Look, I’m going to say something relatively taboo in the field of Strength and Conditioning: many coaches just aren’t programming intelligently.
I’m not saying it’s their fault, I’m not saying they’re bad at their job, and I’m not saying they don’t deserve to be where they are. What I’m referring to is the lack of validation of different philosophies and their derivatives. It’s not the role of the practitioner to validate their methods—it’s their role to interpret research and land on best practices in order to develop the best athletes within the constraints of their organization. As a field, however, we cannot afford to stagnate by simply relying on tradition or anecdotal evidence. To grow in our individual careers, we need to be willing to audit our methods and improve our breadth of knowledge. Strength and Conditioning is a dynamic discipline, one that exists at the intersection of sports science, human performance, and organizational demands. To truly push the field forward, we must prioritize a culture of critical evaluation, open-mindedness, and continuous learning.
To truly push the S&C field forward, we must prioritize a culture of critical evaluation, open-mindedness, and continuous learning, says @connor_ryder30. Share on XThis means going beyond the surface-level application of ‘what works‘ and digging deeper into the why and how (see Image 1). Are we aligning our methods with the most recent advancements in physiology, biomechanics, and motor learning? Are we questioning outdated paradigms that no longer hold water? Are we, as coaches, willing to challenge our own biases and explore innovative approaches, even if it means stepping outside our comfort zone?
I think a lot of current S&C coaches are made uncomfortable when made to face these questions head-on. Formal education and standards are way too lax to prevent situations where someone who lacks a true, deep understanding of research application is put in a position to program training for athletes. I think that’s where I break away from the need for years of experience, in exchange for quality of experience. To remind myself of this concept, I always come back to this quote:
“Do you have 10 years of experience, or 1 year of experience 10 times?”
I have coached in a “long-term athletic development” (LTAD) environment at the collegiate level and in a “perform-now” environment in professional baseball. In the world of professional sports, I learned that I had to audit my process fairly frequently to check my own biases and give my athletes their best chance to win a job. Returning to the collegiate environment, I’ve realized there is a significant gap to bridge between the LTAD mindset and the continuous auditing of principles and methods, all in the ultimate pursuit of best practices within strength and conditioning.
In the world of professional sports, I learned that I had to audit my process fairly frequently to check my own biases and give my athletes their best chance to win a job, says @connor_ryder30. Share on XI think everyone reading can agree that the athletes in our care deserve programming that is:
- Rooted in evidence-based practices.
- Adapted to their individual needs.
- Designed to maximize both their immediate performance and long-term development.
To achieve this, we need to collectively shift from interpreting research to actively contributing to it; and, admittedly, without expecting changes in compensation in the short-term. However, in an evidence-based field, compensation hasn’t historically been evidence-based; by contributing to growing the field, you’ll have much stronger leverage in negotiations against other job candidates or your organization. It’s hard to argue against hiring or giving a raise to a practitioner who has proven their worth in writing. There are different levels to contributions, but I’ll follow with three proposed solutions that cover the most common practitioner scenarios.
Image 1. Both when putting principles into practice and when conducting new research, validity and reliability are concerns that we need to take into account. There’s no way of knowing your training interventions and coaching are working without being heavily influenced by validated methods and creating reliability with your own implementation! (Image via “Validity and Reliability,” by Martyn Shuttleworth. Creative Commons License.)
Solution #1: Collaborate with the Campus Exercise Science or Data Analytics Program
If your school has an exercise science or data analytics program, you have a valuable resource for bridging the gap between academia and practice. This partnership can be mutually beneficial, combining your practical insights with their research expertise and access to equipment, software, and academic networks.
This is the solution that takes the most front-end work to establish, with support needed from many different disciplines to get it off the ground. However, it can also be the most beneficial, due to the amount of attention you can garner from stakeholders. For example, I once off-handedly mentioned the time it takes to analyze data to one of our athletic administrators, and they were immediately interested in getting our department connected to the statistics department to create a learning opportunity for their undergraduate students. In return, by taking analysis completely off the practitioner’s plate, some big projects could come to fruition, and it would be a massive step forward for our staff’s productivity.
Action Steps
- Collaborate with faculty to design applied research projects that align with your program’s needs (e.g., evaluating training interventions, load management, or athlete well-being).
- Engage students in hands-on research opportunities, using your program as a real-world lab for their coursework or theses.
- Use campus resources, such as labs or student workers, for testing variables like VO2 max, force output, or biomechanics analysis.
- Share findings with both academic and professional audiences through conferences, journal articles, or case studies.
Benefits
- By utilizing the people around you to design and execute the study according to your needs, you can manage the scope while still creating valid and reliable research.
- Leverage cutting-edge research tools without incurring extra costs.
- Contribute to academic publications that validate your methods.
- Strengthen the pipeline of future professionals by providing exercise science students with practical experience.
Solution #2: Maximize In-House Data Collection and Analysis
If your school lacks a dedicated exercise science program but you actively collect and analyze data in-house, you can still contribute to advancing the field by developing a systematic approach to research. Your internal data can be an invaluable resource for both the Strength and Conditioning community and academic researchers. This solution is best if you have a sport scientist on staff, or the ability to hire one!
Action Steps
- Develop a consistent framework for collecting and analyzing key performance metrics (e.g., GPS tracking, strength benchmarks, recovery data) (see Image 2).
- Partner with external researchers or organizations to validate and publish your findings, offering them access to your data in exchange for their expertise in study design.
- Present your in-house research at conferences or through professional organizations, even if it’s not formally published.
- Standardize your data collection process to ensure it’s replicable and robust, which increases its credibility for future collaborations.
Benefits
- Turn everyday performance monitoring into meaningful research contributions that can inform new practitioners.
- Build a reputation within your organization and outside as a leader in applied sports science.
- Strengthen your program’s data-driven approach, enhancing athlete outcomes, and your own personal credibility.
I constantly show my athletes the data I collect, which ensures they know that I’m still actively using the data and that my efforts to improve their performance are always evidence-based. Additionally, I open myself to new learning opportunities by sharing my practice, which helps me guide my future research by adding the perspective of my athletes and peers.
I constantly show my athletes the data I collect, which ensures they know that I’m still actively using the data and that my efforts to improve their performance are always evidence-based, says @connor_ryder30. Share on XSolution 3: Lean on Interns and Personal Expertise to Conduct Research with Limited Resources
If your school has minimal resources, you can still make significant research contributions by using your expertise and tapping into the enthusiasm and manpower of interns. Focus on manageable, impactful projects that don’t require extensive funding or equipment. This solution is the direction where most S&C practitioners will be able to realistically go right away, but it shouldn’t discourage you from working towards Solutions 1 or 2!
If your school has minimal resources, you can still make significant research contributions by using your expertise and tapping into the enthusiasm and manpower of interns. Share on XAction Steps
- Use your research background to guide interns in designing and executing small-scale studies that align with your programming goals (e.g., comparative analysis of different exercise selections).
- Focus on practical, low-cost research methods such as surveys, observational studies, or basic statistical analysis of existing performance data. Make sure your research group follows best practices for conducting research to avoid poor study design!
- Encourage interns to present findings at regional or national Strength and Conditioning conferences or submit them for publication in practitioner-oriented journals.
- Build a repository of case studies or research briefs that can be shared with the broader community.
Benefits
- Use your own expertise to overcome the limitations of funding or infrastructure.
- Keep interns engaged in the important, but less glamorous, side of S&C.
- Provide your staff with meaningful, resume-building research experience while auditing your own processes.
- Guide innovation and boost credibility despite resource constraints.
Pushing the field forward requires an honest assessment of what’s holding us back. I feel we’re too focused on utilizing established methods that may be outdated, we’re too dependent on the experiences of those who came before us, and at times, ignorant of what we can do to go beyond what is required of us now to get the things we want in the end.
Ultimately, the responsibility lies with all of us to raise the standards within the field of Strength and Conditioning. By committing to validated practices and making ourselves vulnerable to the scrutiny of others, we can collectively elevate the profession, and—more importantly—better develop the athletes who rely on us to help them succeed.
Since you’re here…
…we have a small favor to ask. More people are reading SimpliFaster than ever, and each week we bring you compelling content from coaches, sport scientists, and physiotherapists who are devoted to building better athletes. Please take a moment to share the articles on social media, engage the authors with questions and comments below, and link to articles when appropriate if you have a blog or participate on forums of related topics. — SF