Weight room

C

Crimson and Black

Well-known member
We all know what “outworking” your opponents means. It’s is obvious that is critical to success. My question is…do the vast majority of programs Put in the same amount of time and focus in the weight room? I realize, just like everything else in life, some do it better than others. I’m just wondering if the amount of time varies, does every program make off season weight training mandatory, is there a year round mandatory focus on the weight room. For me, watching any game it is apparent who is the stronger team especially after halftime. Also, what is the norm for in season weight training.
 
 
I've seen schools around me (mostly small Darke county schools) try and outsource their weight program to a training company (if that's what you call it). Some have had success, while others have been hurt by the practice. I think the biggest thing with it is how much is the head coach/coaching staff involved. The ones who've gone this route with the coach still involved have had way more success than those that have just left it to the trainer.

I've also seen a shift in some schools over the last 5-10 years I'd say focusing on tone/agility as opposed to "juicing." While they want strong athletes, they're not focused on building big muscle mass types but more athletic type if that makes sense.
 
My experience as a player and coach has been that the most important part of weight training development isn't the formal workouts but the supplemental time they put in on their own.
And with me and my training partners, many of the workouts on our own were even more intense.
 
BigK72 said:
I've seen schools around me (mostly small Darke county schools) try and outsource their weight program to a training company (if that's what you call it). Some have had success, while others have been hurt by the practice. I think the biggest thing with it is how much is the head coach/coaching staff involved. The ones who've gone this route with the coach still involved have had way more success than those that have just left it to the trainer.

I've also seen a shift in some schools over the last 5-10 years I'd say focusing on tone/agility as opposed to "juicing." While they want strong athletes, they're not focused on building big muscle mass types but more athletic type if that makes sense.
Click to expand...
explain the outsourcing their weight program in Darke county?
 
The obvious distinction that determines the biggest year-to-year success is the combo of weight room programming with weight room quality.

I've seen HS's with bad weight rooms. No natural light, no good air ventilation, and a bad flow for "traffic." It kills a lot of desire for kids to show up during the off-season. The diehards will show up regardless, but you lose the ability to convince that extra kid or two who would wind up making great strides.

I've seen weight rooms where you can open a garage door when the weather is nice, kids can mingle out in the sun if things are crowded, and the equipment is plentiful and spacious. It makes a world of difference when the weight room can be a social outlet instead of a dungeon.

In the same vein, the programming can break you. I've seen weight coaches who knew how to program a routine for building raw strength. The downside was the programming was uniform. Great linemen, poor skill positions.

It takes a lot of thought and supervision to properly get each athlete the attention/program they need. Doing it well ain't easy.
 
bigkat said:
explain the outsourcing their weight program in Darke county?
Click to expand...
A few years ago, a few schools started partnering with a training company called Enhanced U. I know Tri-Village and Arcanum did for sure. Tri-Village used it for strength/speed/agility for most of its athletes (football coach didn’t; he trained his players). I believe Arcanum went in 100% with its athletics programs. I’m pretty sure they turned Enhanced U into a class for all athletes, and the coaches weren’t as involved as much as they once were. I’m not sure if either school still partners with them anymore; don’t hear about the company too much if at all now. There may have been other schools in the area, but those two I know for sure.
 
BigK72 said:
A few years ago, a few schools started partnering with a training company called Enhanced U. I know Tri-Village and Arcanum did for sure. Tri-Village used it for strength/speed/agility for most of its athletes (football coach didn’t; he trained his players). I believe Arcanum went in 100% with its athletics programs. I’m pretty sure they turned Enhanced U into a class for all athletes, and the coaches weren’t as involved as much as they once were. I’m not sure if either school still partners with them anymore; don’t hear about the company too much if at all now. There may have been other schools in the area, but those two I know for sure.
Click to expand...
so did enhanced U bring the programs to each school? or did they have a training facility for the kids do come to? also who paid for the training programs? the student or the school? were any of the coaches part of the program?
 
bigkat said:
so did enhanced U bring the programs to each school? or did they have a training facility for the kids do come to? also who paid for the training programs? the student or the school? were any of the coaches part of the program?
Click to expand...
Enhance U came to the schools. No idea how it was paid for, but the school paid for it. That’s the case for both. As far as coach involvement, I don’t think either school had a lot. It was kind of here go do this. IMO THAT is where the problem was, there wasn’t physical buy in from the coaches, which is why it failed. Like I said in my other post, Tri-Village’s football coach didn’t participate in it
 
Sometimes out-working your opponent is overrated. A lot of these kids are working hard but are underfed and underslept. Probably a factor as to why so many HS players look like they’ve never touched a weight in their lives. I fully believe in smarter, not harder when it comes to training.

If you want to be a serious program those 6am workouts on 7 hours of sleep and an empty stomach have to go. Yes, I’m projecting, but I’m also right
 
Last edited:
drew2732 said:
Sometimes out-working your opponent is overrated. A lot of these kids are working hard but are underfed and underslept. Probably a factor as to why so many HS players look like they’ve never touched a weight in their lives. I fully believe in smarter, not harder when it comes to training.

If you want to be a serious program those 6am workouts on 7 hours of sleep and an empty stomach have to go. Yes, I’m projecting, but I’m also right
Click to expand...
You hit the nail on the head there.

And most people have zero clue as to the academic demands many students have today, it's exponentially more than 10+ years ago.

We are simply expecting too much from our top 25% of kids on schools.
 
drew2732 said:
Back in my day we used to get up at 5:15 am for winter workouts on 7 hours of sleep (if that) for a 6 am workout, empty stomach, pretty intense stuff with box jumping and agility, deadlifts…it was no joke

Sometimes out-working your opponent is pointless. I would have been a much better player with proper nutrition and training times. Probably wrecked my hormones. It’s one thing I’m still slightly bitter about 15 years later

One of my buddy’s a few years ago was like yeah, dude, all of the very successful programs aren’t working out that early. It was dumb
Click to expand...
Interesting how different perspectives are with this as I know a few very successful programs in West Central Ohio who believe 6 am workouts is one of the major keys to their success.
 
cincifbfan said:
You hit the nail on the head there.

And most people have zero clue as to the academic demands many students have today, it's exponentially more than 10+ years ago.

We are simply expecting too much from our top 25% of kids on schools.
Click to expand...
what is the different between now and 10 years ago
 
BigK72 said:
Enhance U came to the schools. No idea how it was paid for, but the school paid for it. That’s the case for both. As far as coach involvement, I don’t think either school had a lot. It was kind of here go do this. IMO THAT is where the problem was, there wasn’t physical buy in from the coaches, which is why it failed. Like I said in my other post, Tri-Village’s football coach didn’t participate in it
Click to expand...
thats crazy..a big benefit of a GREAT workout program in a HS is how it brings the TEAM together.... in more ways then just pounding weights. Knowing that each worked their off and that they can depend on each other in the 4th quarter..... BRINGS MENTAL toughness!!!

and you GOT to have your coaches there in that room too!!!
 
bigkat said:
what is the different between now and 10 years ago
Click to expand...
There's a few things.

1. 1 is expanded course offerings.... There are SO many AP classes and College Credit Plus (CCP) classes, it's unreal. Those have been expanded exponentially since Covid, and many people, rightfully so are taking a boat load of college classes for free.

2. We are still putting too much pressure on kids going to college. It doesn't make sense. Essentially if you are not a complete A-hole in school, the vast majority of educators are still pushing "college degree is the only way to get ahead in life" narrative. I put this in a different box than the CCP, because that's free for the families. There's no life-crippling debt.

3. Lastly, with testing requirements in schools, students take way more useless tests than anyone should. So much class time is lost due to these state tests, practice tests, and other bogus assessments (like MAP, IOWA, etc.) that they are loaded up with homework due to curriculum being missed because of said testing.

These issues didn't exist on the scale they do now.
 
AugMer said:
Interesting how different perspectives are with this as I know a few very successful programs in West Central Ohio who believe 6 am workouts is one of the major keys to their success.
Click to expand...
I push back a little bit on this belief only because coaches notoriously struggle with surviviorship bias- meaning the ones who win a bunch of games sometimes wrongly attribute their success to certain causes.

Some teams can win 8 or 9 games a year if they have a bad weight room program. Some teams, with a great weight room program and culture, may only win 2-3 games a year. At the end of the day, if you have dudes, it doesn't matter nearly as much as some think about what you do or don't do in the weight room. Can a good weight room program develop more "dudes" for the program? Sure. And that's the goal for any good coach. But even the best development can't overcome a massive talent disparity.
 
4verts said:
I push back a little bit on this belief only because coaches notoriously struggle with surviviorship bias- meaning the ones who win a bunch of games sometimes wrongly attribute their success to certain causes.

Some teams can win 8 or 9 games a year if they have a bad weight room program. Some teams, with a great weight room program and culture, may only win 2-3 games a year. At the end of the day, if you have dudes, it doesn't matter nearly as much as some think about what you do or don't do in the weight room. Can a good weight room program develop more "dudes" for the program? Sure. And that's the goal for any good coach. But even the best development can't overcome a massive talent disparity.
Click to expand...
I always laugh at this excuse… team doesn’t do what it takes to win and the team that loses says “it’s only because you have better players”

Everyone knows better players usually wins, it’s the losers that just always make it an excuse without realizing what it takes to win.

Also for the teams that win only 2-3 games… would you rather show up with a bad team that committed to the weight room or a bad team that avoided it? At least you give yourself a chance with the weightroom.
 
AugMer said:
I always laugh at this excuse… team doesn’t do what it takes to win and the team that loses says “it’s only because you have better players”

Everyone knows better players usually wins, it’s the losers that just always make it an excuse without realizing what it takes to win.

Also for the teams that win only 2-3 games… would you rather show up with a bad team that committed to the weight room or a bad team that avoided it? At least you give yourself a chance with the weightroom.
Click to expand...
Football is a zero-sum game. Not everyone can win a bunch of games. To think that having a great weight room correlates exactly to winning a bunch of games would be foolish. Obviously not everyone can go 8-2 or 9-1. Even if every school in Ohio had elite programming, participation, and buy-in, there would be schools that go 1-9 or 2-8. It's just a reality of zero-sum games.

You have to have a good weight room program and culture to give yourself a chance. It's the price of admission in high school football, especially at the higher levels. But to think that "putting in the work" guarantees outcomes on Fridays, is cliche coach-speak.
 
cincifbfan said:
You hit the nail on the head there.

And most people have zero clue as to the academic demands many students have today, it's exponentially more than 10+ years ago.

We are simply expecting too much from our top 25% of kids on schools.
Click to expand...
Exponentially?
 
Crimson and Black said:
We all know what “outworking” your opponents means. It’s is obvious that is critical to success. My question is…do the vast majority of programs Put in the same amount of time and focus in the weight room? I realize, just like everything else in life, some do it better than others. I’m just wondering if the amount of time varies, does every program make off season weight training mandatory, is there a year round mandatory focus on the weight room. For me, watching any game it is apparent who is the stronger team especially after halftime. Also, what is the norm for in season weight training.
Click to expand...
I would say most programs make offseason workouts "highly encouraged". Also think it matters why you miss. Missing lifting for your in-season sports game/meet is different than missing because you just didn't want to be there. When I was in school, none of the winter sport athletes were to come to football lifting because their coaches wanted them at practice. In the spring, baseball players could only come on non-game days.

As for in-season lifting, we lifted every other day during 2-a-days (half the team one day and half the next. Your non-lifting day was extra conditioning). Once the season actually started we lifted on Saturday and Monday.
 
drew2732 said:
Sometimes out-working your opponent is overrated. A lot of these kids are working hard but are underfed and underslept. Probably a factor as to why so many HS players look like they’ve never touched a weight in their lives. I fully believe in smarter, not harder when it comes to training.

If you want to be a serious program those 6am workouts on 7 hours of sleep and an empty stomach have to go. Yes, I’m projecting, but I’m also right
Click to expand...
Always thought those 6:00 AM workouts were more of a deterrent to try to get kids from staying out late. We know kids and that does not matter. Most kids will stay up half the night no matter what time they are supposed to get up.

We always had a morning workout and an afternoon workout you could choose which one you went to. That made it ideal for kids who worked, had appointment or whatever.
 
A good strength and conditioning program for any athletic program should be focused on building strength, explosion, flexibility to prevent injury. Every great college strength coach I’ve heard talk about building a good program talks about how few non-contact injuries the football players have because of the work they are doing in the weight room.

They will also tell you that’s where your team becomes a TEAM because of the time the players spend together…at Lancaster they began bringing 7th and 8th graders into the offseason work outs with the varsity team to begin teaching form and technique a couple years ago. They are starting to see the payoff with younger players being more physically prepared to play at the high school level.
 
I would say most programs make offseason workouts "highly encouraged".

I am 100% in favor of an off-season lifting program. I 100% believe that coaches should be there. If a program's weight routine is effective then it doesn't really matter what type of workouts the kids do; they will make gains. My issue is when the quote above.

"Highly encouraged" can lead to limited numbers for other programs. The age of multiple sport athletes is diminishing. In smaller schools numbers are critical and if a coach "sways" their players to lift only it will have a dramatic effect on other programs.
 
disciple said:
"Highly encouraged" can lead to limited numbers for other programs. The age of multiple sport athletes is diminishing. In smaller schools numbers are critical and if a coach "sways" their players to lift only it will have a dramatic effect on other programs.
Click to expand...
Most coaches and schools will agree, off-season workouts are focused towards the kids that are not in a sport at that time. The kids that play basketball and run track for our school won't attend an off-season workout with the football team until June, because the coaches trust that they're working in a sport and all of our sports value the weight room
 
BirdDog10 said:
Most coaches and schools will agree, off-season workouts are focused towards the kids that are not in a sport at that time. The kids that play basketball and run track for our school won't attend an off-season workout with the football team until June, because the coaches trust that they're working in a sport and all of our sports value the weight room
Click to expand...
You are going to get some push back for this. There are some who believe the coaches should all be able to work in harmony to have the athletes make it to practice/lifting for each sport during all seasons.
 
CedarBuck92 said:
You are going to get some push back for this. There are some who believe the coaches should all be able to work in harmony to have the athletes make it to practice/lifting for each sport during all seasons.
Click to expand...
If a football coach with multi-sport athletes thinks that his kids should lift with him all year round and not with the sport that they're in (unless they have a training program that crosses over with multiple sports - IMO the best way to go) then that coach won't win very much and won't last long
 
I always shake my head at parents that question lifting that have a kid playing football.

Lets not work year round to get stronger yet throw them out there to play the most physical sport with kids and programs that take lifting dead serious.
 
BirdDog10 said:
If a football coach with multi-sport athletes thinks that his kids should lift with him all year round and not with the sport that they're in (unless they have a training program that crosses over with multiple sports - IMO the best way to go) then that coach won't win very much and won't last long
Click to expand...
The idea I am talking about would involve a 3 sport athlete having 3 different "practices" a day. So during the fall, Basketball lifting before school, football after school, and baseball throwing program late evening. I'm personally a fan of the athlete focusing on their current sport but others are not.

That said, a multi sport training program would be nice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top