scholarly journals Can Monitoring Training Load Deter Performance Drop-off During Off-season Training in Division III American Football Players?

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (7) ◽  
pp. 1745-1754
Author(s):  
Ashley R. Kildow ◽  
Glenn Wright ◽  
Ryan M. Reh ◽  
Salvador Jaime ◽  
Scott Doberstein
2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deborah L. Feairheller ◽  
Kristin R. Aichele ◽  
Joyann E. Oakman ◽  
Michael P. Neal ◽  
Christina M. Cromwell ◽  
...  

Studies report that football players have high blood pressure (BP) and increased cardiovascular risk. There are over 70,000 NCAA football players and 450 Division III schools sponsor football programs, yet limited research exists on vascular health of athletes. This study aimed to compare vascular and cardiovascular health measures between football players and nonathlete controls. Twenty-three athletes and 19 nonathletes participated. Vascular health measures included flow-mediated dilation (FMD) and carotid artery intima-media thickness (IMT). Cardiovascular measures included clinic and 24 hr BP levels, body composition,VO2 max, and fasting glucose/cholesterol levels. Compared to controls, football players had a worse vascular and cardiovascular profile. Football players had thicker carotid artery IMT (0.49 ± 0.06 mm versus 0.46 ± 0.07 mm) and larger brachial artery diameter during FMD (4.3±0.5 mm versus3.7±0.6 mm), but no difference in percent FMD. Systolic BP was significantly higher in football players at all measurements: resting (128.2±6.4 mmHg versus122.4±6.8 mmHg), submaximal exercise (150.4±18.8 mmHg versus137.3±9.5 mmHg), maximal exercise (211.3±25.9 mmHg versus191.4±19.2 mmHg), and 24-hour BP (124.9±6.3 mmHg versus109.8±3.7 mmHg). Football players also had higher fasting glucose (91.6±6.5 mg/dL versus86.6±5.8 mg/dL), lower HDL (36.5±11.2 mg/dL versus47.1±14.8 mg/dL), and higher body fat percentage (29.2±7.9% versus23.2±7.0%). Division III collegiate football players remain an understudied population and may be at increased cardiovascular risk.


2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 42-50
Author(s):  
Lotfi Zeghari ◽  
Hicham Moufti ◽  
Amine Arfaoui ◽  
Yassir Habki

The aim of this paper is to use a training load quantification tool (RPE) to evaluate if the training load programmed by the coach is appropriate to the characteristics of these footballers. The study was conducted at the football section of the Sale Sports Association, Morocco, on a sample of 8 football players who practice in the club of the Association, aged between 18 and 21 years, the study was established during a mesocycle in a period from 18/03/2019 to 20/04/2019. For the quantification of the training load (TL) we chose the (RPE) tool, where each footballer must give his own perception of the effort felt in each training session, taking into consideration also the duration of the session. This will allow us to calculate the intensity of the session estimated, on a scale from 0 to 10. Based on the results of the quantification of training load for the 8 footballers, we note that in the majority of the cases, the acute load (AL) is higher than the chronic load (CL) at the end of each week. On the other hand, for the monotony index (MI) that provides information on the negative adaptations of training and overtraining, we note that it present a high value among the majority of footballers (1.8UA<2.1UA). For the average of the ratio of the training load: acute/chronic, we note that for the first three footballers the training loads are higher compared to the others. The monitoring training load help to better conceptualize the adaptations of the athlete to the training, and also allows the prediction of the performance.


2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 66-73 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryan T. Li ◽  
Michael J. Salata ◽  
Sagar Rambhia ◽  
Joe Sheehan ◽  
James E. Voos

Background: The relationship of training load to injury using wearable technology has not been investigated in professional American football players. The primary objective of this study was to determine the correlation between player workload and soft tissue injury over the course of a football season utilizing wearable global positioning system (GPS) technology. Hypothesis: Increased training load is associated with a higher incidence of soft tissue injuries. Study Design: Case-control study. Level of Evidence: Level 3. Methods: Player workloads were assessed during preseason and regular-season practice sessions using GPS tracking and triaxial accelerometry from 2014 to 2016. Soft tissue injuries were recorded during each season. Player workload during the week of injury (acute) and average weekly workload during the 4 weeks (chronic) prior to injury were determined for each injury and in uninjured position-matched controls during the same week. A matched-pairs t test was used to determine differences in player workload. Subgroup analysis was also conducted to determine whether observed effects were confounded by training period and type of injury. Results: In total, 136 lower extremity injuries were recorded. Of the recorded injuries, 101 injuries with complete GPS and clinical data were included in the analysis. Injuries were associated with greater increases in workload during the week of injury over the prior month when compared with uninjured controls. Injured players saw a 111% (95% CI, 66%-156%) increase in workload whereas uninjured players saw a 73% (95% CI, 34%-112%) increase in workload during the week of injury ( P = 0.032). Individuals who had an acute to chronic workload ratio higher than 1.6 were 1.5 times more likely to sustain an injury relative to time- and position-matched controls (64.6% vs 43.1%; P = 0.004). Conclusion: Soft tissue injuries in professional football players were associated with sudden increases in training load over the course of a month. This effect seems to be especially pronounced during the preseason when player workloads are generally higher. These results suggest that a gradual increase of training intensity is a potential method to reduce the risk of soft tissue injury. Clinical Relevance: Preseason versus regular-season specific training programs monitored with wearable technology may assist team athletic training and medical staff in developing programs to optimize player performance.


2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew R. Jagim ◽  
Glenn A. Wright ◽  
Jacob Kisiolek ◽  
Margaret T. Jones ◽  
Jonathan M. Oliver

Background: To what extent pre-season training camp may impact body composition and metabolism in collegiate football players is unknown. Objective: The purpose of this study was to assess changes in body composition, dietary habits and metabolism following pre-season training in Division III American football players. Methods: Seventeen Division III football players (Ht: 1.80±0.6 m; BM: 99.1±60.1 kg; FFM: 79.7±8.6 kg; BF%: 19.3±8.6%) had their body composition and resting energy expenditure (REE) assessed in a fasted state (>12 hr.) before and upon completion of pre-season training. Pre-season training consisted of 14 days of intense training. Results: Linemen had a higher body mass, fat-free mass (FFM), and fat mass likely contributing to the higher REE (p < 0.01). A main effect for time was observed regarding changes in FFM (p<0.001) and body fat % (p = 0.024). A significant interaction was observed for FFM with linemen experiencing a greater reduction in FFM (-1.73±0.37 vs. -0.43±0.74 kg; p<0.001). Linemen (L) experienced a greater reduction in REE compared to non-linemen (NL) (L: -223.0±308.4 vs. NL: 3.27±200.1 kcals; p=0.085) albeit not statistically significant. Non-linemen consumed a higher amount of daily calories (p=0.036), carbohydrates (p=0.046), and protein (p=0.024) when expressed relative to body mass. Conclusion: The greater size in linemen prior to pre-season likely contributed to their higher REE. However, the multiple training bouts appeared to reduce REE in linemen, which may have been driven by the observed losses in FFM and low protein intake. Further, pre-season training increased body fat % in all players.


Author(s):  
Andrew R. Jagim ◽  
Glenn A. Wright ◽  
Clayton L. Camic ◽  
Jacob N. Kisiolek ◽  
Joel Luedke ◽  
...  

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jesse A. Steinfeldt ◽  
Courtney Reed ◽  
Clint M. Steinfeldt

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document