NSCA 2021 Conference Abstracts

(1) Current Strength and Conditioning Practices of College Football: 2019–2020 C. Fitzgerald Northern Michigan University Purpose: The primary purpose of the current research study was to identify the common and unique aspects of college football strength and conditioning (S and C) practices during 2019–2020. This study focused on position-specific aspects of the training program and how training variables were manipulated during different mesocycles. Methods: A previously validated survey instrument was utilized. All collected data were entered into SPSS (v. 24.0 IBM) Statistical Analysis Program. All procedures were approved by the Institutional Review Board at Northern Michigan University (NMU). Results: The survey was completed by 92 subjects. Subjects had 12.53 ± 8.98 years of overall S and C coaching experience (n = 89) and 10.85 ± 8.61 years of S and C experience specifically at the college level (n = 91). The results revealed greater variations in the specific mesocycles of physical fitness testing occurred and which specific positions were tested, regarding specific fitness variables. Flexibility exercises were prescribed 4.06 ± 1.39 days per week (n = 80); most commonly during post-workouts periods (n = 71). Subjects reported prescribing speed training exercises 1.63 ± 1.08 days per week during the in-season (n = 65); compared to 2.90 ± 1.12 days per week during the off-season (n = 84). Plyometric exercises were prescribed 2.64 ± 0.94 days per week (n = 85). Subjects reported prescribing resistance training exercises 2.45 ± 0.50 days per week during the in-season (n = 85); compared to 3.78 ± 0.56 days per week during the off-season (n = 84). The top ranked exercise was the “squat” (n = 36); with the most important muscle group to develop being the “lower body” (n = 41). Subjects also indicated training session durations during the in-season and off-season, the duration of both the warm-up and cool down, and the number of mesocycles that made up the macrocycle. A total of 48 subjects reported that they individualized the training program based on specific position. The results revealed greater variations in the methodologies subjects utilized for training load, sets and reps, rest intervals, and exercise order. Most commonly subjects prescribed balance and stability, core training, Olympic weightlifting, injury prevention program, and recovery modalities to “all players” (n = 64; n = 80; n = 74; n = 81; n = 67 respectfully). Subjects reported pre-resistance training meals were consumed 1.24 ± 0.46 hours prior (n = 81); compared to post-resistance training meals being consumed 0.75 ± 0.51 hours post (n = 80). A total of 29 subjects indicated that supplements were administered to athletes. The most common supplement provided was protein (n = 22). Conclusions: These findings suggest that coaches consider position-specific characteristics when implementing various training interventions. Additionally, there is substantial amount of training variable manipulation during the yearly training program. This was the first comprehensive survey to analyze these variables at the college level. Practical Applications: This study describes the common and unique aspects of the college football S and C practices. This data should be useful for future research as a source for comparison. With this new source of information, researchers are able to continue to empirically investigate various aspects of training programing. Additionally, S and C coaches can review this data as a source for new ideas. (2) Differences in Countermovement Jump Height, Time to Takeoff, and Modified Reactive Strength Index Between Division III Collegiate Teams S. Connell, M. Chavez, S. Holt, and T. Suchomel Carroll University Purpose: To examine the differences in jump height (JH), time to takeoff (TTT), and modified reactive strength index (RSImod) between NCAA Division III collegiate teams. Methods: Three hundred four NCAA Division III athletes performed unloaded countermovement jumps (CMJ) on force plates as part of a long-term athlete monitoring program. Female athletes participated in either softball (n = 23), volleyball (n = 18), lacrosse (n = 23), soccer (n = 40), and basketball (n = 15), while male athletes participated in either football (n = 75), baseball (n = 40), lacrosse (n = 11), soccer (n = 44), or basketball (n = 15). The force-time data from the force plates were used to calculate JH and TTT. RSImod was calculated as the ratio between JH and TTT. A series of one-way ANOVA tests were used to compare the differences in JH, TTT, and RSImod between teams. Results: The descriptive data for each team and statistical differences in JH, TTT, and RSImod between teams are displayed in Table 1. There were no significant differences between the women's teams for JH (p > 0.05); however, the JH of all the men's teams was greater than all the women's teams (p ≤ 0.05). In addition, the JH of the men's football and basketball teams was significantly greater than the men's lacrosse team (p ≤ 0.05). The TTT of the women's lacrosse team (p = 0.013), as well as the men's football (p < 0.001), baseball (p < 0.001), and soccer (p < 0.001) teams, were significantly greater than women's softball. In addition, the TTT of men's baseball was significantly greater than men's basketball (p = 0.034). Similar to JH, there were no significant differences between the women's teams for RSImod (p > 0.05). In the of men's and basketball was significantly greater compared to all the women's teams (p ≤ 0.05). In addition, the RSImod of men's lacrosse was greater than women's lacrosse (p = 0.001) and basketball teams (p = the men's teams, the RSImod of football and basketball was greater compared to men's lacrosse (p ≤ 0.05). the RSImod of the men's basketball team was significantly greater than men's baseball (p = and soccer (p = Conclusions: The men's teams this study greater JH and RSImod compared to the women's however, differences were displayed all teams regarding TTT. RSImod to be by greater JH Practical Applications: differences in reactive strength characteristics between male and NCAA Division III collegiate teams, research is to these differences research should consider the jump used to specific JH, TTT, and RSImod and these characteristics should training that be used to JH and Countermovement jump time to and modified reactive strength index descriptive to and T. T. and of of of Purpose: The and of the used to regarding during The purpose of this study was to examine the and from the and as a of Methods: ± = ± = ± height = ± performed muscle of the and at and on the and the and of the were the The of the first and were used for The and were to of the A ANOVA was used to analyze the A ANOVA was used to differences for the were used when Results: The indicated a significant for and ± was greater (p < 0.001) than ± there was a significant indicated no from to in either at either during (p > and a significant (p = from ± to ± both and during there was a significant for Time there was a significant (p = from ± to ± and for there was a significant revealed a significant (p = in the from ± to ± and no significant (p > in the from ± to ± during findings were of during and the results that the was by than the the of for and there was a in and of the during there was no in of the during and during the in in with between the be to as the and in compared to the of the to Practical Applications: A of the time to or a greater resistance to experience the of as the should consider exercises to to the level of resistance as the to and M. University of University is of the most in which is the of the on various of basketball with and Purpose: The of this study were to (1) investigate the in variables between and (2) which variables the to a and variables when a Methods: male basketball = ± = ± = ± performed sets of while a at of variables in this study were from a of basketball and at the during the of the height between the and the prior to to of the at the of the between the of the and at the of the and between the and a to the at the time of and a were used to the differences in variables and in n = from n = Results: greater and and to (p < 0.001), while no was for the (p > 0.05). The in the or in of The variables most to the total of the were and the significant in the variables between made and the group of was the variable (p < Conclusions: of each of the variables can to level of with the and being most the to the between made and The to a or to with the during the of the in a greater number of made Practical Applications: The findings of this study basketball by of The and of the a to T. T. and of of of used to investigate the of muscle during various of resistance and is to Purpose: The purpose of this study was to examine the of a to on the and from the and Methods: ± = ± height = ± = ± performed and at of and by a to as a from the were performed in the as The was from the and during a ANOVA was used to the differences and a ANOVA was used to the differences for and and were used when Results: there was a significant for Time the ± was greater than the ± < there was a significant for Time that there was a significant (p < 0.001) when the was the ± compared to when the was the ± with no significant (p = for the when muscle there was no significant or for or Conclusions: There were in for and the The of in the from the and to muscle The of in from the and that there were no in the These findings that the in the and were to aspects of Practical Applications: can be used to examine the aspects of muscle during a to the of in Differences in Collegiate in M. S. and M. of University to athletes from are at for than athletes from reported that athletes are to than athletes. The of the is calculated based and Purpose: To compare the between and athletes in and Methods: A total of n = n = and n = n = Collegiate Division athletes was was calculated based the was compared by team of was used to identify differences teams, which were reported at the level < were calculated and were reported as Results: and characteristics are in Table 1. A significant (p < tests indicated that (p < 0.001) and (p < 0.001) had greater than Additionally, there were between and = = and = and were between and = and and = Conclusions: had a significantly than a was had a than and This be to the of as is a that and athletes with than that and differences in Practical Applications: is that with athletes from resistance training and in the training of and characteristics by The of on in to M. M. and University of a of of force and be a to and during is by and during the is Purpose: To the of and on Methods: (n = were in ± n = = ± height = ± = ± = ± or ± n = = ± height = ± = ± = ± All subjects completed a exercise session at either at or at be was for sets to The first of and the of were data was collected with a force data was collected with a data was from force-time data a with a of were as = = first = = = and = of Time duration between was A ANOVA was used to and differences in force and time (p < 0.05). Results: A significant was for duration (p = = up tests indicated that duration with (p = = and that was in for first (p < = and (p = = A for time was for (p = = with was different time (p = a was = with aspects of to be during the as training at or and the of the durations were different from first to this be by during the and to as group differences were for Practical Applications: and the of be when training at or with and to and is coaches should consider to to and for and time for the and The of on Countermovement Jump in Collegiate M. and University A countermovement jump (CMJ) is used in to there is regarding which variables be most to Purpose: The purpose of this was to investigate the of from a training session on in collegiate football athletes. Methods: collegiate football athletes participated in this study with testing periods at hours and The was a strength training session by a conditioning session was variables were as either jump or Results: subjects displayed in most jump variables jump and while to in jump variables. jump variables were with while jump variables significantly with and Table Conclusions: was that as of a training session countermovement jump variables with from to both and variables were by from the that variables were to a greater with variables significantly while variables Practical Applications: monitoring in collegiate football variables as time ratio and duration be to and with into the time of and and for and hours The a that Similar and and of of of the The of is common in training however, there is research regarding the muscle of exercises in Purpose: This study the muscle of different during a exercise in had experience with Methods: male subjects ± = ± height = ± = ± and = ± completed the a of subjects of the was used to the muscle of the and during the and of each The data were and as a of a muscle The variable was the muscle of the and of the to be The of the were a one-way of (p ≤ 0.05). Results: The results revealed no significant differences between the muscle during the = = Conclusions: data that the is a exercise the and to the Practical Applications: The be and exercise for to in a and of a Countermovement C. C. and T. University of in to physical be useful in physical of the of and Similar can be to by the both and of and during a be as useful in a training to the and of a to be during unloaded countermovement jumps Purpose: The study were to the and of a for and during unloaded Methods: = ± height = ± = ± completed on session performed of a by of The was on the of the during all and were by the and a force The was was a force the and Results: to were for = = = = = = and = = were between the and force for = = = = = = and = = The was calculated for = = = = = = and = = the the is a and in and during unloaded Practical Applications: Strength and conditioning should consider in of and with and for and during a of Jump Between in Collegiate Female M. M. and University of The jump is a to in the of the unique of how jump can based on can in both the of as well as training Purpose: the purpose of this was to compare countermovement (CMJ) and jump between the that on jump during Methods: Division collegiate volleyball athletes participated in this ± height ± ± completed a up by and and All data was collected a force at during testing first performed with a the in a position. used a countermovement and to jump to a to the of were to of to for of during a rest were performed with the as the were to to a and that for prior to to jump to a height the of a was to no countermovement was a displayed a was were All were by of testing were performed a the Jump and were calculated for were used to statistical between Results: significant differences were between of the variables of in both the and Conclusions: the jump is a to the physical of both the of differences in the are in the the had in of the variables The of significant can be to the group which is a of team in the Additionally, the during the the findings in this This is different from the both during training and Practical Applications: The results of this that when training collegiate volleyball to the athletes should be than the of the position. of on Countermovement Jump in Division Collegiate C. and University of jump is for volleyball jump to during each of a volleyball Division volleyball the to a or for during is important to these the jump force-time characteristics in Purpose: To examine the of different of on countermovement jump characteristics in Division collegiate volleyball Methods: from NCAA Division volleyball team were for this testing to injury or time All data was completed for the ± ± ± ± ± The was on a on the was performed and of a countermovement jump were The top top or was for the duration of each testing of was prior to were a force for each jump and was to calculate force-time were SPSS statistical Statistical was a at = Results: was was There was no significant between in ± ± ± = ± ± ± = ± ± ± = duration ± ± ± = duration ± ± ± = jump height ± ± ± = force ± ± ± = ± ± ± = ± ± ± = ± ± ± = force as a of ± ± ± = force as a of ± ± ± = or ± ± ± = Conclusions: no significant between in of the force-time characteristics of the countermovement Practical Applications: the tested, can the they most differences in jump or research should consider to there is to volleyball of for of and The University of that during both and of the a on the of the used for of these to with regarding Purpose: The purpose of this study was to examine the of for the of during the when compared to as a Methods: A collegiate basketball = = = performed sets of (n = A and a with were used to the from a of data at was used to the variables and compare with the variables from the between and a to the at the time of the at between and with at the of the and at between and with at the of the and were used to examine significant of and between the Results: The results are in Table 1. The all made and and significant differences between the of were for and variables. the of in was the in the variable was no significant was for the Conclusions: the in the be to the of for can that the as a and for of Practical Applications: The to regarding which in to be be of for and long-term athlete of the variables between and in in Division and M. S. M. and S. University of at as the in between Current how the in between to and of there is a of research the in these and to Purpose: To examine the in and athletes during Methods: This study Division and completed sets of at different time during The of a to prior to the of the with the time was used for were used to and were the in the of the variables and the data of the variables were calculated the index were to SPSS for data variables were the tests were to differences in the of variables. Results: the there were no significant differences from to post for the = = = time = = = time = > = Additionally, there were no significant differences in time = = = for the time = = = tests that while on there was a in speed and these were significant = = = = = = There was a significant in time = = = this was the was of Additionally, there were no significant in = = = time = = = time = = = in the = > = Conclusions: on the results of this a off-season and athletes or Practical Applications: to continue implementing off-season training to be to to time and Additionally, should be to be to during A of the Between Collegiate and S. M. S. M. and S. University of at The is a of that describes The is useful for strength and conditioning to during to be a in between collegiate athletes at different Purpose: To compare differences in variables collegiate up to and in Methods: Division and athletes = = participated in this Subjects completed a Subjects were to with the with the was used to calculate the ratio of and in ratio of The was used for statistical or tests were used to differences between each group and the were calculated with for and for Results: differences were for = = = force = = = speed = = = ratio of force = = = = = = and = = had significantly for the = = = and the in the ratio of force = = = Conclusions: There are differences in all variables between and with to had a greater for ratio of and and for the and in the ratio of These differences be to differences in training between training and Practical Applications: The be used to the of and athletes and to to a of of M. and of Purpose: To compare the to a of resistance exercise between resistance and Methods: (n = ± ± ± ± and (n = ± ± ± ± completed a of the a of and days of to and to were during the of The exercise of sets of of the at with rest between to with each the was and was for was collected exercise hours and 48 hours number and ratio and number and ratio and and number and ratio and were by a were a group time Results: A of time was for in = = = with in from to (p < 0.001) and a to at (p = were for = = = and = = = in from to (p = 0.001) and at (p < 0.001) to at (p = from to (p = in at (p = to at (p = differences in were between at in from to (p = to at (p < 0.001), at (p = and to at (p = in from to (p = to at (p = and to at (p = differences in were between at differences were for or Conclusions: in were between and and to resistance exercise In the in exercise was by while the in of in all while to at in Practical Applications: testing during the when is at differences in the to resistance exercise are The in in a recovery compared to as these are in to muscle coaching consider recovery with male athletes compared to athletes. in NCAA Division and University is a in for team both during and and coaches to the by athletes in different Purpose: The purpose of this study was to the of NCAA Division lacrosse during in-season to positions and and between Methods: was and during the first of the rest of the was to for all athletes in at of both (n = variables total number of top and A of with was used to compare between and Statistical was a at ≤ To were and were calculated for Results: data are in Table 1. significant was calculated for of the variables a for time was for both (p < = and (p < = In the a significant in (p < = and (p < = also had a significant in (p = = significant differences were between positions for A was calculated between and for total = A was between and = and and = for Conclusions: There were than differences in during positions and between There was of time for and to the of Practical Applications: can data for to strength and conditioning to the athletes are for the specific of to the in monitoring be to to in the as or data between and of a on T. and of at of training is a of exercise by of exercise with recovery This exercise as to training with overall training time There are various for and that Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate the of a based program on Methods: previously ± = ± = ± were into a (n = or (n = was prior to and the were all subjects a was also from the which was used to program the in the group performed training each sets of exercise at with a performed The group was prescribed training and were to continue current physical training session was by the for on the To examine the of the on the in of was used to examine group on the variable while for The level was at ≤ and and the are also Results: for ± ± there was a significant group = < = on the the in was significantly for the = compared to the = to findings suggest that of a in previously These data to the of which the of based for in to training and durations to Practical Applications: was to with training time training a greater to results This exercise be to of time as a primary to based and be in group The of of on of and University in during are with in and is to and greater suggest that muscle and both by and by in and of is to force during In addition, in and and of Purpose: To prior to a or Methods: ± ± ± ± ± and were in session To and completed a at for were collected in the of the In session had a rest prior to the In session was to the and for prior to the was calculated as to for between The validated was used with to during the in both were used for was calculated for time and of while are were used to compare to for all variables. was at Results: speed was ± significant differences were between for or (p > 0.05). Conclusions: of no in or were findings prior that no no in variables a of The of in to ± time ± Practical Applications: prior to a to or in is that to of These findings suggest that is a that can be used prior to a to or the of the on and and University of at the there is a in muscle and to the in This in of and The of on muscle and previously Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare muscle and muscle between and Methods: ± ± ± ± by n = n = n = of the on the were and for were and were for were to muscle and one-way ANOVA with were used to compare muscle and between Results: There was a significant in both (p = and (p = between revealed that was significantly in ± = ± = when compared to ± = ± = was significantly in ± = ± = when compared with ± = ± Conclusions: The current findings suggest that both muscle and muscle are by the The from to be the most important to for muscle and with muscle Practical Applications: and be to the in muscle and in muscle to during during this time to to of in a C

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.