Yes it is but without the bar to balance the weight which also offers an easier grip. This is why the tire flip incorporates more muscles. Actually.
don't we all
Yes it is but without the bar to balance the weight which also offers an easier grip. This is why the tire flip incorporates more muscles. Actually.
Even though it's not perfectly balanced, due to various things, let's say it is. So you would be activating all muscles required for the movement. Your arguement is just wrong.
Now if you're talking about total work done, then it depends on the difference in the loads, reps and distance traveled. It's complicated.
It's not complicated and no matter how you word your arguement , you are wrong. Total work done is what every fucking move is about so of course that is what I am talking about!
was about total work done, they would all be doing CrossFit. You're saying flipping a tire of the same load in the same exact path requires more work than a "balanced" barbell of the same load.
No, you're wrong.
Your statement that he is just "wrong" is presumptuous. This is an issue that even the most experienced and respected experts in the fitness field disagree on, so how can you be so definite in your statement?
The tire flip, much like some of the Olympic moves, activates just about every single muscle in your body. Both offer immense benefits in this regard. The main benefit of the Oly lifts over the flip is that because there is, in fact, more balance, easier grip, etc., you can train to failure (although power lifters usually do not do so). The main advantage of the tire is the complete lack of balance and the awkwardness of grip, which activates the core and foreawm muscles in different ways. Not better, not worse - but there are differences.
Personally, I think that the ideal training regimin would include both Oly movements and "body in motion" movements like the tire. But, like I said in my original post, unlike Barwis, nobody is offering to pay me $250,000 a year to train their team, so my opinion is just that - my opinion.
If you are replying to me I only said he is wrong because he said I was. Not very mature I know. So basically in your opinion it is a draw? I think you hit the nail on the head anyway. A blend of both would achieve the best results.
These debates between Michgoblue, RomeyJDogg, and DennisBlundon are EPIC.
I don't know whether I'm learning new information or just absorbing bullshit, but I sure as hell am enjoying this. I especially like when someone responds with (paraphrasing here) "you're a fucking idiot."
I'm not being /s. This is a very enjoyable end to my workweek.
What you are absorbing is six of one, half a dozen of the other, more or less.
I assume you were joking about point #1, michgoblue. Bench, curls, etc. have nothing to do with olympic lifting. Olympic lifting consists of clean & jerk and snatch. Nothing more. As others have pointed out, derivatives of those lifts, such as power cleans, power snatches, snatch balances, high pulls, front squats and high bar back squats are often used in training.
There are a truckload of benefits that come with olympic lifting, but often it's neglected in S&C for sports for one main reason -- oly is technical as hell and hard to teach, especially if the one doing the teaching does not have a long history in oly with damn near perfect technique to fall back on. The cost/benefit is hard to justify for some. A coach may feel that the time spent learning oly would be better spent on movements that don't have the same crazy learning curve, but may offer 80-90% of the benefits.
That article about Wellman from SignOnSanDiego that AT linked to should be required reading for all mammals.
The upshot - if you feared a drop in performance based on Barwis' relocating the wolf's lair, think again. This guy sounds for real.
My favorite passage:
Asked about the eagerness with which his new charges subscribed to his philosophy, Wellman, initially taken aback by the Aztecs' high percentage of body fat, said: “To some degree, you don't have a choice, because it's not a democracy."
Couple this intensity with the investments in equipment necessary to get us out of the Bronze Age, and we ought to be in good shape....
I am surprised they don't emphasize the Olympic lifts. I thought everyone did that now. I hope the lineman don't get slower off the ball.
See my reply to the comment a few up (the reply to the post with the videos) - the moves that he is using, while not technically Olympic - offer the same benefits, and may, actually, be more effective.
I still have the scares from that brief period of time when I, as a guy in my twenties with a policital science degree, appeared to know more about modern strength and conditioning training than did Gittleson.
but don't worry, because you don't.
Gittleson told Mike Massey to bulk up by eating pizza.
here to not be a dick, so don't take this as a slight to you. Do you realize how hard it is for these guys to get the required caloric intake to add weight? Think about it, they are probably in class, at practice, in weight room or watching film most of their time. Plus, how many dudes will actually cook ahead and stuff tupperwares into their backpacks for the entire day of eating (like I did)?
It makes complete sense, actually. Pizza is a caloric dense food that will be a big help in getting to the athletes caloric goals. Are there better ways? SURE! But, you see where I'm going with this, right?
why not use them? Can't the players usually eat food provided by the university?
In the bigger picture, it didn't take much to see that Michigan in Carr's later years was taking highly-ranked recruits but putting relatively slow and unathletic teams on the field. Gittleson was behind. My point is that we, as Michigan fans, have come by our curiosity about the S&C coach honestly. Similarly, we'll all be spooked about M's place-kicker next year.
Did you read what I wrote? Yeah, they can eat at the training table, but that's, what, 3 meals a day? There's only so many cals you can shove in at three sittings. And like I said before, these guys probably aren't packing their food and eating in between dorm feedings. Therefore, they need moar calorieZ. In comes pizza. Make sense?
In a perfect world, every player packs 6 meals a day with a ton of clean food. That isn't realistic. Pizza is easy.
I believe Barwis addressed this problem with the chocolate milk dispenser.
You raise a good point, and one that most on this board probably do not know. To gain real muscle mass, it is not enough to eat 3 square meals per day. It is critical to eat a meal containing protein (as well as carbs and some fat) every 3 hours.
I personally use protein shakes for 2 meals per day and bring 2 to work with me. But it is a hard thing to keep up with. Enter, Pizza, which does have some protein and a ton of other calories.
This, however, is the best way to go. Sure, all athletes, even in the pros, have pizza from time to time. But the fact that Git found it acceptable that our players were using pizza as a staple food was a concern. Over the past 10-15 years, there has been a huge realization amongst the broader fitness community that nutrition is perhaps as important as training. Sure, pizza adds weight, but much of that weight is fat. At the end of the Carr era, our players looked soft. Pizza surely played a part in this, so I think that it is a fair criticism of Git that he didn't focus in on proper nutrition.
You have heard of GNC right? In this day and age of supplements you don't have to cook the perfect meal, you can drink it. You will get your calories and protein all in one big gulp and typically around a dollar per serving. BCAA's as well as vitamins are also added in to make this fool proof for any student athlete. You see where I am going wih this, right?
I certainly do. Is that an option for these guys though? Do they have the money for that, etc etc. I don't know the logistics, so idk.
And, the nutritional value of most weight gainer mixes is crap anyways (lots of high GI carbs), so there's not much of a difference between that and pizza, IMHO.
Weight gainer mixes are shit, so we agree on that. Muscle Milk is a protein drink giving you 25 grams of protein and around 350 calories. It also incorporates good fat into the shake all for around 85 cents a serving. You can't buy a meal anywhere with that kind of nutrition that cheap.
Why would you start a post with "not to be a jerk" if the only purpose of your reply was to be a jerk? I am pretty sure that he didn't actually believe that he knew more than Git. He was kidding.
I was just making a joke about the bad old days.
Many, many programs don't perform Olympic lifts. At least, 80% of the NFL doesn't, Penn State doesn't, USF didn't, Tennessee doesn't now, and many other schools. Many programs around the country use HIT training.
You mean other places use HIT too?! They are behind the times as well. /s
I'm not a fan of HIT, but to each their own I suppose.
His name is Hecklinski.
Is the WR coach.
I know, but he spelled it wrong was my point. My fault for being vague.
I'm not sure what everybody's love affair is with oly movements. They are highly technical lifts (and FWIW, the vids I've seen of BG doing cleans under MB is not safe/good form) that have a higher probability of injury and are simply one way to recruit fast twitch fibers. That being said, there are many ways to skin a cat.
Another (perhaps safer) way to activate fast twitch fibers is a higher load, more controlled movement, like a back squat, say for instance an intensity > 85% 1RM. Even oly guys do heavy back and front squats because it carries over to the oly movements. The main thing to recognize is: will whatever lifts they perform translate to the field? I believe this is namely a product of coaching/football technique on the field and no S&C program will teach that. Again, there's only so much S&C can do. It's simply preparing the athlete to perform.
So, don't get too caught up in what "super secret methods" an S&C guy is using because there are many different paths to the same end point. Some of the best programs I've personally run are very basic. It's kind of like the whole fitness community. Everyone is always talking about the "most groundbreaking" techniques, when really it all comes do to the basics. Are the guys working hard, getting stronger, increasing flexibility, increasing cardio capacity and increasing their lean mass : total mass ratio.
So, don't get too caught up in what "super secret methods" an S&C guy is using because there are many different paths to the same end point. Some of the best programs I've personally run are very basic. It's kind of like the whole fitness community. Everyone is always talking about the "most groundbreaking" techniques, when really it all comes do to the basics. Are the guys working hard, getting stronger, increasing flexibility, increasing cardio capacity and increasing thehaveir lean mass : total mass ratio.
Half the programs in the country truly believe they have the best S&C coach in the business. Most of them are probably right.
When you think about how many personal trainers are out there, and then realize that there are only 120 I-A strength coaches, it's pretty clear that you've got to have a very distinguished résumé to get any of these jobs. The idea that there's some great gulf in performance from one school's workouts to the next is pretty hard to imagine.
Michigan was very far behind when it came to S&C under Carr there at the end. Those of us who want to know what the S&C coach is up to are motivated by Michigan's recent history of turning fast recruits into stiff, slow, robotic players.
And we were so far behind that we only won 75% of our games under Carr and produced a boatload of NFL Draft picks. This is all relative. Mike Gittleson is almost certainly better than 99% of the personal trainers you could find. His methods may be 1.268% less efficient than Mike Barwis's, but the difference is virtually unnoticeable. For fans to create thread after thread after thread on this topic is silly.
Michigan won 75% of its games when it had better recruits the vast majority (95%) of the time. I agree that Gittleson is likely better than 99% of personal trainers out in the world. I disagree that the difference between Gittleson and other S&C coaches was unnoticeable. I always thought Michigan looked surprisingly slow given the recruits it brought in. Others agreed. I remember Herbstreit saying something along those lines.
Further: A. I did not create a thread; B. I am not responsible for other people's posts; C. you are not the boss of me; D. I am taking my ball and going home; E. harumph.
This guy is an amazing S&C coach. One of the best in the country. I have a friend who went to SDSU and worked for the athletic department and he said the workouts Wellman would run them through were unbelievable.
1-3 ounce throwbacks.
Sure has made me bigger!
whenever I'm back in Detroit I drink Molson Canadian, with Labatt as a default but not as a first choice.
At home, I only drink fancy beers and mostly white liquor.
Used to alternate between that and Rolling Rock, then they bought RR. I heard they don't make RR in Latrobe anymore, so I quit drinking it.
I heard that UM changed the weight room and took out the food station. (Chocolate milk dispensing machine? More? I don't know.) Any idea why the new guy didn't want that around?
IMO, the most important quality S&C coaches is their ability to motivate players to push themselves to new physical limits. The actual program itself is secondary. Philosophy is great, but the work is what makes players really improve.
In Rocky Long, San Diego State football coach Brady Hoke hired a defensive coordinator who for 11 years as head coach at New Mexico made Mountain West Conference offenses as edgy as a parakeet at an alley cat convention.
In Al Borges, Hoke hired an offensive coordinator capable of turning a play drawn up in the dirt into one that turns up in the playbooks of his peers, a man who could find an end zone in midtown Manhattan."
Holy hell did Fred jackson write this?
...there are as many theories of S&C as there are facilities to train. That is not to say that there isn't a right and wrong in every action...just a lot of room for debate. One of the reasons I wear earbuds is to prevent the casual meta S&C blab that can take away from actually working out.
Has any S&C coach ever won a national championship under different head coaches or at different schools for that matter? We've discussed this before and I don't think anyone came up with one.
Off season workouts also bond the team together. Barwis is to be credited with doing that very well. It sounds like Wellman is capable of doing the same. Hopefully all the concern with method doesn't transcend the team building quality that probably correlates more to winning than anything else.
I think we are totally underemphasizing the importance of MUSCLE CONFUSION!!