Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'strength'.
Found 4 results
..I’ve been looking to see if Phillip has been told to pound sand yet...anyone heard...? His 45% body fat linemen is a stand-alone metric itself, on top of the obvious evidence the whole country already saw..no core push power whatsoever...and Our D line get shoved to side like a HS JV squad...I heard all the hype about stoltenburg in offseason how “strong” he got...BS..he gets moved aside like a tree that looks the part but has NO trunk whatsoever..
..the problems in Husker football program are complex, deep and multifaceted. A strong case could be made the whole entire football system is absolutely broken and current approach, methodologies etc have and are a failure.. ...want to discuss a major issue, and it’s a sad one indeed, because it’s an area that absolutely be controlled in contrast to athletic ability etc..im talking about the players physical strength. More specifically the offensive line, however all players are part of same system so all players are in view with this, however it’s most glaring with O-line.. ...a strong case could me made this is the physically weakest team in modern husker history (1980-present) ...we all know in general athletic ability, they are probably last in the big 10, however I’m talking about what can be controlled, and that’s the physical strength of the players.. this offensive line is and the whole team in general reflect a failed weight lifting and strength approach. I first just observe the players overall body composition, the linemen has no arms, chests, shoulder mass..I see tackles with fat flappy arms, can’t even see the triceps muscle..they all carrying about 35 pounds of bad, very bad weight (fat) ..I can’t understand what’s going on..I understand this isn’t a bodybuilder sport, I get it, however I allot can be discerned just by the composition of these men’s body composition...I see the whole o-line carries about 30 pounds of absolute horrible weight (fat)..I can’t understand the why behind this.. i watched he’s the huskers peers closey this season, in particular the penn state/ Ohio state game yesterday and observed both teams linemen profile..the contrast to what husker are is mind numbing, they reflect a successful powerlifting and nutrition program, they have huge cores (butt, thighs) and chest and shoulders, which having these 4 areas are a must for a offensive linemen. the husker o line are pathetic in strength..again I don’t get this, how strong these players get can be changed, I understand coaches can’t make them more “athletic” so to speak but they can build there bodies.. ...is any one else seeing this..? The local reporters are historically very insightful, detailed and accurate in their articles and I haven’t seen any of them write about this glaring, easy to see problem..
For your consideration.. You don't get stronger in the gym. That's where stress is applied. You get stronger outside the gym by recovering and eating well. I find the older you get, the more you have to consider how to recover best and what dosage of stress (aka training) is required to drive progress. Sometimes I like to think of training as a medicine. You need to titrate the dose of training to a level that causes adaptation so that you can apply the next dose sooner than later. Apply too much too soon, you won't make long term progress, and burn out or die (well, not really but you get it). Apply too little and you won't drive progress either. In my experience, it takes some time to learn how your body and mind react to training to know what was too much, what's too little and what's about right. Starting with a good training program will get you at least pointed in the right direction. Generally, younger people can recover very quickly and be ready for more training quicker than older people. The older you get (read 40+ years, probably), you need to look to progress slower but progress none the less. This is where proper programming can come in. A lot of this stuff is described in Seyle's general adaptation syndrome. Check out the books Practical Programming or Starting Strength for a primer on it.
Was looking at the rankings for this week, and saw this nugget (courtesy of Boyd's World): Now, why do Iterative Strength Ratings (ISRs) matter? Because they provide a clearer picture of team (and conference) quality over the Strength of Schedule (SoS) or the Ratings Power Index (RPI), and it's becoming a bigger factor in how teams are perceived (and ultimately ranked). And for a breakdown of ISRs by conference for the same week, check this out: Middle of the pack is not too bad for the Big 10--could be a lot worse, but yes...for the 'half-empty' folks on this board, it could be better as well. As for RPIs, since the NCAA still uses this formula, here's the latest (pseudo) RPIs for this week: Of note, Illinois is the next Big 10 team, at #65, for Boyd's (pseudo) RPIs. And while RPIs will take a hit, Nebraska and/or Illinois could get a good assist by beating Purdue, and if Illinois comes in a solid third in the Big 10 (behind what appears to be a Nebraska/Purdue battle for the conference title), there is a good (not great--just good) possibility of landing three teams from the B1G in the tournament this year.