paper bag? school is a guide to learning. but what happens when the guide falls of the course do you just keep following it. wouldn't that be rather wrong and what if you don't need a guide should I waste my money to please people with a piece of paper.
philosophy is everything. every science comes from it. the fact that you need a degree to get a job does not make it anymore worthwhile, besides monetarily. I don't use weed bro, just steroids.dzuljas said:
this isnt a philosophy course BOY! And people in the real world want credentials, you need a degree to get certain jobs, thats just the way it is, plain and simple.......I think you have been smokin a little too much weed BOY!
stonecold54 said:once again Appeal to laughter. you have much to learn. How does it feel to be so insecure?
stonecold54 said:yeah I am done too. it was fun. I liked it. I just like to make people think about things. to many times on this board people spout off things with no reasons or faulty logic. and I am not a zen master that would be worse than having a degree.![]()

stonecold54 said:now tell me what movement will achieve more strength. and besides that which movement will not hurt the athlete. what point is there at explosive lifting when you are guaranting yourself an injury.
princeton said:Olympic lifts are NOt the best lift for sports! YOu must work your posterior chain group of muscles. Hamstring, glutes, spinal erectors ect... Dead lifts, good mornings and glute ham raises will make you the fastest. Go do some research on louie Simmons and Dave tate from West side barbell with what they've come up with.
princeton said:Olympic lifts are NOt the best lift for sports! YOu must work your posterior chain group of muscles. Hamstring, glutes, spinal erectors ect... Dead lifts, good mornings and glute ham raises will make you the fastest. Go do some research on louie Simmons and Dave tate from West side barbell with what they've come up with.
princeton said:Nebraska lifting or western periodization is a thing of the past. Acomidating resitance is the way to go. I wish I was smarter so I could explain it better.
princeton said:
genarr3 said:... patiently waiting for Fonz and Nelson to start arguing about this.
princeton said:
kiloamp said:
I checked out the site. I noticed GPP and SPP mentioned a lot, kind of sounds like periodization to me but what do I know.
slobberknocker said:
GPP is general physical preparedness and SPP is special physical preparedness. Lots of info on each of those in the articles at elitefts, and also in the training forum.
It's not periodization, but in a way it is. It's self-periodizing. The idea is that you will be able to train at 100% of your max week after week without overtraining if you constantly switch up your ME movements. So in essence, it's periodized into 1-week mini-cycles.
princeton said:olympic lifting is not bad for sports, its just not the best . Its very complicated to teach right and not any people can do it very well. I see a lot of athletes getting injured or just not doing it right. there are better ways to get faster and quicker.
I can power clean more than most of the kids on my team but I never do it. I just have explosive power from other lifts.
kiloamp said:
Yes, the terms GPP and SPP have been around for a long time. I remember reading of them and periodization in ' The Soviet Sports Review' back in the early 80s and even then they were well developed methods of training that had been established over years of research with thousands of athletes. And what you are describing is exactly what periodization is: breaking cycles down into microcycles (1-2 weeks) and combining those with larger mesocycles (4-6 weeks) and combining those with still larger macrocycles (4-6 months) and if your really good, building into large macrocycles (2-4 years.) The common misconception is that periodization necessarily applies to intensity and training volume of the athlete's workload. The Bulganian's were maxing out every workout for multiple workouts a day but also had training cycles they worked through. Of course, this is a subject that is like religion and politics, you're never going to agree on.
Here's a link to an article from the elitefts site that touches (lightly) on the subject.
http://www.elitefts.com/documents/TomMyslinski.pdf
Sebass67 said:I just gave someone negative karma...anyone care to guess who????
This page contains mature content. By continuing, you confirm you are over 18 and agree to our TOS and User Agreement.
Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 










