This study describes the results of a survey of the strength and conditioning practices of the National Football League’s (NFL) strength and conditioning (S&C) coaches. The primary purpose was to identify the common and unique aspects of the NFL S&C practices during 2018. A secondary purpose was to compare those results to 1997-1998 (‘97-98) to determine differences across years. The survey response rate was 28.1% (9 of 32 NFL teams) agreeing to participate. The survey instrument was a 150 item assessment divided into 10 sections examining the entire training program. Results revealed that subjects test 6.8 ± 3.1 fitness variables using 9.0 ± 3.7 tests; compared to 7.0 fitness variables using 10.0 tests in ‘97-98. Six subjects prescribe plyometric exercises to “all players” 1.8 ± .4 days per week. During the in-season subjects prescribed resistance training 2.3 ± .8 days per week (n=6); similar to 2.8 ± 0.8 days per week in ’97-98 (p= .220). Subjects prescribed off-season resistance training 3.5 ± 0.8 days per week; compared to 2.0 ± 2.9 days per week in ’97-98 (p= .007). Five subjects prescribed “all players” balance and stability training “year round”; on average 3.3 ± .9 days per week (n=4). This data should be useful for future research as a source for comparison. With this new source of information, researchers are able to continue to empirically investigate various aspects of training programing. Additionally, a variety of other S&C practices were examined. This research was funded by two Excellence in Education Research Grants.
","abstract_html":"<p>This study describes the results of a survey of the strength and conditioning practices of the National Football League’s (NFL) strength and conditioning (S&C) coaches. The primary purpose was to identify the common and unique aspects of the NFL S&C practices during 2018. A secondary purpose was to compare those results to 1997-1998 (‘97-98) to determine differences across years. The survey response rate was 28.1% (9 of 32 NFL teams) agreeing to participate. The survey instrument was a 150 item assessment divided into 10 sections examining the entire training program. Results revealed that subjects test 6.8 ± 3.1 fitness variables using 9.0 ± 3.7 tests; compared to 7.0 fitness variables using 10.0 tests in ‘97-98. Six subjects prescribe plyometric exercises to “all players” 1.8 ± .4 days per week. During the in-season subjects prescribed resistance training 2.3 ± .8 days per week (n=6); similar to 2.8 ± 0.8 days per week in ’97-98 (p= .220). Subjects prescribed off-season resistance training 3.5 ± 0.8 days per week; compared to 2.0 ± 2.9 days per week in ’97-98 (p= .007). Five subjects prescribed “all players” balance and stability training “year round”; on average 3.3 ± .9 days per week (n=4). This data should be useful for future research as a source for comparison. With this new source of information, researchers are able to continue to empirically investigate various aspects of training programing. Additionally, a variety of other S&C practices were examined. This research was funded by two Excellence in Education Research Grants.</p>","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Fitzgerald, Corey"],"institution":null,"degree_name":"Master of Science","degree_level":"Thesis","degree_discipline":"Health and Human Performance","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Randall L. Jensen"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2020,"date_issued":"2020-03-01T08:00:00Z","date_published":"2020-03-01T08:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T03:24:17Z","subjects":["American Football","survey","training intervention","exercise","elite athletes","Sports Sciences"],"languages":[],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://commons.nmu.edu/theses/614","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Randall L. Jensen"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Fitzgerald, Corey"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2020-03-10T07:00:00Z"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Health and Human Performance"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Thesis"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Master of Science"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["American Football","survey","training intervention","exercise","elite athletes","Sports Sciences"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://commons.nmu.edu/theses/614"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["This study describes the results of a survey of the strength and conditioning practices of the National Football League’s (NFL) strength and conditioning (S&C) coaches. The primary purpose was to identify the common and unique aspects of the NFL S&C practices during 2018. A secondary purpose was to compare those results to 1997-1998 (‘97-98) to determine differences across years. The survey response rate was 28.1% (9 of 32 NFL teams) agreeing to participate. The survey instrument was a 150 item assessment divided into 10 sections examining the entire training program. Results revealed that subjects test 6.8 ± 3.1 fitness variables using 9.0 ± 3.7 tests; compared to 7.0 fitness variables using 10.0 tests in ‘97-98. Six subjects prescribe plyometric exercises to “all players” 1.8 ± .4 days per week. During the in-season subjects prescribed resistance training 2.3 ± .8 days per week (n=6); similar to 2.8 ± 0.8 days per week in ’97-98 (p= .220). Subjects prescribed off-season resistance training 3.5 ± 0.8 days per week; compared to 2.0 ± 2.9 days per week in ’97-98 (p= .007). Five subjects prescribed “all players” balance and stability training “year round”; on average 3.3 ± .9 days per week (n=4). This data should be useful for future research as a source for comparison. With this new source of information, researchers are able to continue to empirically investigate various aspects of training programing. Additionally, a variety of other S&C practices were examined. This research was funded by two Excellence in Education Research Grants.
"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["A COMPARISON OF THE NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE COACHES STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING PRACTICES 1997-1998 TO 2018"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Randall L. Jensen"],"dc:creator":["Fitzgerald, Corey"],"dc:date.available":["2020-03-10T07:00:00Z"],"dc:description.abstract":["This study describes the results of a survey of the strength and conditioning practices of the National Football League’s (NFL) strength and conditioning (S&C) coaches. The primary purpose was to identify the common and unique aspects of the NFL S&C practices during 2018. A secondary purpose was to compare those results to 1997-1998 (‘97-98) to determine differences across years. The survey response rate was 28.1% (9 of 32 NFL teams) agreeing to participate. The survey instrument was a 150 item assessment divided into 10 sections examining the entire training program. Results revealed that subjects test 6.8 ± 3.1 fitness variables using 9.0 ± 3.7 tests; compared to 7.0 fitness variables using 10.0 tests in ‘97-98. Six subjects prescribe plyometric exercises to “all players” 1.8 ± .4 days per week. During the in-season subjects prescribed resistance training 2.3 ± .8 days per week (n=6); similar to 2.8 ± 0.8 days per week in ’97-98 (p= .220). Subjects prescribed off-season resistance training 3.5 ± 0.8 days per week; compared to 2.0 ± 2.9 days per week in ’97-98 (p= .007). Five subjects prescribed “all players” balance and stability training “year round”; on average 3.3 ± .9 days per week (n=4). This data should be useful for future research as a source for comparison. With this new source of information, researchers are able to continue to empirically investigate various aspects of training programing. Additionally, a variety of other S&C practices were examined. This research was funded by two Excellence in Education Research Grants.
"],"dc:identifier":["https://commons.nmu.edu/theses/614"],"dc:subject":["American Football","survey","training intervention","exercise","elite athletes","Sports Sciences"],"dc:title":["A COMPARISON OF THE NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE COACHES STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING PRACTICES 1997-1998 TO 2018"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Health and Human Performance"],"thesis:degree_level":["Thesis"],"thesis:degree_name":["Master of Science"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T03:24:17Z"}