h~~~k--+~L - OhioLINK ETD Center

A Comparison of Collegiate Basketball Players Off-Season Strength and Conditioning Programs

Edward A. Dreyer

Submitted to the Master of Arts in Education Program of Defiance College

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Education

August, 2005

L::::or h~~~k--+~L

Dr. Suzanne McFarland, Coordinator~ Master of Arts in Education Program

Chair, Division of Education

AIZ~HIV~~ vnF6D "" 0

GV <::> 11 ""

C1>

~ e'~5" 3S "'- 'LOGS Abstract w If)

Q • '1.

Seven male college basketball players enrolled in a rural, faith-based institution located

in Northwest Ohio participated in this project. All experienced the two off-season

strength and conditioning programs in the summers of 2003 and 2004. The purpose of

the study was to determine the benefits of a modified, structured off-season weightlifting

and conditioning regimen within a Division III men's college basketball program. There

were increases in body weight and performance in the bench press exercise from the

modified strength and conditioning program completed in summer of2004.

111

This work is dedicated to all Defiance College students who have accepted the challenge

of writing the Master ' s Capstone and the faculty and staff who have assisted them along

their journey to achieve their goals.

IV

Acknowledgments

I wish to acknowledge all the people who lend their support, guidance, and effort toward

the successful completion of this project. Sincere appreciation is expressed to my

advisor, Dr. Tim Rickabaugh, for his constant direction and encouragement from the

project's initial stages to its completion. Special thanks are also extended to Dr. JoAnn

Burkhardt and Dr. Suzanne McFarland for their helpful suggestions and criticisms

throughout the development of the research and writing. Sincere gratitude is also

expressed to my parents and brother whose encouragement and understanding served as

an inspiration toward the accomplishment of this important education goal.

v

Table of Contents

Page

Chapter I: Introduction 1

Statement of the Problem 2

Research Questions 2

Justification 3

Definition of Terms 3

Limitations and Appropriate Use of Results 4

Chapter II: Review of the Literature 5

Chapter III: Methods and Procedures 17

Background 17

Participants 24

InstrumentslProtocols 24

Procedures 26

Timeline 28

Data Analysis 29

Chapter IV: Results 31

Chapter V: Discussion 46

Meaning of Findings 46

Recommendations 49

Conclusion 52

References: 54

VI

Appendices

Page

Appendix A: Week 1 Workout 57

Appendix B: Week 2 Workout 58

Appendix C: Week 3 Workout 59

Appendix D: Week 4 Workout 60

Appendix E: Week 5 Workout 61

Appendix F: Week 6 Workout 62

Appendix G: Week 7 Workout 63

Appendix H: Week 8 Workout 64

Appendix I: Week 9 Workout 65

Appendix J: Week 10 Workout 66

AppendixK: Week 11 Workout 67

Appendix L: Week 12 Workout 68

AppendixM: Week 13 Workout 69

Appendix N: Week 14 Workout 70

Appendix 0: Week 15 Workout 71

Appendix P: Week 16 Workout 72

Appendix Q: Wall Chart 73

AppendixR: 2004 Summer Week 1 74

Appendix S: 2004 Summer Week 2 75

Appendix T: 2004 Summer Week 3 76

Vll

Appendix U: 2004 Summer Week 4 77

Appendix V: 2004 Summer Week 5 78

Appendix W: 2004 Summer Week 6 79

Appendix X: 2004 Summer Week 8 80

Appendix Y: 2004 Summer Week 9 81

AppendixZ: 2004 Summer Week 10 82

Appendix AA: 2004 Summer Week 11 83

Appendix BB: 2004 Summer Week 12 84

Appendix CC: 2004 Summer Week 13 85

Appendix DD: Off-season Workout Compliance Survey 86

Appendix EE: Pre-evaluation Form 87

Appendix FF: Post-evaluation Form 88

Appendix GG: Comments 89

Figure 1:

Figure 2:

Figure 3:

Figure 4:

Figure 5:

Figure 6:

Figure 7:

Figure 8:

Figure 9:

Figure 10:

Figure 11:

Vlll

List of Figures

Page

Comparison of 2003 and 2004 conditioning program requirements 20

Comparison of 2003 and 2004 weightlifting program requirements 23

Comparison of responses from participants about off-season

workout compliance in the summer of 2003 and 2004

Comparison of number of participants completed the off-season

workout in 2003 and 2004.

Responses from questions about the reasons for incompliance for

2003 and 2004 from the Off-season Compliance Survey

Response for questions about a self-designed program from 2003

and 2004 from the Off-season Compliance Survey

Response for questions about the length of the workout for 2004

and 2003 from the Off-season Compliance Survey

Responses for questions about coming back to school feeling

stronger in 2004 than 2003

Responses for questions about compliance for the off-season

workouts in the summer of 2003 and 2004

Responses for questions about the compliance percentage with the

off-season workouts in the summer of 2003 and 2004

Responses for questions about recovery time for 2003 and 2004

from the Off-season Compliance Survey

32

33

35

36

36

37

38

38

39

IX

List of Figures (continued)

Page

Figure 12: Responses for questions about soreness for the off-season

workouts in 2003 and 2004 40

Figure 13: Response for questions about the running in 2003 and

plyometrics in 2004 from the Off-season Compliance Survey 41

Figure 14: Results from the PrelPost Evaluation over the time of summer

of 2004 and 2003 43

Chapter 1: Introduction

A men ' s college basketball program has certain expectations that have to be met

for it to be successful. Full participation among all student athletes in an off-season

strength and conditioning program has been the difference between many programs

becoming a consistent winner instead of an average team. Smith (1996) observed, "The

OFF-SEASON PROGRAM for basketball at the University of South Florida is designed

to enhance the athletes ' abilities to play competitive basketball" (p.74). The researcher

believed that it was vital for every successful college basketball program to expect the

completion of an off-season weightlifting and conditioning program for each player to

become better than they were the year before.

However, it became evident through informal observations and conversations that

many Division III college basketball players at a small Midwestern faith-based college

have not completed their off-season workouts. As a graduate assistant at this private,

liberal arts college in Northwest Ohio, the researcher decided to organize specific

exercises into an off-season weightlifting and conditioning program to allow for the

achievement of a solid strength base, adequate conditioning level, improvement in skill

development, and open gym experience versus quality competition. Many Division III

student-athletes worked in the off-season because they did not have the luxury of an

athletic scholarship. As a former Division III basketball player, the researcher has a

perspective of what the players were required to complete in an off-season training

sessions. The researcher believed that a modified, structured off-season weightlifting and

conditioning program permitted an intense workout that only lasted thirty to forty

minutes three days a week in the weight room. The researcher reflected through his own

2

experiences that it was difficult to expect these student-athletes to work between eight to

ten hours a day and then spend another two to three hours four days a week in the weight

room. The researcher thought that working out for three days a week for thirty to forty

minutes in the weight room would allow more time for conditioning, skill development,

and open gym play with quality competition. The expectations of this modified,

structured off-season weightlifting and conditioning program were to prepare these

college basketball players physically and mentally for the preseason aspect of

periodization which began once school started in late August.

Statement of the Problem

The purpose of this project was to determine the outcomes of a modified,

structured off-season weightlifting and conditioning regimen within a Division III men's

college basketball program in Northwest Ohio.

Research Questions

1. What types of off-season weightlifting and conditioning programs have been

successfully implemented by college basketball coaches?

2. What motivated collegiate athletes to complete their off-season weightlifting and

conditioning program?

3. What outcomes resulted for male Division III college basketball players as a

result of the compliance of a modified, structured off-season weightlifting and


3

Justification

The project was completed to develop a model for an off-season weightlifting and

conditioning program for college basketball coaches to duplicate that would enhance

overall performance for each of their student-athletes. The researcher completed this

project to gain an understanding of why Division III male college basketball players

completed their off-season strength and conditioning program. The researched believed

that if every individual student-athlete improved through an off-season strength and

conditioning program, then the entire team would have benefited from their hard work,

commitment, stronger base, improved skill, and enhanced conditioning.

Definition a/Terms

Conditioning: fitness level which placed an importance on endurance and flexibility

Off-season: time period after the post-season where an athlete was concerned with

increasing strength level and maintaining conditioning

Weightlifting: a system of conditioning that involved lifting barbells as an exercise

especially for strength and endurance

Strength training: training with an emphasis on increased strength

Modified, structured off-season weightlifting and conditioning program: an

organized training workout which stressed quick, intense strength training

Stronger base: a solid core which allows for the student athlete to acquire the necessary

balance during play

Limitations and Appropriate Use of Results

This project was conducted in a small Midwestern faith-based Division III

college. The research sample size was small and made up of seven basketball players.

The participants were previously accustomed to a long, complex off-season strength and

conditioning program. The project was conducted by the assistant men's basketball

coach, which might have influenced the results of the participants in the study because

the basketball players would respond differently to an assistant coach compared to how

they would for the head coach. An additional limitation was an observation of each of

the strength and conditioning programs for just one off-season. The project was limited

to the bench and squat exercises because these two exercise were the only ones decided

to be tested by the coaching staff at this institution before the spring semester ended and

then again once school started again in late August. Within the bench and squat

exercises, the one repetition maximum for each were projected because the testing

provided three different weights for each participant to do as many repetitions as they

could perform. Therefore, the projected one repetition maximums were solely based on

the certain amount of repetitions completed given the provided weight. Because this

study was implemented in a small, private Division III school with a specific sample

group, the results may not be generalized to other collegiate student-athletes.

4

5

Chapter II : Review of the Literature

Introduction

The next step in this project was to examine the literature related to the

aspects of an off-season strength and conditioning program. The literature contained

different types of off-season workouts that have produced positive outcomes. It went into

detail about the different phases of motivation within a student-athlete and the outcomes

that result from compliance with a modified off-season weightlifting and conditioning

workout.


The purpose of this project was to determine the outcomes of modified, structured

off-season weightlifting and conditioning workouts within a Division III men's college

basketball program in Northwest Ohio.

Research Questions





3. What outcomes resulted in male Division III college basketball players as a result

of the compliance of a modified, structured off-season weightlifting and


6

Research Question # 1.' What types of off-season weightlifting and conditioning programs

had been successfully implemented by college basketball coaches?

There were various types of off-season strength and conditioning programs that

had been implemented successfully by college basketball coaches. Groves (1989)

stressed that basketball coaches had been hesitant to allow their players to actively

participate in an off-season strength and conditioning program. He recognized that one

of the major concerns basketball coaches had was the negative effect on shooting

percentages based on the formation of more developed muscles limiting the player's

flexibility. He continued that many coaches found it necessary to work in the off-season,

and the notion was that it contributed to team success even though this concept was not

fully experimented with. Groves indicated that when strength training programs were

introduced at Virginia Commonwealth University, players worked out but it was not

mandatory. He affirmed that the three players who fully complied with the off-season

workouts played extremely well the following season. Groves emphasized that the

following year the coach made it mandatory that all players complied with the off-season

strength and conditioning program. He explained that participation in the off-season

strength training programs were encouraging, and Stanton (2004) reinforced that the

VCU team from the 1987-88 season finished with a record of23 victories and 12 losses

advancing to the third round of the National Invitational Tournament for the first time in

school history. Groves described that the VCU team was proclaimed by the media as a

strong and well-conditioned team. He concluded that the success of strength training for

the VCU teams raised questions about the importance of an off-season strength and

conditioning program within the college basketball programs in the country and the

successes of those programs.

Binkley (2002) discussed strength was active in each and every sport. She

declared it was critical to develop a general base strength and then improve the general

strength with sport-specific strength training. Binkley also stated that the strength

training programs should include exercises to enhance sport- specific movements and

muscle actions. For example, a workout for a basketball player was different from a

program for a football player.

Fulton (1992) communicated that strength training played a vital role in the

development of a basketball player because many movements on the court were sudden

and powerful, especially in the leg and hip areas. He asserted that the goals of the off

season strength training program at the University of Massachusetts were to progress in

the areas of overall strength, power, lean body mass, and flexibility. Fulton summarized

that one player during the course of a year advanced from being frail , weak, and

apprehensive to strong, confident, and hard working.

7

Fulton (1992) summarized that the greatest effect the off-season training program

had on the basketball program was the new expectations because the overall

improvement of one player. He continued that it was evidence enough to persuade the

team's compliance to the off-season strength training program. The University of

Massachusetts' 2003-2004 Men's Basketball Media Guide reported that from 1990 to

1996 the Minutemen prevailed 166 times compared to only 39 losses and maintained an

81 % winning percentage over these six years. It presented that during the 1995-96

season, the University of Massachusetts men's basketball team led the nation in winning

percentage, won a school record 35 games versus only losing two, and advanced to the

Final Four of the NCAA tournament.

8

Hedrick (1993) acknowledged that power was an essential ingredient for a college

basketball player to perform at the highest level. He continued that examples of how

power was used in the game of basketball were rebounding, shooting over an opponent,

or driving the lane to the basket. Balabinis (2003) introduced that strength, endurance,

and power were important features of athletic ability, and basketball players needed to

improve all of these three components in the off-season to come back in the fall as a

better athlete .

Remedios (1993) explained that resistance training placed an importance on the

development of large muscle groups and enhanced power movements. Baechle (2000)

described, "Resistance training in great detail and its seven program design variables:

needs analysis, exercise selection, training frequency, exercise order, training load and

repetitions, volume, and rest periods" (p.316). Remedios stated that needs analysis was a

two stage procedure that contained an evaluation of the characteristics of the sport and an

assessment of the athlete. He also affirmed that exercise selection was exactly what it

sounded like, doing selecting the exercises for a resistance training program. Baechle

(2000) stated "training frequency" refers to the number of sessions completed in a given

time period and exercise order to the sequence of resistance exercises accomplished

during one training workout. He mentioned that "training load" was simply the amount

of weight used for a set of a specific exercise, and it was known as the most important

phase of a resistance training program. Baechle (2000) indicated "volume" included the

total amount of weight lifted in a workout and was calculated by multiplying the number

9

of sets by the number of repetitions times the weight lifted per repetition. The last of the

seven program design variables was rest period and it was the amount of time between

sets and exercises designated to allow for recovery. Baechle (2000) summarized that any

college basketball player working to increase strength, power, and endurance would have

been involved in a resistance training program.

Remedios (1993) noted that plyometrics connect the relationship between strength

and speed, and plyometrics were an intense, lower body workout focused on

strengthening the muscles in the legs. He stressed that the focus with plyometrics was on

maximum effort and full recovery between sets which reduced the probability of injury

and enabled the athlete to give his or her maximum effort. Mackenzie (1996) termed

plyometrics as the distinct method of training for power and explosiveness, and he

described power as the combination of speed of strength. Macekenzie (1996) introduced

speed and strength as the major components of fitness found in varying levels in virtually

all athletic movements. Gleddie (1996) thought, "plyometrics was a form of power

training that involved maximal muscular contractions in response to rapid stretching of

the muscles" (p.20). Furthermore, Gleddie continued that many exercise specialists

believed it was responsible for the development of power. He reported that the men's

basketball team at University College of the Cariboo in Kamloops, BC won two

consecutive national championships during the first two year they performed plyometrics.

Baechle (2000) indicated, "plyometric exercise was an example of an activity that

enabled a muscle to reach maximal force in the shortest possible time, and he articulated

that a sensible definition of plyometric exercise was a quick, explosive movement using a

prestretch, or countermovement, that consisted of a stretch-shortening cycle. Baechle

noted that the purpose of plyometric exercise was to increase the power of related

movements by combining the natural elastic components of muscle and tendon and the

stretch reflex" (p.428). Consequently, he decided that the correct use of plyometric

exercises developed muscle force and power.

10

Both Hedrick and Binkley expressed the importance of strength and power in

basketball. Baechle contrasted strength, plyometric, and resistance training, for even

though differences existed, these three types of training overlapped each other. The

men' s basketball teams from the University of Massachusetts and Virginia

Commonwealth University showcased the positive outcomes of successful off-season

strength training and conditioning programs. The men's basketball team from the

University College of the Cariboo proved the importance of plyometric training in an off

season strength and conditioning workout plan. Opinions and philosophies about off

season strength and conditioning programs evolved over time.

Research Question # 2: What motivated collegiate athletes to complete their off-season

weightlifting and conditioning program?

There were many factors that influenced intercollegiate athletes to complete their

off-season weightlifting and conditioning programs. Huit (1994) articulated, "motivation

was defined as the internal condition that initiated behavior and gave it direction. He

continued that within that definition motivation was also explained more specifically as

the desire that influenced goal-oriented behavior. In addition, Huit suggested that

motivation was recounted as the influence of needs and desires on the attitude in relation

to the behavior." Smith (1996) from the University of South Florida summarized that

each player was given an off-season strength and conditioning program manual that

11

contained the expectations of the workout, and he confirmed that these goals were

discussed and agreed upon by the coaching staff and each player. Smith indicated that

the manual consisted of supplemental information on nutrition, flexibility, conditioning,

speed development, and agility training.

At the University of Dayton, Owens (1998) organized a system that assisted

student-athletes reaching their potential as basketball players. Huit (1994) mentioned that

three specific actions for intrinsic motivation were formed goals for learning, related

learning to student needs, and assisted students develop plan of action. Furthermore, he

explained that intrinsic motivation was an internal desire for achievement, and he also

communicated that three explicit qualities of extrinsic motivation were provided clear

expectations and valuable rewards while rewards were made available.

Fulton (1993) acknowledged that it was interesting to view the external changes

in the student-athlete' s confidence level and attitude after he completed the off-season

workout. Huit (1994) claimed that three parts of an emotional source of motivational

desire were self-confidence, security, and enthusiasm.

Cissik (2002) explained that the design of off-season strength and conditioning

program relates to an improvement in an athlete's ability which hopefully improved his

or her performance. Cissik claimed that the only way to improve a movement was to

strengthen the movement, and it was accomplished this by resistance training. He

stressed that another purpose of this type of training was the prevention of injuries in the

athletic event.

Cissik presented an example of how basketball players desired to improve their

vertical leap. He mentioned that the vertical leap was tested standing up with both feet in

12

line and approximately hip-width apart. Cissik continued that the vertical leap test was

performed by pushing the hips down and back, ensued by knee flexion until a quarter

squat position had been reached. He expressed that there was no break at the bottom of

the squat, and then the athlete jumped off the ground. According to Cissik, there were

various exercises that could improve the vertical leap and these include: the back squat,

the front squat, the power clean, and the power snatch, and the jerk.

The motivation for student-athletes to complete their off-season strength and

conditioning workout revolved around their roles on the team. The internal motivation

provided a desire to become the best player he can be and reach his full potential. The

external motivation included aspirations of being a starter, the best player on the team,

all-conference, or possible all-American. None of these goals could have been reached

without compliance to an off-season workout. The example in the paragraph above

regarding improving one's vertical leap presented the fact that basketball players were

targeting to become more athletic so they could become more competitive among their

teammates and/or their opponents.

Binkley (2002) reported that strength, size, and power were three reasons for

training programs. She defined strength as the production of force, and size as the

development of the muscle. Owens (1998) stressed that there was a certain advantage to

an enhancement in size, and he continued that college players need core strength if they

were to control their own bodies against their opponents as they fought for position on

the court. Owens confirmed that taller players frequently required prolonged

development of muscles. Hilyer (1989) presented that at the University of Alabama at

Birmingham, the goals for the off-season strength training program were intense weight

13

training with focus on development of muscles and production of force. Lastly, Binkley

distinguished that power was the production of force quickly, which was a combination

of time and speed of the movement. Therefore, Binkley concluded that there were

specific differences in training for strength, size, or power; however, these three

overlapped in sport-specific training.

Gleddie (1996) confirmed that basketball was a power sport, and it was difficult

to include additional intense training into a basketball season because the length of a

basketball season can last up to seven or eight months. Fulton (1992) recognized,

"strength training played an important role in the development of a basketball player

because of the power required for running, jumping, passing, shooting, and rebounding"

(p.31). Owens (1998) stated that basketball forwards and centers required a great deal of

strength, power, stamina, and quickness, and very few players graduated high school with

the physical capabilities it took to compete effectively at the college level. He recounted

when it came to basketball , bigger was not always better, but making a player more

powerful contributed to his success of the court. Remedios (1993) expressed that a year

round strength and power program was developed in an effort to maintain

competitiveness within the team.

Gleddie, Fulton, and Owens all agreed that power and strength were necessary

factors that influenced how successful college basketball players were on the court.

Binkley detailed the differences between power and strength, while Cissik summarized

reasons for motivating student-athletes to complete their off-season strength and

conditioning program. Power, strength, and prevention of injury were three major

contributors to the motivation of student-athletes.

14

Research Questions #3: What outcomes resulted in male Division III college basketball

players from the use of a simplified, structured off-season weightlifting and conditioning

program?

Owens (1998) confirmed that it was easy to try to do too much with tall, thin

athletes. Furthermore, he continued that many players had internal motivation to become

stronger and were willing to complete intense weight training workouts. Owens

contradicted an assumption that more was always better because these student-athletes

frequently had a difficult time gaining muscle mass which could have related from their

poor diet and nutritional habits as well. He mentioned that the strength and conditioning

coach kept close supervision on them in the weight room.

Therefore, Owens stated that he limited the weight training to about an hour four

or five days a week, depending on the player's schedule. He acknowledged that other

factors such as diet, supplementation, and the amount of rest these basketball players get

everyday influenced their ability to train hard for a long period oftime. Remedios (1993)

declared that during resistance training, emphasis was placed on the development of large

muscle groups and improved power movements. He continued that few auxiliary

exercises were performed such as leg extensions, bicep curls, etc. because the workouts

needed to be completed in a set amount of time. Remedios confirmed that his student

athletes participated in weight training twice a week with approximately ten exercises to

be completed each workout in about an hour.

Fulton (1992) affirmed that the student-athlete who increased his overall body

strength drastically and visibly added twenty pounds of body weight. He avowed that at

15

the University of Massachusetts, they modified the workouts to alter the emphasis to be

placed on running and conditioning. Along with that, Fulton used more basketball-

specific drills and exercises. Consequently, he presented that the frequency of lifting

would be cut to three sessions per week allowing for at least one day of rest between the

weight lifting sessions. Overall, Fulton maintained, "the student-athlete was able to

progress from being the weakest member of the team to one of the strongest during the

course of the workout" (p.32).

Conclusion

Power and strength were two variables that an off-season weightlifting and

conditioning program assisted in the development of a college basketball player. There

were training methods that focused strictly on power, strength, resistance, and

plyometrics. Motivation of the student-athletes was an essential component in order for

the student-athlete to work out consistently in the off-season. An athlete who has not

experienced any type of training in the past could have recognized the benefits and

consequences of the completion of a training session. These benefits were increased

strength, development of power, improved speed and quickness, enhanced vertical jump

performance, and prevention of injury. Off-season workouts changed and evolved over I

time, for the head coach decided what his expectations were for these training sessions

for each player in the entire program.

Owens (1998) emphasized that making serious alterations in a student-athlete's

body began with the head basketball coach and his staff dedicating time in the off-season

to these workouts . He claimed that basketball players have to believe in the staff and that

the coaches frequently had to reinforce their commitment to a successful program with

16

their team. The coaching staff related how the individual player improved his ability to

play basketball through those off-season workouts. This provided motivation within the

student-athlete because it gave a reason for him to be in the gym and weight room as

many days ofthe week the workout required him to be there.

The goal of a modified, structured off-season workout was for the student-athlete

to manage his time in the weight room and gym, so he was not spending his entire

summer wondering if this time put in for personal basketball development was worth it or

not. Increased strength and power were the consequences of a completion of an off

season workout, but the motivation of the individual student athlete was the most difficult

aspect for each of these respective coaching staffs.

17

Chapter III: Methods and Procedures

Statement o/the Problem

The purpose of this project was to determine the outcomes of modified, structured

off-season weightlifting and conditioning workouts for a Division III men's college


Research Questions





3. What outcomes resulted in male Division III college basketball players as a result

of the compliance of a modified, structured off-season weightlifting and


Background

The 2002-2003 basketball season at a small Division III private college was a

successful one for the program. The team finished with a record of 17 wins and 10 losses

with a fourth place finish in the league standings. The best two players from the 2002-

2003 season were not coming back to play the following season meaning that the

returnees had plenty of hard work if the 2003-2004 season was going to be as successful

as the previous one.

Part of preparing for an upcoming basketball season required that players

maintain an exercise and conditioning level through a specified program during the

summer months. In the summer of2003 , each member of the team was expected to

18

complete an off-season strength and conditioning program consisting of four days of

weightlifting and two days of conditioning each week. The Monday and Friday workouts

were the same as the Wednesday, Saturday or Sunday workouts. The Monday workout

also included a conditioning portion, which on average lasted thirty minutes. On

Thursdays, the student-athletes were expected to complete another conditioning segment

of the workout of about thirty minutes. The weightlifting portion of this off-season

workout should have lasted at least ninety minutes in the summer months, the

conditioning section added an additional thirty minutes to the workout for a total of about

two hours. Additional information including specific exercises with sets and repetitions

for the 2003 off-season strength and conditioning program can be found in Appendix A

through P (p.58-73).

The summer 2003 workout yielded unfavorable results for little or no

improvement was seen. Players ' exercise performance indicated to the coaching staff

that players may not have participated in the off-season strength and conditioning

program. The staff tried to determine why these student-athletes would not complete the

workouts and the first issue presented to them was time. Many of the athletes worked 40

hours or more per week.

Based on those results of the summer 2003 program, the coaching staff modified

the summer 2004 workout program. They decided to reduce the number of days per

week that the players were expected to lift weights and change the type of exercises to be

completed. Along with that, they decided to shorten the workout to accommodate many

of the participants who worked over forty hours a week. The staff thought that an intense

forty-five minute workout could provide more favorable results than the longer workouts.

19

Therefore, the workout program for the summer of 2004 focused on the core lifts: bench

press, squat exercise, and the power clean exercise. Additional information including

specific exercises with sets and repetitions for the 2004 off-season strength and

conditioning program were placed in Appendix R through CC (p.75-86). Appendix Q

(p.74) contained the wall chart used by the student-athletes to determine the amount of

weight and repetitions that each participant was to use for each set.

2003 off-season running expectations.

Each member of the team was expected to follow the guidelines for an off-season

strength and conditioning program. To introduce the summer 2003 workout program, the

researcher described the expectations for the conditioning portion when the student

athletes returned for school in the fall. There were two different sets of expectations

based on positions played by the basketball players.

2004 off-season running expectations.

The summer 2004 conditioning expectations for running were limited to the one

mile run; however, the times of summer 2004 were similar with summer 2003 except

they were slightly faster times. See Figure 1 below for a comparison of the 2003 and

2004 running expectations by positions played.

Summer of 2003 Summer of 2004

Distance/Time Guard Post Guard Post

1 Mile Run 5:50 6:10 5:45 6:00

2 Mile Run 12:00 13:00 N/A N/A

3 Mile Run 19:00 20:30 N/A N/A

Figure 1 : Comparison of 2003 and 2004 conditioning program expectations

2003 off-season weightlifting expectations.

20

The weightlifting exercises for the 2003 off-season strength program were: bench

press, incline press, decline press, fly ' s, triceps pushdowns, bar extensions, dumbbell

French press, squat press, lunges, calf raises, military press, side dumbbell raise, front

dumbbell raise, upright row, lat pull downs, dumbbell rows, straight dumbbell pullovers,

bent dumbbell raises, straight bar curls, preacher curls, and incline curls. This program

was divided into four days per week with the same workouts on Monday and Friday as

were on Wednesday, Saturday or Sunday. The Monday/Friday workouts for the summer

of 2003 consisted of a focus on the development of chest, triceps, legs, and abs. The

program included at least three different exercises across each of those body parts. The

abs exercises were to be completed at the student athlete ' s discretion requiring them to

choose three different specific exercises.

The Wednesday/Saturday or Sunday workout for the summer 2003 program

emphasized the development of the shoulders, back, biceps, and abs. The shoulders

exercises contained the military press, side dumbbell raise, front dumbbell raise, and

upright row, and the back exercises were lat pull downs, dumbbell rows, straight

21

dumbbell pullovers, and bent dumbbell raises. The biceps exercises included straight bar

curls, preacher curls, and incline curls while the abs exercises were to be completed by

the student athlete ' s discretion requiring them to choose the three different specific

exercises. Within the Wednesday/Saturday or Sunday, the sequence of repetitions was

the same as they were for the Monday and Friday workout.

2004 off-season weightlifting expectations.

The coaching staff modified the summer 2004 off-season strength and

conditioning program to accommodate the time factor allowing the participants to be able

to finish their workout each week while working forty hours per week. The summer

2004 workout placed a focus on the core lifts: bench, squat, and clean exercises.

Each participant in this study met with the head men's basketball coach before the

previous school year ended to discuss his strengths and weaknesses, then the student

athlete knew what he needed to work on for the next season. The head coach wanted to

meet with each player to be assured that each knew what needed to get done for each

individual to improve during the off-season. Each player wanted to meet with the head

coach in order to understand where he stood within the program. The conversation was

led by the head coach while the player attentively listened to what he needed to improve

in over the summer months in order to come back a better player during next school year.

The bench press consisted of the development of the pectoral muscles, with some

development of the anterior deltoids and triceps. Furthermore, the purpose of the squat

press exercise was to develop the quadriceps, thigh adductors, gluteus maximus, and

hamstrings. When done correctly, full squats build up the muscles, ligaments, and

tendons that surround the knee. The power clean exercise contained many integral parts:

22

feet hip width, hands shoulder width, back flat and tight, head up, bar started from the

ground, arms straight, elbows locked, strong and steady straight line pull after moderately

quick drop to start movement.

The current coaching staff implemented the use of a wall chart when working

with the three major core lifts: bench, squat, and clean exercises. The wall chart was

based on a one maximum repetition for each of these three core lifts, and the number of

sets and repetitions corresponded accordingly based on each certain percentages ofthe

one maximum repetition.

The other exercises to be included in the workout each week were the incline

press, lat pull downs, military press, dips to exhaustion, and the plyometric workout. The

incline press was similar to the bench press except that the student-athlete was seated on

an incline bench instead of a flat bench. The lat pull down exercise was to develop the

muscles of the upper back through the pulling down of the bar to the base ofthe neck and

returning the bar to the starting position with control and repeat. The military press

focused on the shoulders with upward motion with either dumbbells or a bar from the

shoulders to the full extension of the arms. The dip exercise placed an emphasis the

triceps muscles through lowering of the body and raising the body using the dip machine,

and dips to exhaustion was one set to failure where an individual could not longer do

anymore repetitions.

The workout included plyometrics along with the core weightlifting portion of the

off-season strength and conditioning workout. The plyometric workout began with a one

mile run then a series of exercises focused on lower body strength. The workout took

approximately twenty to twenty-five minutes and was made up of nine different

23

exerCIses: power broad jumps, knees to chest, butt kicks, Russian hops, power walk, line

jumps, calf raises, wall sit, and lane slides. The plyometric workout assisted in bridging

the gap between strength and speed, for it was an excellent lower body regiment. The

plyometric workout was to have been done two times a week, Monday and Friday.

See Figure 2 for a comparison between the expectations of the workouts from the

summer of2003 and the summer of2004.

Summer of 2003 Area of Focus Required Lifts Summer of2004 Area of Required Focus Lifts

Monday/Friday Chest Bench, Ineline, Decline, Monday Core Bench, Fly's Squat, Clean

Triceps Triceps Pushdowns, Incline, Dips to Bar extensions ,DB Lat Pull Exhaustion, French press Plyometrics

Legs Squat, Alternate leg Wednesday Core Bench, lunge, Calf raiser Squat, Clean

Abs 3X Military Running/ Conditioning

Wednesday/ Shoulders Military, Side DB raise, Friday Core Bench + Saturday or Front DB raise, Upright burnout, Sunday row Squat, Clean

Back Lat Pull , DB rows, Incline, Dips to Straight DB Lat Pull Exhaustion, pullovers, Bent DB raise Plyometrics

Biceps Straight bar curls, Preacher curls, Incline cures

Abs 3X Thursday Conditioning!

Running

Figure 2. Comparison of 2003 and 2004 weightlifting program requirements

There were similarities and differences between the two workout schedules,

however the objectives were the same. The coaching staff wanted each student-athlete to

maintain his overall strength and conditioning level during the off-season. The

background .information provided an understanding for the following sections in this

chapter.

Participants

24

Participants were seven members from the men's basketball team from a small

private Midwestern college. They were between the ages of 18 and 23 and had been

active in the program for both the 2003 and 2004 seasons. These Division III college

basketball players participated in the men's basketball program from the summer of2003

to the fall preparatory stage for the 2004-2005 season; therefore, all student-athletes who

participated in this research project were college basketball players for at least one year

prior to the project.

Instruments/Protocols

In order to answer research questions #3, "What outcomes resulted in male

Division III college basketball players use of a modified, structured, off-season

weightlifting and conditioning program?" instruments and procedures were selected and

developed to gather data. The first instrument used to gather data was the Off-season

Compliance Survey, and the second protocol used was pre-summer and post-summer

testing to evaluate the progress each student-athlete did or did not make. The off-season

strength and conditioning program for the summer of 2004 was created to offer an

alternative, quick, intense workout.

Off-season compliance survey.

In order to collect information about off-season compliance with the conditioning

program, a survey (see Appendix DD p.87-91) was administered to each of the seven

male participants during the fall of the 2004-2005 school year. The Off-season Workout

25

Compliance Survey was divided into four categories: compliance, reasons for

incompliance, general information, and comments section. The compliance subdivision

was comprised of the multiple-choice questions one through four, while the multiple

choice questions regarding the reasons for incompliance were numbered five and six. An

example of one of the questions follows. "How many days a week during the summer of

2004 did you workout?" The answers given to choose from were "0-1" "2-3" "4-5" or

"6-7".

The compliance section began with the inquiry of the student-athletes on how

many days a week in the summer they worked out. They responded by marking little or

no compliance, low compliance, some compliance, and high compliance. Section two

coined the phrase "reasons for incompliance" because questions five and six tried to find

out why the participants were not compliant, if they indicated that they had not been.

Therefore, their answers were based on the answers from questions three and four. If

they answered "no" for questions three or four, they decided whether or not it was too

long, comfortable with another workout, or completed a different workout.

The general information category contained the multiple-choice questions 7

through 22. An example of one of the questions in the general information section

follows, question #9. "When you worked out during the summer of2004, how long did it

last?" The answers given were "less than an hour" "between an hour and two hours" and

"more than two hours".

The comments portion of the survey was made up of the last three open-ended

questions. These questions asked for changes that the basketball players would have

liked to have made within the summer workouts. The last question ofthe survey was an

26

open-ended query that gave the participants the opportunity to give general concluding

comments about the off-season strength and conditioning program. The survey was used

to collect data from the seven individual college basketball players comparing the 2003

and 2004 off-season strength and conditioning workouts and evaluated their level of

commitment to the completion of each of the workouts.

Pre/post evaluation.

Pre-summer and post-summer evaluations were given to each participant to

determine his body weight and his performance on the bench press and back squat

exercises. The staff created an evaluation form (see Appendix EE p.92) to record the

body weight and maximum number of repetitions for both the bench press and squat

exercises. The staff circled the amount of weight the basketball players decided to

choose and wrote the number of repetitions they completed. The body weight of each

student-athlete was tested and recorded on this form as well. The post-summer

evaluation form (see Appendix FF p.93) was created to record the body weight and

maximum number of repetitions for the bench and squat press exercises.

Procedures

The researcher discussed the project with the head coach and athletic director of

the college to get their consent for the project. The researcher gathered data from the

seven participants prior to and after the summer of 2004. The following sections desribe

the procedures for collecting information.


In order to determine how much the team complied with the expectations of the

off-season strength and conditioning program, the Off-season Compliance Survey was

27

administered to each of the seven male basketball players individually during the fall of

the 2004-2005 school year. The participants were told to make an appointment with the

researcher for a time to complete the survey about the compliance of the off-season

workouts. When the student-athletes completed the survey, the researcher reviewed the

open-ended questions with the participant to allow for additional questions so the

researcher had full understanding of the answers written in the blanks. The surveys were

collected and data was recorded in tables.


Each basketball player met with the head coach before the previous school year

ended to discuss his off-season strength and conditioning expectations. The coach

mentioned that each student-athlete was to be evaluated before school was out. To

determine the body weight of each participant, each basketball player used the same

weight scale right outside the office of the staff. Secondly, each participant was asked to

do as many repetitions of the bench press and back squat exercises as he could. The

student-athletes were given the option to choose either one hundred and forty-five pounds

or one hundred and eighty-five pounds for their repetitions of the bench press exercise.

Each participant in this project then determined the set weight at either one hundred and

eighty-five pounds or two hundred and twenty-five pounds for their repetitions of the

back squat exercise. They completed as many repetitions as they could with the selected

weight. Each participant was informed that he would be tested on these categories along

with his body weight when school was back in session after the summer break. All

participants completed these tests on the same day individually. The testing took

approximately fifteen minutes for each student athlete.

28

After the set of repetitions was completed for both exercises, each participant was

given an off-season strength and conditioning program which consisted of a weekly

description of what was expected during the summer break. The main emphasis of this

summer workout program was the core lifts, which included the squat and the bench.

The staff created a form to track the body weight of each of these student athletes along

with the results of the bench press and squat press exercises. For the bench press, they

choose among three weights, one hundred and thirty-five, one hundred and eighty-five,

and two hundred and twenty-five. The coach circled what amount each choose and wrote

down exactly how many repetitions each completed with the set weight. For the squat

press exercise, each choose among four weights, one hundred and thirty-five, one

hundred and eighty-five, two hundred and twenty-five, and two hundred and eight-five.

The coach circled what amount each choose and wrote down exactly how many

repetitions each completed with the set weight. The staff then compared the post-summer

evaluations to the pre-summer evaluations.

Timeline


The researcher administered the off-season compliance survey in the middle of

September of the 2004-2005 school year. The survey took approximately twenty minutes

for each student-athlete to complete. Each male basketball player filled out the survey

within the first three weeks of the 2004-2005 school year. The researcher met with each

basketball player to discuss the project and confirm his consent of using his specific

information for the project. The survey was completed by each individual. The answers

to the open-ended questions were read by the researcher while the participants were still

in the office. Follow-up questions were asked to allow for less interpretation and full

comprehension between the researcher and the basketball player.


29

The actual testing dates for the evaluation of the off-season strength and

conditioning program were Sunday, May 2,2004, and Tuesday, September 7, 2004.

Sunday, May 2 was the test date before the last week of school where exams were being

completed, and students were packing their belongings and proceeding home. Tuesday,

September 7 was the evaluation date to determine how much time and effort these seven

basketball players put in the summer to make themselves better overall athletes.

Data Analysis


The survey included twenty-two multiple-choice questions with the purpose of

gathering data about the commitment and compliance of male basketball players to

complete the off-season strength and conditioning given by the men's basketball

coaching staff. There were questions in the survey that focused on the compliance of

each individual to perform the workout, and these questions were coded one through four

with one having low compliance and four having high compliance. The answers were

coded by those who worked out zero or one day, two or three days, four or five days, and

six or seven days. The answers to the questions one through four were placed in a table.

There were other questions that emphasized the completion or lack of completion

of the off-season season program and if the goal was not attained, why. The answers for

questions numbered five and six were placed in a table to provide the frequency of

answers of why the off-season strength and conditioning program was not completed.

30

There were four questions at the end of the survey that asked specifically about

recovery time and soreness during the off-season workouts. The recovery time was

indicated as "more than adequate", "adequate", or "less than adequate." Soreness was

measured by "very sore", "sore", "somewhat sore", or "not at all." These answers were

placed in a table to view and decided what answers appeared more than others.

At the end of the survey, there were three open-ended questions which asked for

any changes, alternatives, and general concluding comments. Each participant's answer

for these three questions was placed in a table to compare and contrast the different

changes that each participant would have done to make the workout better.


The pre-summer evaluation data was collected to compare to the post-summer

testing. The collected data included the body weight, number of repetitions completed

for the bench press, and number of repetitions completed for the squat press exercise.

Using the repetitions completed for the bench and squat press exercises, a one repetition

maximum could be computed for each participant. The one repetition maximum was

used for both the pre-summer and post-summer data. The results of the evaluations were

placed in an Excel spreadsheet. All the information for each of the measures was

presented in figures in the following chapter. The results of the survey are described as

well in the following chapter.

31

Chapter IV: Results


The purpose of this project was to determine the outcomes of simplified,

structured off-season weightlifting and conditioning workouts within a Division III men's

college basketball program in Northwest Ohio.

Research Questions





3. What outcomes resulted in male Division III college basketball players from the

use of a simplified, structured off-season weightlifting and conditioning program?

Results


The Off-season Compliance Survey was divided into four categories:

compliance, reasons for incompliance, general information, and comments section. The

compliance section was comprised of the four multiple-choice questions. The multiple

choice questions regarding the reasons for incompliance were five and six. The general

information category contained the multiple-choice questions seven through twenty-two.

The comments portion of the survey was the last three open-ended questions, and these

questions asked for any changes the basketball players would have liked to make within

the summer workouts. The last question of the survey was an open-ended query that

32

gave the participants the opportunity to give general concluding comments about the off-

season strength and conditioning program.

The compliance category began with asking student-athletes about how many

days a week in the summer they had worked out. The answers were coded by those that

worked out zero or one day, two or three days,Jour or five days, and six or seven days.

These answers corresponded with little or no compliance, low compliance, some

compliance, and high compliance. The results for the first questions were either low or

somewhat compliant, specifically two were low and the other five were somewhat

compliant. Question two was very similar to number one except it asked how many days

a week in the summer of 2003 had they worked out, and the same response categories

were given for the same answers as question one. The answers for question number two

were similar except one participant had little or no compliance, two were low

compliance, and the other four were somewhat compliant. See Figure 3 for a display of

the responses from the participants about their compliance to the off-season workouts in

the summer of 2003 and 2004.

2.

1.

o.

Student 1 Student 2 Student 3 Student 4 Student 5 Student 6 Student 7

Figure 3: Comparison of response from participants about off-season workout

compliance in the summer of 2003 and 2004

2004

.2003

o

33

Question three asked whether or not these male college basketball players

completed the off-season strength and conditioning program required by the men's

basketball coaching staff in summer of 2004. The answers given were yes or no, and

question four asked whether or not these student-athletes completed the off-season

strength and conditioning program instructed by the institution's men's basketball

coaching staff in the summer of 2003. The results for question three and four were three

participants did complete while four did not complete the summer workouts . See Figure

4 for a display of results. The data showed that in 2004 one more student indicated

compliance.

4

3.5

3

2.5

~ 2 . No

1.5 0

1

0.5

0 2004 2003

Figure 4: Comparison of number of participants completed the off-season workout in

2003 and 2004.

Section two coined the phrase "reasons for incompliance" because questions five

and six tried to find out why the participants were not compliant. Therefore, they were

based on the answers from questions three and four. If they answered no for questions

three or four, they indicated whether or not it was too long, the participants were

comfortable with using another workout, or the student-athletes completed a different

34

workout. The results for question number five asking why they were not compliant,

indicated that two answered both comfortable with another workout and completed a

different workout; however, the other two were only comfortable with another workout.

The results for question six were similar with two of the student-athletes mentioning both

comfortable with another workout and completed a different workout. One just

completed a different workout, and one was unable to complete because of an injury.

The results for questions five and six were entered in figure form, and the male student

athletes indicated why they did not complete the workout from the reasons given to them.

Below are the answers given by the student-athletes including the frequency of

answers for the most frequently stated and the least frequently stated responses. For

question number five, the most frequent answer for the reason why these student-athletes

were not compliant was being comfortable with another workout. The answer with the

least frequency for questions five was the combination of too long in length and

comfortable with another workout. For question six, the answer that appeared most

frequently was the combination of being too long and comfortable with another workout.

The answer that appeared the least frequently for question six was a tie between injured

and completed a different workout. The results from the analysis of questions five and

six revealed that the most frequent answer was comfortable with another workout, while

the least frequent answer was a tie between injured and completed a different workout,

see Figure 5 below. Remember if the student answered yes for questions three and four,

he moved on to question number seven.

35

Student #5:2004 #6:2003

too long, comfortable with another 1 too long, comfortable with another workout workout

2 n/a n/a too long, comfortable with another

3 too long, comfortable with another workout workout

4 comfortable with another workout n/a

5 comfortable with another workout INJURED

6 n/a n/a

7 n/a complete a different workout

Frequency too long, comfortable with another

Most comfortable with another workout workout injured and complete a different

Least too long, comfortable with another workout workout

Combined 5&6

Most comfortable with another workout

Least injured and complete a different workout

Figure 5: Responses from questions about the reasons for incompliance for 2003 and

2004 from the Off-season Compliance Survey

The third section known as the general information category, contained the

mUltiple choice questions seven through twenty-two. Questions seven and eight asked

whether or not they performed a self-designed off-season strength and conditioning

program for the summer of2004 and the summer of2003. The answers given were

either yes or no; therefore, these basketball players decided if they completed their own

workouts. The results for both these questions were the same with four participants

stating yes, they completed a self-designed workout, and three of them stated no.

0.5 O+---'---.J'----

2003 2004

Figure 6: Response for questions about a self-designed program from 2003 and 2004


Questions nine and ten inquired about the length of each participant's workout

during these two different summers. The answers provided were less than an hour,

between an hour and two hours, and more than two hours. For summer 2004, all of the

36

participants answered between an hour and two hours as the amount of time they worked

out each day. For the summer of2003, all except one answered between an hour and two

hours as well. The exception was one participant who answered less than an hour. See

Figure 7 below for a display of results.

2003 2004

o Less than an hour

• BIt an hour and two hours

o More than two hours

Figure 7: Response for questions about the length of the workout for 2004 and 2003


Questions eleven and twelve asked each participant if he felt stronger when he

came back to school than when he finished in early May. Question eleven asked about

the summer of 2004. Six out of seven answered yes. The corresponding question was

asked for the summer of 2003 and five out of seven basketball players answered yes.

2003 2004

tjyes

. No o

37

Figure 8: Responses for questions about coming back to school feeling stronger in 2004

than 2003

Questions thirteen through sixteen referred directly to how compliant the

participants were with the workout given by men's basketball coaching staff for the

summer of2004 and 2003 . The answers were coded mostly, sometimes, seldom, or not at

all. For question number thirteen, the results were one was not at all, two were [ow,

three were somewhat, and one was highly compliant. The results for question number

fourteen were similar except only two were somewhat compliant and two were highly

compliant. The last two questions of this subcategory of compliance asked each

participant to give a percentage of completion over the whole summer. Answers were

grouped zero to twenty-jive , twenty-six to fifty , jifty-one to seventy-jive, and seventy-six to

one hundred. These answers corresponded with little or no compliance, low compliance,

some compliance, and high compliance. The questions including percentages of

38

compliance yielded results that were comparable for last summer' s results were four not

at all, one somewhat, and two highly compliance. The summer of2003 results were three

not at all, two somewhat, and two highly compliant. See Figure 9 for a display of results

for questions 13 and 14. See Figure 10 for a display of results for questions 15 and 16.

2.

1.

o.

2003 2004

o Mostly

• Sometimes

OSeldom

o Not at all

Figure 9: Responses for questions about compliance for the off-season workouts in the

summer of 2003 and 2004

2003 2004

00-25%

.26-50%

051-75%

076-100%

Figure 10: Responses for questions about the compliance percentage with the off-season

workouts in the summer of 2003 and 2004

Questions seventeen and eighteen, regarding the recovery time, were grouped

together within the general information section for the workout in the summer of 2003

39

and the previous summer. The answers were coded more than adequate, adequate, and

less than adequate. The recovery time for the summer of 2003 workout was a resounding

adequate from all participants, while the summer of 2004 workout received three more

than adequate and two adequate levels for the recovery time. Questions nineteen and

twenty paired to rate the soreness in their muscles after the workouts in the summer of

2003 and the summer of2004. The answers were coded by very sore, sore, somewhat

sore, and not at all. The results for the soreness from the summer of 2003 workout

mentioned three sore and three somewhat sore. However, the soreness from the 2004

summer's workout was rated one very sore, three sore, and two somewhat sore. See

Figure 11 for a display of results on the recovery time and Figure 12 for a display of

results about soreness.

2003 2004

o More than Adequate

• Adequate

o Less than Adequate

o 3-D Column 4

Figure 11 : Responses for questions about recovery time for 2003 and 2004 from the

Off-season Compliance Survey

2003 2004

OVery Sore

.Sore

o Somewhat Sore

ONot at all

Figure 12: Responses for questions about soreness for the off-season workouts in 2003

and 2004

The last two questions of the Off-season Compliance Survey focused on the

additional requirements besides just the weightlifting portion of the off-season strength

and conditioning program. Question twenty-one asked whether or not the participants

completed the running portion of the workout in the summer of 2003 and the answers

given were yes or no. The results for the completion of the running portion in the

summer of 2003 were two did and five did not. Furthermore, question twenty-two

inquired whether or not these student-athletes completed the plyometrics portion of the

off-season program in the summer of 2004 and the participants either circled yes or no.

Three male basketball players did complete the plyometrics section of the workout, and

four did not. See Figure 13 for a display of results on the completion of the running

portion of the program in the summer of 2003 and the plyometrics section from the

summer of 2004.

40

41

E]ves

.No o

Running 2003 Plyometrics 2004

Figure 13: Response for questions about the running in 2003 and plyometrics in 2004

from the Off-season Compliance Smvey

The last category of the survey, the comments section, contained the open-ended

questions and these three questions asked for specific comments regarding the off-season

strength and conditioning program. Question twenty-three asked the student-athletes

what they would change about the workout given to them for the summer of2003.

Almost half, three out of the seven participants requested different muscle groups for

different days for they thought that working the whole body on one day was insufficient.

Question twenty-four asked the male college basketball players what they would alter

about the program given to them for the summer of2004. Three out of the seven male

basketball players preferred working out four days a week: Monday, Tuesday, Thursday,

and Friday while taking Wednesday off. The last question of the survey gave each

participant the opportunity to write any general concluding comments they might have

regarding both workouts and anything to do with each program. Two out of the seven

declared their personal desire to improve their strength in the weight room, while another

two out of the seven requested a workout specifically designed for each basketball player.

Summaries of the participants ' answers were shown in Appendix GG (p. 94).

42

The survey focused on the compliance of the off-season strength and conditioning

programs in the summer of2003 and 2004. The majority of the participants were either

sometimes compliant or seldom compliant with the workouts. The answers did not

correspond favorably when applied to percentages, as the results emphasized that for the

summer of 2004 off-season, four out of the seven student-athletes completed between

zero and twenty-five percent of the workout. The graphs included in the section provided

a visual description of the results, and the results were compared from the summer of

2003 to the summer of 2004 within those graphs.


These results were based on the survey given to each student-athlete in the fall of

the school year 2004-2005. However, there was other information gathered on the male

basketball players. The Figure 14 displays the improvement of each student-athlete in the

three areas of pre-summer and post-summer evaluation. Five out of seven basketball

players gained body weight. The results of the bench press exercise were all seven

participants had positive improvement. The results for the squat press exercise were

three made positive change, three made negative change, and one stayed the same.

43

150 ----- -- - -

r-

100 r-

50 r-- r--~ ,~,

[J Body Weight Difference -• Bench Difference

I [ ~u o Squat Difference

0 -1 2 3 5 L6 7

-50

-100

Student-athletes

Figure 14: Results from the Pre/Post Evaluation over the time of summer of2004 and

2003

The results displayed in Figure 14 correspond favorably with how each student-

athlete answered questions in the Off-season Compliance Survey. Students one through

three all gained weight and had positive results with the bench press and squat press

exercises. Students one and three worked out between three and four days a week while

they completed the off-season strength and conditioning programs in the summer of 2003

and 2004. Student two had the same results, but he completed a self-designed off-season

strength and conditioning program in the summer of 2003 and 2004.

44

Student number four had a positive weight gain and improved his bench press

exercise, however, he decreased in the squat press exercise. The results from his survey

indicated that he did not complete the off-season strength and conditioning program in

the summer of 2004 but did complete it in the summer of 2003. Student four did not

complete a self-designed workout for the summer of 2004 either.

Student five increased his bench press exercise while he gained weight. He

decreased in the squat press exercise, but student five was injured during the summer of

2003. He did not complete the off-season strength and conditioning programs for either

of summer of 2003 or 2004. Student five did complete a self-designed off-season

workout in the summer of 2004.

Student six lost weight, increased his bench press, and his squat press exercise

stayed the same. His results were misleading because from the survey he completed both

off-season strength and conditioning programs in 2004 and 2003. Student six also

completed the running portion ofthe summer 2003 workout and the plyometrics ofthe

summer 2004 workout which could have attributed to his weight loss.

Student seven lost weight, increased his bench press, and decreased his squat

press. He completed his off-season strength and conditioning program in the summer of

2004 but did not complete it in the summer of2003. In the summer of2003, student

seven did not complete a self-designed workout either which attributed to his major

decline in the squat press exercise.

The data di splayed in the results section came from the Off-season Compliance

Survey along with the records of testing these male basketball players with their body

weight and one repetition maximum for bench and squat exercises. The data was

presented in graph form, included in the text, in appendices, and the data was provided

without any interpretations.

45

46

Chapter V: Discussion


The purpose of this proj ect was to determine the outcomes of modified, structured

off-season weightlifting and conditioning workouts within a Division III men's college


Research Questions





3. What outcomes resulted in male Division III college basketball players from the

use of a modified, structured off-season weightlifting and conditioning program?

Meaning of Findings

The researcher interpreted a variety of ideas from the results section of this

project. The previous section included the basketball players' answers from the off

season workout compliance survey, and the researcher kept records of the participants'

body weight and the results of the bench and squat press exercises. The observation that

all seven of these participants had " low" or "somewhat" compliance of the off-season

strength and conditioning program may hold the answer in small part to why the last two

years had been losing seasons for this particular basketball program. Each individual

student came from a different background in respect to what type of experience each had

in high school with off-season strength and conditioning expectations. The different

47

backgrounds with regard to strength training were no excuse for these particular student

athletes to dismiss the directions of the coaching staff and not complete the requested off

season workouts . Owens (1998) admitted, "at the University of Dayton, he met with

potential student-athletes to discuss the commitment and dedication to hard work in the

weight room during their recruiting visit. He declared that the men ' s basketball staff

recruited athletes with a strong sense of dedication" (p.19). The researcher felt this was

an advantage for a Division I institution like Dayton that has the resources to pick and

choose who they recruit and award an athletic scholarship. The researcher thought this

would be very difficult at a Division III school to have this same type of philosophy

without the resources, luxuries, and scholarships.

However, the researcher was surprised with the lack of urgency for that each

student-athlete had to try to be as close to one hundred percent compliant as they could.

The summer of 2003 was after a successful season, but the best two players were not

coming back, therefore, opportunities were present for these seven basketball players to

compete for playing time. Yet, the average percentage of compliance was approximately

fifty-eight percent. Compliance was also affected by an injury during the summer of

2003 , for with only seven participants, one injury influenced the results greatly compared

to a project with a large sample size.

The two off-season strength and conditioning programs contained additional

running and plyometric regiments after the conclusion of the weight workout. The

compliance among these two programs was approximately twenty-five percent. The

summer of 2003 program included conditioning work of running distance and sprinting,

while the summer of 2004 program incorporated a plyometric workout of running one

48

mile followed by numerous intense leg exercises. These student-athletes knew they were

not going to be tested in their vertical jump; therefore, allowing them to reconsider the

reasons why they should complete the plyometric workout. This workout was difficult to

administer by oneself, difficult to do, and difficult to push oneself, for there was

discomfort involved following an intense plyometric workout that these participants have

not experienced freq uently.

Smith (1996) insisted that his basketball players compete in recreational summer

basketball leagues, which allowed them to gradually combine strength gains with

basketball skills. The researcher assumed that these seven student-athletes played in

summer leagues and open gyms back in their hometown. The summer months were very

busy for these participants with full-time work and playing in these leagues. These

factors supported the change to the modified, structured off-season strength and

conditioning program. The researcher believed it would be difficult to expect these

student-athletes to work forty hours a week, lift four days a week for two hours, play

open for four days a week, and individually workout to improve their basketball skill four

days a week as well. It would be difficult for any student-athlete to do all of these

workouts especially when they were not on scholarship and had to afford to payout of

their own pocket for their tuition.

Five out of the seven male basketball players gained body weight this two year

plan ranging from thirty pounds to ten pounds. This weight gain could have been

influenced by a consolidation of outside factors and not just lifting weight, and these

outside factors could have included diet, maturity level , and college lifestyle.

49

Six out of seven participants improved their bench press results over this span of

two years, while only three out of these same seven participants improved their

performance in the squat exercise. The difference between the results of the bench and

squat press exercises could lead to perceptions and assumptions as to how collegiate male

student-athletes work out. The majority of male collegiate student-athletes were more

concerned with lifting their upper body and improving their bench press than working out

their lower body. The researcher believed the discomfort that went along with the squat

exercise persuaded these participants to concentrate solely on their upper body. The

physical effects of lifting the upper body were easier to notice and be recognized than the

similar effects of lifting the legs and other muscles below the waist. These statements

regarding the improvements over the span of two years of off-season strength and

conditioning workouts revealed some desire to become stronger. However, the best

teams have all players consistently using the same conditioning program ..

Recommendations

If this research were conducted again, the researcher would recommend a similar

type of sample with all student-athletes of the same age. This would entail the same

years of experience outside of high school where they might have then learned the

importance of strength and conditioning within intercollegiate athletics. Along with

discussion about the sample, the researcher believed a larger sample size would have

eliminated the single injured athlete greatly influencing the results of the survey.

However, the large sample size would have reduced the effect this single injury had on

the outcomes of the records of the performances in the bench and squat press exercises.

Furthermore, the larger sample size would cover a greater diversity of student-athletes.

50

The survey could have been simplified and condensed with the emphasis solely

on compliance. Compliance was the most revealing characteristic for the researcher to

figure out how to analyze the behavior of each of these basketball players. It would be

interesting to do this project with a group of young men preferably basketball players

again after an unsuccessful season. Consequently, a different group of student-athletes

who have the desire to succeed yet have not done so yet. The length of the survey could

provide more insight if it was only ten questions. However, if compliance was the main

focus, then perhaps, ~he open-ended questions at the end of the survey could have

provided more detailed answers. An informal interview could have been requested for

each participant in the study to allow them an opportunity to describe and explain all of

their answers. The researcher would probably have to prepare the same questions for

each participant in a way to receive more details about compliance while trying to

eliminate other variables.

Within the study, the researcher thought other materials besides body weight,

bench press, and squat press could have been tested , and the researcher recommended

body composition, vertical leap, one mile run, and percent of body fat. Within the

investigation, the changes in body weight could have been influenced by outside factors

as diet and college lifesty le. If a future researcher tested body composition and/or

percentage of body fat, this could potentially eliminate using body weight as a variable.

College basketball coaches do not mind student-athletes gaining weight as long as it is

muscle; therefore, weight gain was not always a positive consequence.

Comparing the results of bench and squat press exercises was misleading because

each one repetition maximum was projected based on a certain amount of repetitions with

51

a certain amount of weight. In the future, the bench press could be officially performed

for each student-athlete to complete their actual one repetition maximum, while the squat

exercise should never get to the point of intercollegiate student-athletes trying to

complete a one repetition maximum. Generally speaking, the upper and lower bodies

were definitely intriguing to observe separately. An assumption has been made that male

student-athletes were more likely to lift their upper body than lower body. If lower body

was to become stronger, vertical leap, shuttle run, and maybe one mile run needed to be

tested as well when these participants came back to school in the fall. The plyometric

workout was an excellent workout, but as one of the player described in one of the open-

ended questions, he worked on his bench press because he knew he was going to be

tested on the bench when school resumed. An assumption was that these student-athletes

would have completed the plyometric workout if they were going to be tested in vertical

leap, shuttle run , or one mile run. Athletes from different sports like basketball and

football should not be tested in the same exercises because different sports call for

various types of strength and conditioning.

The researcher decided to think about how to further the investigation on a similar

topic of an off-season strength and conditioning program. It would be interesting to

include gender, race, and socioeconomic status. Although it would be very difficult,

those three characteristics could have provided interesting results. Were females more

likely to lift in the summer than males? Were males more likely to run than females in

the summer? Were white, Caucasian basketball players more likely to get stronger than

African-American basketball players, and vice versa? The researcher believed the

influence of the head coach could provide a dramatic change in the percentages of

The Pi/gim Ubrary 1be Defiance Collage

52

compliance within a basketball program especially if the head coach was there for many

years and made it clear that completing the off-season strength and conditioning workout

was not an option.

Conclusion

This final chapter concluded the compliance project of a group of seven male

basketball players from the same Midwestern faith-based college in Northwest Ohio.

There were many surprises that stood out to the researcher as the project went along, and

the researcher could only continue to analyze the reasons for compliance or lack of

compliance. Hopefully, this was only the beginning of an investigation on the influence

of the off-season strength and conditioning workouts at the Division III level.

Overall , the results showed that all seven of the participants responded that they

had "low" or "somewhat" compliance to the off-season strength and conditioning

program. However, three out of the seven improved their body weight and performances

in the bench and squat exercises. Two of the seven improved their body and performance

in the bench exercise but saw a decrease in the squat exercise. One student-athlete

increased his performance in the bench exercise while his body weight stayed the same

and his performance in the squat exercise decl ined. The final student-athlete only

increased his performance in the bench press while his body weight and performance in

the squat exercise decreased .

The researcher believed that even though there was a lack of compliance with the

modified, structured off-season weightlifting and conditioning program, the results

showed that these seven student-athletes did provide data to determine if improvements

were made over a certain time period. The researcher wondered if a different group of

student-athletes from the same sport and institution but maybe a couple of years in the

past or in future would provide similar results. Are the student-athletes today more

compliant or less compliant than in the past? Will the future student-athletes be more

compliant or less compliant? Only time will tell.

53

54

References

Baechle, T.R. , & Earle, R.W. (2000). Essentials of Strength Training and Conditioning

(2nd ed.) Champaign: Human Kinetics.

Balabinis, C.P. , Psarakis, C.H., Moukas, M., Vassiliou, M.P., & Behrakis, P.K. (2003).

Early phase changes by concurrent endurance and strength training. Journal of

Strength and Conditioning Research, 17(2), 393-401.

Binkley, H.M. (2002). Strength, size, or power? NSCA 's Performance Training

Journal, 1(4), 14-18.

Cissik, J.M.(2002). Basic principles of strength training and conditioning. NSCA's

Performance Training Journal, 1 (4), 7-11.

Fulton, K.T. (1990). Off-season strength training for basketball. National Strength and

Conditioning Association Journal, 12(6), 48-53.

Fulton, K.T. (1992). Off-season strength training for basketball. National Strength and

Conditioning Association Journal, 14(1), 31-34.

Gleddie, N. (1996). Plyometric training for basketball. Strength and Conditioning,

18(6), 20-25.

Groves, B., Gayle, R., & Brunet, S. (1989). Strength training and team success in NCAA

men' s division I basketball. National Strength & Conditioning Association

Journal, 11(6),26-28.

Hedrick, A. (1993). Strength and power training for basketball. National Strength and

Conditioning Association Journal, 15(4),31-35.

55

Hilyer, 1., & Hunter, G.R. (1989). A year-round strength development and conditioning

program for men 's basketball. National Strength & Conditioning Association

Journal, 11(6), 16-19.

Huit, W. (1994) Motivation to Learn: An Overview. Retrieved from July 15,2004, from

Valdosta State University, Educational Psychology Interactive Web site:

http: //chiron.valdosta.edu/whuitt/co[/motivation/motivate.html

Mackenzie, Brian (1996). Sports Coach. Retrieved from October 25 ,2004, from

Successful Coaching Interactive Web site :

http: //www.brianmac.demon.co.uk/plymo.htm

Owens, 1. (1998) . Strength training for basketball: building post players. Strength and

Conditioning, 20(1), 16-2l.

Remedios, R.(1993). A summer strength and power program for basketball. National

Strength and Conditioning Association Journal, 15(3),48-50.

Renfro, GJ. (1996). Basketball specific squats. Strength and Conditioning, 18(6),29-

30.

Smith, B.R. (1996). The University of South Florida's off-season strength training for

basketball. Strength and Conditioning, 18(2), 74-75.

Stanton, P. (2004, March). VCU Men 's Basketball Notes . Retrieved July 18,2004, from

Virginia Commonwealth University, Men ' s Basketball Web Site:

http://vcurams.vcu.edulmbb/mbb.pdf

University of Massachusetts Amherst (2003, October). 2003-2004 Media Guide.

Retrieved July 18, 2004, from the Men's Basketball Records and History Web

Site: http: //graphics.fanson ly.com/photos/schools/umas/sports/m-

baskbllauto pdf/yearbyyear.pdf

56

57

Appendix A: Week 1 Workout

Monday and Friday Workout for Week #1

Exercise Rep Wt Rep Wt Rep Wt Rep Wt Rep Wt

Bench Press 12 12 10 10

Incline Press 12 12 10

Decline Press 12 12 10

Fly's (dumbbell or cable) 12 12 10

Triceps Pushdowns 12 12 10 10

Bar Extensions (skull crushers) 12 12 10

Dumbbell (DB) French Press 12 12 10

Squats 12 12 10 10

Alternate Leg Lunge 12 12 10

Calf Raises 15 15 15

Pick 3 abs exercises 25 25 25

Wednesday and Saturday or Sunday Workout for Week #1


Military Press 12 12 10 10

Side DB Raise 12 12 10

Front DB Raise 12 12 10

Upright Row 12 12 10

Lat Pull Downs 12 12 10 10

DB Rows (lawnmowers) 12 12 10

Straight DB Pullovers 12 12 10

Bent DB Raises 12 12 10

Straight Bar Curls 12 12 10 10

Preacher Curls 12 12 10

Incline Curls 12 12 10


58

Appendix B: Week 2 Workout










Squats 10 10 10 10











DB Rows (Iawnmowers) 10 10 10







59

Appendix C: Week 3 Workout







Triceps Pushdowns 12 10 8


Dumbbell (DB) French Press 12 10 8 6

Squats 12 10 8 6


Calf Raises 12 10 8







Upright Row 12 10 8


DB Rows (lawnrnowers) 12 10 8







60

Appendix D: Week 4 Workout



Bench Press 8 8 8 8

Incline Press 8 8 8

Decline Press 8 8 8



Bar Extensions (skull crushers) 8 8 8 8


Squats 8 8 8 8


Calf Raises 8 8 8 8





Side DB Raise 8 8 8


Upright Row 8 8 8







Incline Curls 8 8 8


61

Appendix E: Week 5 Workout






Fly's (dumbbell or cable) to 8 6

Triceps Pushdowns to 8 6 4

Bar Extensions (skull crushers) to 8 6

Dumbbell (DB) French Press to 8 6

Squats to 8 6 4

Alternate Leg Lunge to 8 6

Calf Raises to 8 6





Side DB Raise to 8 6

Front DB Raise to 8 6

Upright Row to 8 6 4

Lat Pull Downs to 8 6 4

DB Rows (lawnrnowers) to 8 6




Preacher Curls 10 8 6 4

Incline Curls to 8 6


62

Appendix F: Week 6 Workout



Bench Press 6 6 6 6

Incline Press 6 6 6

Decline Press 6 6 6

Fly' s (dumbbell or cable) 6 6 6




Squats 6 6 6 6


Calf Raises 6 6 6





Side DB Raise 6 6 6


Upright Row 6 6 6







Incline Curls 6 6 6

Pick 3 abs exercises 25 25 25 ,

63

Appendix G: Week 7 Workout



Bench Press 8 6 4 2

Incline Press 8 6 4 2

Decline Press 8 6 4 2





Squats 8 6 4 2


Calf Raises 8 6 4





Side DB Raise 8 6 4


Upright Row 8 6 4







Incline Curls 8 6 4


64

Appendix H: Week 8 Workout

Monday and Friday Workoutfor Week #8-Test in every exercise (once), for you must be able to do between 4-8 reps. Record the weight and the reps. Test Monday and Wednesday, and take the rest of the week along with

0 UIY to recover. 4th f J I


Bench Press

Incline Press

Decline Press

Fly's (dumbbell or cable)

Triceps Pushdowns

Bar Extensions (skull crushers)

Dumbbell (DB) French Press

Squats

Alternate Leg Lunge

Calf Raises

Pick 3 abs exercises



Military Press

Side DB Raise

Front DB Raise

Upright Row

Lat Pull Downs

DB Rows (Iawnmowers)

Straight DB Pullovers

Bent DB Raises

Straight Bar Curls

Preacher Curls

Incline Curls


65

Appendix I: Week 9 Workout










Squats 12 12 10 10


















66

Appendix J: Week 10 Workout










Squats 10 10 10 10











DB Rows (Iawnrnowers) 10 10 10







67

Appendix K: Week 11 Workout









Dumbbell (DB) French Press 12 10 8 6

Squats 12 10 8 6


Calf Raises 12 10 8







Upright Row 12 10 8









68

Appendix L: Week 12 Workout



Bench Press 8 8 8 8

Incline Press 8 8 8

Decline Press 8 8 8



Bar Extensions (skull crushers) 8 8 8 8


Squats 8 8 8 8


Calf Raises 8 8 8 8





Side DB Raise 8 8 8


Upright Row 8 8 8


DB Rows (Iawnrnowers) 8 8 8





Incline Curls 8 8 8


69

Appendix M: Week 13 Workout










Squats 10 8 6 4


Calf Raises 10 8 6







Upright Row 10 8 6 4






Preacher Curls 10 8 6 4



70

Appendix N: Week 14 Workout



Bench Press 6 6 6 6

Incline Press 6 6 6

Decline Press 6 6 6





Squats 6 6 6 6


Calf Raises 6 6 6





Side DB Raise 6 6 6


Upright Row 6 6 6







Incline Curls 6 6 6


71

Appendix 0: Week 15 Workout



Bench Press 8 6 4 2

Incline Press 8 6 4 2

Decline Press 8 6 4 2





Squats 8 6 4 2


Calf Raises 8 6 4





Side DB Raise 8 6 4


Upright Row 8 6 4







Incline Curls 8 6 4


72

Appendix P: Week 16 Workout

Monday and Friday Workout for Week #l6-Test in every exercise (once), for you must be able to do between 4-8 reps. Record the weight and the reps. IS e t e Irst wee o sc 001, an wew . Th· will b h fi k f hid ill test as a team.


Bench Press

Incline Press

Decline Press

Fly's (dumbbell or cable)

Triceps Pushdowns

Bar Extensions (skull crushers)

Dumbbell (DB) French Press

Squats

Alternate Leg Lunge

Calf Raises




Military Press

Side DB Raise

Front DB Raise

Upright Row

Lat Pull Downs

DB Rows (lawnmowers)

Straight DB Pullovers

Bent DB Raises

Straight Bar Curls

Preacher Curls

Incline Curls


Appendix Q: Wall Chart Defiance College Men's Basketball Summer of 2004

1 Rep Chart #1 Max 3 X 10 150 100 105 115 160 105 110 120 170 110 120 130 180 115 125 135 190 125 135 145 200 130 140 150 210 135 145 160 220 145 155 165 230 150 160 175 240 155 170 180 250 165 175 190 260 170 180 195 270 175 190 205 280 180 195 210 290 190 205 220 300 195 210 225 310 200 215 235 320 210 225 240 330 215 230 250 340 220 240 255 350 230 245 265 360 235 250 270 370 240 260 280 380 245 265 285 390 255 275 295 400 260 280 300 410 265 285 310 420 275 295 315 430 280 300 325 440 285 310 330 450 295 315 340 460 300 320 335 470 305 330 345 480 310 335 350 490 320 345 360 500 325 350 365i

Chart #2 4X8 100 105 105 110 110 120 115 125 125 135 130 140 135 145 145 155 150 160 155 170 165 175 170 180 175 190 180 195 190 205 195 210 200 215 210 225 215 230 220 240 230 245 235 250 240 260 245 265 255 275 260 280 265 285 275 295 280 300 285 310 295 315 300 320 305 330 310 335 320 345 325 350

115 120 130 135 145 150 160 165 175 180 190 195 205 210 220 225 235 240 250 255 265 270 280 285 295 300 310 315 325 330 340 335 345 350 360 365

120 130 140 145 155 160 170 180 185 195 205 210 220 225 235 245 250 260 265 275 285 290 300 310 315 325 330 340 350 355 365 360 365 375 380 390

Chart #3 4X6 105 115 110 120 120 130 125 135 135 145 140 150 145 160 155 165 160 175 170 180 175 190 180 195 190 205 195 210 205 220 210 225 215 235 225 240 230 250 240 255 245 265 250 270 260 280 265 285 275 295 280 300 285 310 295 315 300 325 310 330 315 340 320 335 330 345 335 350 345 360 350 365

120 125 130 135 140 145 145 155 155 160 160 170 170 180 180 185 185 195 195 205 205 210 210 220 220 225 225 240 235 245 245 255 250 265 260 270 265 280 275 290 285 295 290 305 300 215 310 235 315 330 325 340 330 350 340 355 350 365 355 375 365 380 360 390 365 400 375 410 380 415 390 425

Chart #4 4X5 105 115 110 120 120 130 125 135 135 145 140 150 145 160 155 165 160 175 170 180 175 190 180 195 190 205 195 210 205 220 210 225 215 235 225 240 230 250 240 255 245 265 250 270 260 280 265 285 275 295 280 300 285 310 295 315 300 325 310 330 315 340 320 335 330 345 335 350 345 360 350 365

120 125 130 135 140 145 145 155 155 160 160 170 170 180 180 185 185 195 195 205 205 210 210 220 220 225 225 240 235 245 245 255 250 265 260 270 265 280 275 290 285 295 290 305 300 215 310 235 315 330 325 340 330 350 340 355 350 365 355 375 365 380 360 390 365 400 375 410 380 415 390 425

Chart #5 8-6-4-3-2 100 105 105 110 110 120 115 125 125 135 130 140 135 145 145 155 150 160 155 170 165 175 170 180 175 190 180 195 190 205 195 210 200 215 210 225 215 230 220 240 230 245 235 250 240 260 245 265 255 275 260 280 265 285 275 295 280 300 285 310 295 315 300 320 305 330 310 335 320 345 325 350

125 135 145 155 160 170 180 185 195 205 210 220 225 240 245 255 265 270 280 290 295 305 215 235 330 340 350 355 365 375 380 390 400 410 415 425

73

135 140 145 150 155 160 160 170 170 180 180 190 190 200 200 210 205 220 215 230 225 235 235 240 245 250 250 265 260 275 270 285 280 290 290 300 295 310 305 320 315 330 325 340 335 350 340 360 350 370 360 380 370 390 380 400 385 410 395 420 405 4251 415 435 425 4451 430 455 440 465 450 475

Name:

M d on ay Bench Squat Clean

Incline Lat Pulldown

Dips to Exhaustion Plyometric Workout

W d d e nes ay Bench Squat Clean

Military

F "d rI ay Bench

Squat Clean

Incline Lat Pull down


Appendix R: 2004 Summer Week 1

Defiance College Basketball Summer of 2004 Workout Sheet

Week #1 Use Wall Chart #1

3 X 10 on Core Lifts

Body Weight:

Max Weight Completed? Max Weight Completed? Max Weight Completed?

XlO X 10 XlO XlO


X 10 XlO

Max Weight Completed? Burnout X Max Weight Completed? Max Weight Completed?

XlO XlO XlO X 10

74

(bIt 15&25)

Name:





Military

F °d n ay Bench

Squat Clean



Appendix S: 2004 Summer Week 2


Max Weight Max Weight Max Weight

XlO XlO


Week #2 Use Wall Chart #2 4 X 8 on Core Lifts

Body Weight:

Completed? Completed? Completed?

X 10 XlO


X 10 X 10


XlO XlO XlO X 10

75

(bit 15&25)

Name:





Military

F 'd rI ay Bench

Squat Clean



Appendix T: 2004 Summer Week 3



X 10 XlO



Body Weight:


XlO XlO


X 10 XlO


XlO XlO X 10 X 10

76

(bit 15&25)

Name:





Military

F'd n ay Bench

Squat Clean



Appendix U: 2004 Summer Week 4



X 10 XlO



Body Weight:


X 10 XlO


XlO XlO


XlO X 10 X 10 X 10

77

(3 X 5, first 3 sets)


(bit 15&25)

Name:





Military

F 'd rI ay Bench

Squat Clean



Appendix V: 2004 Summer Week 5



3 X lOon Core Lifts

Body Weight:


XlO X 10 XlO XlO


X 10 X 10


XlO XlO X 10 X 10

78

(Chart #4, first 3 sets)


(bit 15&25)

Name:





Military

F °d n ay Bench

Squat Clean

Incline LatPulldown


Appendix W: 2004 Summer Week 6


Week #6 Look at each on the sheet.

Body Weight:


XlO X 10 XlO X 10


X 10 XlO


XlO XlO XlO XlO

79

(Chart #5) (Chart #1) (Chart #4, first 3 sets)


(Chart #5) (bit 15&25)

Name:


Incline LatPulldown



Military

F 'd n ay Bench

Squat Clean



Appendix X: 2004 Summer Week 8



3 X 10 on Core Lifts

Body Weight:


XlO XlO XlO XlO


XlO X 10


XlO XlO XlO XlO

80

(bIt 15&25)

Name:





Military

F 'd n ay Bench

Squat Clean



Appendix Y: 2004 Summer Week 9



XlO XlO



Body Weight:


XlO XlO


X 10 XlO


X 10 X 10 X 10 X 10

81

(bit 15&25)

Name:


Incline LatPulldown



Military

F "d rl ay Bench

Squat Clean



Appendix Z: 2004 Summer Week 10



X 10 XlO



Body Weight:


X 10 XlO


XlO XlO


X 10 X 10 X 10 X 10

82

(bit 15&25)

Name:





Military

F 'd n ay Bench

Squat Clean

Incline LatPulldown


Appendix AA: 2004 Summer Week 11



X 10 XlO



Body Weight:


XlO XlO


XlO XlO


XlO X 10 X 10 X 10

83


(3 X5, first 3 sets)

(bIt 15&25)

Name:

M d on ay_ Bench Squat Clean




Military

F °d rl ay Bench

Squat Clean



Appendix BB: 2004 Summer Week 12



3 X lOon Core Lifts

Body Weight:


X 10 X 10 XlO X 10


XlO X 10


X 10 XlO X 10 XlO

84



(bit 15&25)

Name:





Military

F'd rI ay Bench

Squat Clean



Appendix CC: 2004 Summer Week 13


Week #13 Look at each lift on the sheet.

Body Weight:


XlO XlO XlO X 10


XlO XlO


XlO XlO X 10 XlO

85

(Chart #5} (Chart #1) (Chart #4, first 3 sets)


(Chart #5) (bIt 15&25)

Appendix DD: Off-season Workout Compliance Survey

Off-season Workout Compliance Survey

1. How many days a week this summer did you work out? a. 0-1 b. 2-3 c. 4-5 d. 6-7

2. How many days a week did you work out during the summer of2003? a. 0-1 b. 2-3 c. 4-5 d. 6-7

3. Did you complete the off-season strength and conditioning program required by the Defiance College men's basketball staff this past summer?

a. Yes b. No

4. Did you complete the off-season strength and conditioning program required by the Defiance College men's basketball staff for the summer of2003?

a. Yes b. No

5. If you circled no for question #3, why not? a. Too long b. Comfortable with another workout c. Completed a different workout last summer

6. If you circled no for question #4, why not? a. Too long b. Comfortable with another workout c. Completed a different workout last summer

86

7. Did you perform a self-designed off-season strength and conditioning program this past summer? a. Yes b. No

8. Did you perform a self-designed off-season strength and conditioning program for the summer of 2003?

a. Yes b. No

9. When you worked out this summer, how long did it last? a. Less than an hour b. Between an hour and two hours c. More than two hours

10. When you worked out in the summer of2003, how long did it last? a. Less than an hour b. Between an hour and two hours c. More than two hours

11. Do you feel stronger now than where you were when school finished in early May? a. Yes b. No

12. Did you feel stronger when you came back to school last year? a. Yes b. No

13. How compliant were you with the workout given from the Defiance College men's basketball staff for the summer of2003?

a. Mostly b. Sometimes c. Seldom d. Not at all

14. How compliant were you with the workout given from the Defiance College men's basketball staff last summer?

e. Mostly f. Sometimes g. Seldom h. Not at all

87

15. In a percentage over the whole summer, how much of the off-season strength and conditioning program this past summer did you complete?

a. 0-25 b. 26-50 c. 51-75 d. 76-100

88

16. In a percentage over the whole summer, how much ofthe off-season strength and conditioning program during the summer of 2003 did you complete?

a. 0-25 b. 26-50 c. 51-75 d. 76-100

17. How would you rate the recovery time for the program in the summer of 2003? a. More than adequate b. Adequate c. Less than adequate

18. How would you rate the recovery time for the program last summer? a. More than adequate b. Adequate c. Less than adequate

19. After each workout in the summer of2003, how would you rate the soreness in your muscles? a. Very sore b. Sore c. Somewhat sore d. Not at all

20. After each workout last summer, how would you rate the soreness in your muscles? a. Very sore b. Sore c. Somewhat sore d. Not at all

21. Did you complete the running portion of the program in the summer of 2003? a. Yes b. No

22. Did you complete the plyometric portion of the program last summer? a. Yes b. No

89

23. If you could, what would you change from the program for the summer of

2003? ______________________________________________________ _

24. If you could, what you change from the workout last summer?

90

25. General concluding comments:

91

Appendix EE: Pre-evaluation Form

Name: ---------------------

Date: ----------------------

Body Weight: ______ _

Circle the amount of weight you choose to do and write down how many repetitions you

did for the particular weight:

Bench: 145 185 Reps: _____ _

Squat: 185 225 Reps: __________ _

92

Appendix FF: Post-evaluation Form

Name: ---------------------

Date: ----------------------

Body Weight: ______ _

Circle the amount of weight you choose to do and write down how many repetitions you

did for the particular weight:

Bench: 145 185 225 Reps: _____ _

Squat: 135 185 225 285 Reps: _____ _

----- -- --- -- _. ---- - --_ .. -- - - - - - -

#23: If you could what change from the #24: If you could, what you change Student program for the summer of 2003? from the workout last summer? #25: General concluding comments:

I am a person who likes to do a variety of different lifts to work the different muscle groups.1 would rather have

I don't want to write down every lift. Takes up too much time a little pad.Not enough lifts everyday.l couldn't get sore up.Weight books give you set machines to use. I am a doing that workout. The whole main weight program

person who likes to do variety of different lifts to work the because it wasn't accurate.l had to lift 245 Ibs. eight different muscle groups. The book is too big in length and time on my last set and that was impossible. It said that If your lifting in a comfortable place you can lift as long as you want.Music plays how big it is in general.You don't want to take something my max was 300 and I can't do that.Sometimes you a big role if your listening to music that pumps you up you are more liable to lift .

that big into the weight room. The running each was a little would start with too light of weight but then the last set longer and more. When coach tells me at the beginning of the summer he is I

much for the fact of how long it took to complete each is way too heavy to complete. Everyday should be the going to compare our max than when we got back. That made me want to lift workout.Weight books are too much like"books."1 would same workout.You need variety.Way too small of a because I want to impress him and show how much I have improved.l hate

1 rather have a little pad. workout need more lits. working with partners because they slow me down.

Like the workout to be longer, like the booklet, everyone on team got it, want to do more than just what was given in the booklet last summer, would complete a

self-designed workout, a possible argument would be trying to get out of it, Personally, I like to do legs/uppers, legs/uppers and into Too short, more lifting, need percentage, longer not excuses, sick of being pushed around, grew three inches, more mature, late more exercises. Did not like the running/conditioning.Like enough, done in 45 minutes, like to lift for 90 minutes bloomer, one of the weakest during frosh year, middle of pack during soph year, uppper body more than lower. Liked to lift longer and work shorter in bulk, additional exercises to the work, lifted one of the strongest during junior year, to eight on the team, stick to the program on muscle endurance.Bench, incline, and decline was too four times a week, MTRF, take Wednesday off, take for 2 to 3 weeks then noticed a difference, self-confidence improved, lift longer

2 much for one day.Rotate two out of three every time. weekends off because of the improvement

Explanation of a couple of things.Was confused with I would change the amount of time it takes when working a what they wanted.On workout day if I'm going to lift I ten hour day and then lifting another two hours.And that's want to do it right.Everything.l would get rid of writing

not playing. Explanation of a couple of things.Was confused down everything.l'd prefer working out MTRF.llike Don't like writing things down. I'd prefer to know what I have to lift.l do not want to

3 with what they wanted. working with partners. have to take time and write it down.

I would change the fact that I liked the workout I did this summer.1 did one body part per day. Like Monday was

chest and Tueday bicep and so on and I did this five days For me I felt that the five days a week was good for me, but the ones in the a week.1 would also change the things the book is held by.l books could work better for others I did like how the 2003 had more auxiliary lifts

also do not feel all the workouts should be shown to be I would change the same but it did not have the but I also liked how last summer had more core lifts to do.1 also feel that I would

4 done.We should know. workouts so that was good. rather have a smaller book than a bigger one.

I would like to lift probably four days a week like do My answers would have been different if I would not have had a broken I had a broken wrist for the entire summer so I didn't do certain body on two days and other body parts on the wrist.Since my wirst was broken, I couldn't lift so my answers were the way they

5 any of the weightlifting portion at all. other two days. were.

I really would not change much, however I would break it Comparing it to the team more running to get people in This past workout was easier to follow, but I would like to do my off-season 6 down the day so that there not back to back days. shape. workout because I know my body.

Just need of more information running workouts. See I worked 40 hours a week then it was hard this past summer. The year before I didn't do any of the stuff. A good idea would be to design a workout for each player. So if one guy needs to

7 Because I did a lot more cardio than asked of me. More running workouts. lift more than design a workout for his needs.

h~~~k--+~L - OhioLINK ETD Center

Documents

Transcript of h~~~k--+~L - OhioLINK ETD Center