Football Home Game
Sat, August 31, 2024
Sat, August 31, 2024
Basketball Home Game
Fri, November 1, 2024
Fri, November 1, 2024
Strength and Conditioning Program
-
- Posts: 640
- Joined: October 26th, 2019, 10:00 pm
- Has thanked: 408 times
- Been thanked: 417 times
Strength and Conditioning Program
Hey guys. What’s the good word on the new strength and conditioning program for the team? Any inside info on how the players have felt about it so far? The recent post about Calvin Knapp being a little undersized got me thinking about the program and how effective it’s gonna be in turning these players into chiseled football machines.
-
- Aggie Insider, Pick'em Champ - '18 Kickoff, '19 Weekly
- Posts: 19410
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 8:17 pm
- Location: Smithfield, Utah
- Has thanked: 23380 times
- Been thanked: 15507 times
- Contact:
Re: Strength and Conditioning Program
The summer strength and conditioning program starts tomorrow. The players are starting to trickle back into town this week.Slim80 wrote: ↑May 31st, 2021, 1:21 pmHey guys. What’s the good word on the new strength and conditioning program for the team? Any inside info on how the players have felt about it so far? The recent post about Calvin Knapp being a little undersized got me thinking about the program and how effective it’s gonna be in turning these players into chiseled football machines.
-
- Posts: 1225
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 6:03 pm
- Has thanked: 126 times
- Been thanked: 421 times
Re: Strength and Conditioning Program
"Undersized" for the OL usually means the player is under 300 pounds these days. But for so many about 20 pounds or more hangs out over their belts and is not muscle. I'd put a 260 - 270 Merlin Olsen or Clark Miller up against any of today's linemen. Air Force does well with linemen in that range of weight.
- These users thanked the author BobWilson for the post (total 2):
- USU78 • NavyBlueAggie
-
- Posts: 476
- Joined: March 3rd, 2014, 7:52 pm
- Location: Logan, Utah
- Has thanked: 492 times
- Been thanked: 265 times
Re: Strength and Conditioning Program
I disagree. Air Force does well with lineman that size because their system and program requires them to have linemen that size. The triple option relies having quicker linemen that are experts at chop blocking against larger lineman which is largely a run blocking scheme. Linemen in a non triple option offense still need to be quick, but not as quick and need to have mass.You can get away with a just under 300lb quicker offensive tackle since the edge tends to use finesse moves over the bull rush but on the inside where DTs and NTs are in the 300+ range that extra 20-40lbs of even just fat can make the difference between being consistently bulldozed during a bull rush in a 4-5 second traditional pass rush.BobWilson wrote: ↑May 31st, 2021, 6:50 pm"Undersized" for the OL usually means the player is under 300 pounds these days. But for so many about 20 pounds or more hangs out over their belts and is not muscle. I'd put a 260 - 270 Merlin Olsen or Clark Miller up against any of today's linemen. Air Force does well with linemen in that range of weight.
- These users thanked the author FromLItoLogan for the post:
- BobWilson
-
- Posts: 3073
- Joined: November 5th, 2010, 9:28 am
- Has thanked: 398 times
- Been thanked: 753 times
Re: Strength and Conditioning Program
There is an entry posted on this forum identifying the biggest O lines in 2020 complete with height and weight. I believe one of the major problems confronting college and professional football is the extra bulk developed on players these last two decades. Too much mass for the various skeletons, tendons, ligaments even the muscles to manage. Just look at the growing number of injuries and the extended healing time for these athletes.
Players are now faster, taller and enjoy better equipment than we had all those years ago, and that is reality. The frequency of injuries continue to grow, and I blame physics. Mass times velocity elevates the intensity of contact, and the mass increases along with the rate of injury.
Players are now faster, taller and enjoy better equipment than we had all those years ago, and that is reality. The frequency of injuries continue to grow, and I blame physics. Mass times velocity elevates the intensity of contact, and the mass increases along with the rate of injury.
- These users thanked the author NavyBlueAggie for the post (total 3):
- USU78 • BobWilson • bluegrouse
- El Sapo
- Posts: 3075
- Joined: November 27th, 2017, 1:32 pm
- Has thanked: 615 times
- Been thanked: 699 times
Re: Strength and Conditioning Program
I'm surprised the program is just starting. Is there a unofficial program that our players participate in? I know they're students and not professionals, but the considering DeLaSalle High School football players train year around, and we have that great facility, I thought our guys would as well.
- USU78
- Pick'em Champ - '16 Weekly
- Posts: 15398
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 6:43 am
- Location: Sandy
- Has thanked: 7167 times
- Been thanked: 2086 times
Re: Strength and Conditioning Program
Bear Bryant would take a three hundred plus pounder and work him till he was down to 265, all muscle, springs for legs, able to sprint every play for the full sixty minutes.NavyBlueAggie wrote: ↑May 31st, 2021, 9:06 pmThere is an entry posted on this forum identifying the biggest O lines in 2020 complete with height and weight. I believe one of the major problems confronting college and professional football is the extra bulk developed on players these last two decades. Too much mass for the various skeletons, tendons, ligaments even the muscles to manage. Just look at the growing number of injuries and the extended healing time for these athletes.
Players are now faster, taller and enjoy better equipment than we had all those years ago, and that is reality. The frequency of injuries continue to grow, and I blame physics. Mass times velocity elevates the intensity of contact, and the mass increases along with the rate of injury.
And those 265 pounders beat the crap out of everybody.
Because Force = mass times velocity squared. If it were velocity times mass squared Bear would've languished at some JC somewhere
- These users thanked the author USU78 for the post (total 2):
- NavyBlueAggie • mcaggie1
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
-
- Aggie Insider, Pick'em Champ - '18 Kickoff, '19 Weekly
- Posts: 19410
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 8:17 pm
- Location: Smithfield, Utah
- Has thanked: 23380 times
- Been thanked: 15507 times
- Contact:
Re: Strength and Conditioning Program
Once finals are over the kids are all allowed to go home for four or five weeks.El Sapo wrote: ↑June 1st, 2021, 9:11 amI'm surprised the program is just starting. Is there a unofficial program that our players participate in? I know they're students and not professionals, but the considering DeLaSalle High School football players train year around, and we have that great facility, I thought our guys would as well.
Re: Strength and Conditioning Program
I hope you aren't a college of engineering alum...USU78 wrote: ↑June 1st, 2021, 9:28 amBear Bryant would take a three hundred plus pounder and work him till he was down to 265, all muscle, springs for legs, able to sprint every play for the full sixty minutes.NavyBlueAggie wrote: ↑May 31st, 2021, 9:06 pmThere is an entry posted on this forum identifying the biggest O lines in 2020 complete with height and weight. I believe one of the major problems confronting college and professional football is the extra bulk developed on players these last two decades. Too much mass for the various skeletons, tendons, ligaments even the muscles to manage. Just look at the growing number of injuries and the extended healing time for these athletes.
Players are now faster, taller and enjoy better equipment than we had all those years ago, and that is reality. The frequency of injuries continue to grow, and I blame physics. Mass times velocity elevates the intensity of contact, and the mass increases along with the rate of injury.
And those 265 pounders beat the crap out of everybody.
Because Force = mass times velocity squared. If it were velocity times mass squared Bear would've languished at some JC somewhere
- These users thanked the author MalAgua for the post:
- thegreendalegelf
- El Sapo
- Posts: 3075
- Joined: November 27th, 2017, 1:32 pm
- Has thanked: 615 times
- Been thanked: 699 times
Re: Strength and Conditioning Program
UNACEPTABLE!aggies22 wrote: ↑June 1st, 2021, 10:08 amOnce finals are over the kids are all allowed to go home for four or five weeks.El Sapo wrote: ↑June 1st, 2021, 9:11 amI'm surprised the program is just starting. Is there a unofficial program that our players participate in? I know they're students and not professionals, but the considering DeLaSalle High School football players train year around, and we have that great facility, I thought our guys would as well.
-
- Posts: 10605
- Joined: November 14th, 2010, 11:56 pm
- Has thanked: 353 times
- Been thanked: 3130 times
Re: Strength and Conditioning Program
I was going to correct the equation, but I have held off.MalAgua wrote: ↑June 1st, 2021, 10:09 amI hope you aren't a college of engineering alum...USU78 wrote: ↑June 1st, 2021, 9:28 amBear Bryant would take a three hundred plus pounder and work him till he was down to 265, all muscle, springs for legs, able to sprint every play for the full sixty minutes.NavyBlueAggie wrote: ↑May 31st, 2021, 9:06 pmThere is an entry posted on this forum identifying the biggest O lines in 2020 complete with height and weight. I believe one of the major problems confronting college and professional football is the extra bulk developed on players these last two decades. Too much mass for the various skeletons, tendons, ligaments even the muscles to manage. Just look at the growing number of injuries and the extended healing time for these athletes.
Players are now faster, taller and enjoy better equipment than we had all those years ago, and that is reality. The frequency of injuries continue to grow, and I blame physics. Mass times velocity elevates the intensity of contact, and the mass increases along with the rate of injury.
And those 265 pounders beat the crap out of everybody.
Because Force = mass times velocity squared. If it were velocity times mass squared Bear would've languished at some JC somewhere
Eutaw St. Aggie
-
- Posts: 3525
- Joined: November 5th, 2010, 3:14 pm
- Has thanked: 493 times
- Been thanked: 706 times
Re: Strength and Conditioning Program
2+2=4.Yossarian wrote: ↑June 1st, 2021, 10:38 amI was going to correct the equation, but I have held off.MalAgua wrote: ↑June 1st, 2021, 10:09 amI hope you aren't a college of engineering alum...USU78 wrote: ↑June 1st, 2021, 9:28 amBear Bryant would take a three hundred plus pounder and work him till he was down to 265, all muscle, springs for legs, able to sprint every play for the full sixty minutes.NavyBlueAggie wrote: ↑May 31st, 2021, 9:06 pmThere is an entry posted on this forum identifying the biggest O lines in 2020 complete with height and weight. I believe one of the major problems confronting college and professional football is the extra bulk developed on players these last two decades. Too much mass for the various skeletons, tendons, ligaments even the muscles to manage. Just look at the growing number of injuries and the extended healing time for these athletes.
Players are now faster, taller and enjoy better equipment than we had all those years ago, and that is reality. The frequency of injuries continue to grow, and I blame physics. Mass times velocity elevates the intensity of contact, and the mass increases along with the rate of injury.
And those 265 pounders beat the crap out of everybody.
Because Force = mass times velocity squared. If it were velocity times mass squared Bear would've languished at some JC somewhere
- USU78
- Pick'em Champ - '16 Weekly
- Posts: 15398
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 6:43 am
- Location: Sandy
- Has thanked: 7167 times
- Been thanked: 2086 times
Re: Strength and Conditioning Program
Can you explain where the 1/2 goes on mv^2*1/2? Never quite understood that. Teacher going on and on about the relationship between kinetic energy and E=mc^2 and the 1/2 disappearing ... or something.Yossarian wrote: ↑June 1st, 2021, 10:38 amI was going to correct the equation, but I have held off.MalAgua wrote: ↑June 1st, 2021, 10:09 amI hope you aren't a college of engineering alum...USU78 wrote: ↑June 1st, 2021, 9:28 amBear Bryant would take a three hundred plus pounder and work him till he was down to 265, all muscle, springs for legs, able to sprint every play for the full sixty minutes.NavyBlueAggie wrote: ↑May 31st, 2021, 9:06 pmThere is an entry posted on this forum identifying the biggest O lines in 2020 complete with height and weight. I believe one of the major problems confronting college and professional football is the extra bulk developed on players these last two decades. Too much mass for the various skeletons, tendons, ligaments even the muscles to manage. Just look at the growing number of injuries and the extended healing time for these athletes.
Players are now faster, taller and enjoy better equipment than we had all those years ago, and that is reality. The frequency of injuries continue to grow, and I blame physics. Mass times velocity elevates the intensity of contact, and the mass increases along with the rate of injury.
And those 265 pounders beat the crap out of everybody.
Because Force = mass times velocity squared. If it were velocity times mass squared Bear would've languished at some JC somewhere
In any event velocity is a whole lot more important than mass when big bodies collide at speeds less than the speed of light. That's why we square it. That's why AFA beats our average to bad teams so badly.
... oh, that and the illegal blocking
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
-
- Posts: 10605
- Joined: November 14th, 2010, 11:56 pm
- Has thanked: 353 times
- Been thanked: 3130 times
Re: Strength and Conditioning Program
The equation for force is mass times the acceleration (F=ma). Acceleration is the measurement of the change in velocity given in units of distance/time/time (ft/sec/sec, or ft/sec^2). An object moving at a constant velocity has no acceleration. So, to your point - a fellow of smaller mass can produce a larger force by his ability to accelerate into the hit, when compared to a larger, lumbering fellow that cannot accelerate quickly.USU78 wrote: ↑June 1st, 2021, 5:46 pmCan you explain where the 1/2 goes on mv^2*1/2? Never quite understood that. Teacher going on and on about the relationship between kinetic energy and E=mc^2 and the 1/2 disappearing ... or something.Yossarian wrote: ↑June 1st, 2021, 10:38 amI was going to correct the equation, but I have held off.MalAgua wrote: ↑June 1st, 2021, 10:09 amI hope you aren't a college of engineering alum...USU78 wrote: ↑June 1st, 2021, 9:28 amBear Bryant would take a three hundred plus pounder and work him till he was down to 265, all muscle, springs for legs, able to sprint every play for the full sixty minutes.NavyBlueAggie wrote: ↑May 31st, 2021, 9:06 pmThere is an entry posted on this forum identifying the biggest O lines in 2020 complete with height and weight. I believe one of the major problems confronting college and professional football is the extra bulk developed on players these last two decades. Too much mass for the various skeletons, tendons, ligaments even the muscles to manage. Just look at the growing number of injuries and the extended healing time for these athletes.
Players are now faster, taller and enjoy better equipment than we had all those years ago, and that is reality. The frequency of injuries continue to grow, and I blame physics. Mass times velocity elevates the intensity of contact, and the mass increases along with the rate of injury.
And those 265 pounders beat the crap out of everybody.
Because Force = mass times velocity squared. If it were velocity times mass squared Bear would've languished at some JC somewhere
In any event velocity is a whole lot more important than mass when big bodies collide at speeds less than the speed of light. That's why we square it. That's why AFA beats our average to bad teams so badly.
... oh, that and the illegal blocking
The equation you are giving is Einstein's equation for Energy, not force. He equates the amount of energy to the mass multiplied by the speed of light squared. This provides a relationship between two seemingly different entities - mass and energy.
As per the "1/2",
I think you may be confusing the equations for force with equations for displacement (usually denoted with "u" or "x"). A velocity is calculated by taking an initial velocity and adding acceleration over time (v = u + at). A distance traveled or displacement (s) is calculated by taking the intial velocity multiplied by time "t" and adding the acceleration (or deceleration) of the object over that same time period. This produces (s = ut + 1/2at^2). The "1/2" value comes from the integral of the velocity with respect to time. If you were to take the derivative of the displacement equation with respect to time (ds/dt), you would get the velocity equation with acceleration (u + at).
Eutaw St. Aggie
- USU78
- Pick'em Champ - '16 Weekly
- Posts: 15398
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 6:43 am
- Location: Sandy
- Has thanked: 7167 times
- Been thanked: 2086 times
Re: Strength and Conditioning Program
Thanks. It's been forty years. One gets rusty and I'm too lazy to look stuff up. Good thing I changed majors, huh?Yossarian wrote: ↑June 1st, 2021, 6:32 pmThe equation for force is mass times the acceleration (F=ma). Acceleration is the measurement of the change in velocity given in units of distance/time/time (ft/sec/sec, or ft/sec^2). An object moving at a constant velocity has no acceleration. So, to your point - a fellow of smaller mass can produce a larger force by his ability to accelerate into the hit, when compared to a larger, lumbering fellow that cannot accelerate quickly.USU78 wrote: ↑June 1st, 2021, 5:46 pmCan you explain where the 1/2 goes on mv^2*1/2? Never quite understood that. Teacher going on and on about the relationship between kinetic energy and E=mc^2 and the 1/2 disappearing ... or something.Yossarian wrote: ↑June 1st, 2021, 10:38 amI was going to correct the equation, but I have held off.MalAgua wrote: ↑June 1st, 2021, 10:09 amI hope you aren't a college of engineering alum...USU78 wrote: ↑June 1st, 2021, 9:28 amBear Bryant would take a three hundred plus pounder and work him till he was down to 265, all muscle, springs for legs, able to sprint every play for the full sixty minutes.NavyBlueAggie wrote: ↑May 31st, 2021, 9:06 pmThere is an entry posted on this forum identifying the biggest O lines in 2020 complete with height and weight. I believe one of the major problems confronting college and professional football is the extra bulk developed on players these last two decades. Too much mass for the various skeletons, tendons, ligaments even the muscles to manage. Just look at the growing number of injuries and the extended healing time for these athletes.
Players are now faster, taller and enjoy better equipment than we had all those years ago, and that is reality. The frequency of injuries continue to grow, and I blame physics. Mass times velocity elevates the intensity of contact, and the mass increases along with the rate of injury.
And those 265 pounders beat the crap out of everybody.
Because Force = mass times velocity squared. If it were velocity times mass squared Bear would've languished at some JC somewhere
In any event velocity is a whole lot more important than mass when big bodies collide at speeds less than the speed of light. That's why we square it. That's why AFA beats our average to bad teams so badly.
... oh, that and the illegal blocking
The equation you are giving is Einstein's equation for Energy, not force. He equates the amount of energy to the mass multiplied by the speed of light squared. This provides a relationship between two seemingly different entities - mass and energy.
As per the "1/2",
I think you may be confusing the equations for force with equations for displacement (usually denoted with "u" or "x"). A velocity is calculated by taking an initial velocity and adding acceleration over time (v = u + at). A distance traveled or displacement (s) is calculated by taking the intial velocity multiplied by time "t" and adding the acceleration (or deceleration) of the object over that same time period. This produces (s = ut + 1/2at^2). The "1/2" value comes from the integral of the velocity with respect to time. If you were to take the derivative of the displacement equation with respect to time (ds/dt), you would get the velocity equation with acceleration (u + at).
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
- USU78
- Pick'em Champ - '16 Weekly
- Posts: 15398
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 6:43 am
- Location: Sandy
- Has thanked: 7167 times
- Been thanked: 2086 times
Re: Strength and Conditioning Program
@Yossarian , here's something I just found that agrees with my earliest memories of the issue:
In the book, “The Civil War a Narrative, Fort Sumter to Perryville” by Shelby Foot, …. on page 386 he says, “Back in March after years of failing to interest the navy in his theory – and elderly civil engineer named Charles Eller, Jr., wrote and sent to the War Department a pamphlet applying the formula f = mv2 (Force Equals Mass times Velocity Squared) to demonstrate the superiority of the ram as a naval weapon. ….”
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
-
- Posts: 10605
- Joined: November 14th, 2010, 11:56 pm
- Has thanked: 353 times
- Been thanked: 3130 times
Re: Strength and Conditioning Program
Maybe Eller's lack of understanding of Newton's second law of motion is why he failed to interest the navy in his theory?USU78 wrote: ↑June 2nd, 2021, 1:24 pm@Yossarian , here's something I just found that agrees with my earliest memories of the issue:
In the book, “The Civil War a Narrative, Fort Sumter to Perryville” by Shelby Foot, …. on page 386 he says, “Back in March after years of failing to interest the navy in his theory – and elderly civil engineer named Charles Eller, Jr., wrote and sent to the War Department a pamphlet applying the formula f = mv2 (Force Equals Mass times Velocity Squared) to demonstrate the superiority of the ram as a naval weapon. ….”
The force applied by an object is equivalent to its momentum per unit time. The momentum is the mass multiplied by the velocity, and the velocity is the distance per unit time. All together, F=(m*v)/t. The change in velocity per unit time is acceleration. This brings us to the F = ma equation. Force equals mass times acceleration.
Eutaw St. Aggie
- USU78
- Pick'em Champ - '16 Weekly
- Posts: 15398
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 6:43 am
- Location: Sandy
- Has thanked: 7167 times
- Been thanked: 2086 times
Re: Strength and Conditioning Program
Wouldn't be surprised.Yossarian wrote: ↑June 3rd, 2021, 9:36 amMaybe Eller's lack of understanding of Newton's second law of motion is why he failed to interest the navy in his theory?USU78 wrote: ↑June 2nd, 2021, 1:24 pm@Yossarian , here's something I just found that agrees with my earliest memories of the issue:
In the book, “The Civil War a Narrative, Fort Sumter to Perryville” by Shelby Foot, …. on page 386 he says, “Back in March after years of failing to interest the navy in his theory – and elderly civil engineer named Charles Eller, Jr., wrote and sent to the War Department a pamphlet applying the formula f = mv2 (Force Equals Mass times Velocity Squared) to demonstrate the superiority of the ram as a naval weapon. ….”
I wasn't citing it as evidence I was accurate in that particular, just that it's not an unknown thing. I'm blaming my HS physics teacher. His class was not AP approved. Neither was his Calculus.Yossarian wrote: ↑June 3rd, 2021, 9:36 amThe force applied by an object is equivalent to its momentum per unit time. The momentum is the mass multiplied by the velocity, and the velocity is the distance per unit time. All together, F=(m*v)/t. The change in velocity per unit time is acceleration. This brings us to the F = ma equation. Force equals mass times acceleration.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
-
- Posts: 10605
- Joined: November 14th, 2010, 11:56 pm
- Has thanked: 353 times
- Been thanked: 3130 times
Re: Strength and Conditioning Program
Ha ha. That's funny how that information can stick in one's brain for so long (whether the information is accurate or not). I, too, was a product of an unsophisticated upbringing and school system lacking resources and instructors that were not on par with the "big city" folks. I shouldn't say that, though. I feel that my junior high and high school teachers were very good for a school of 500 kids total from grades 9-12. They even offered 3 AP classes when I was there.USU78 wrote: ↑June 3rd, 2021, 9:42 amWouldn't be surprised.Yossarian wrote: ↑June 3rd, 2021, 9:36 amMaybe Eller's lack of understanding of Newton's second law of motion is why he failed to interest the navy in his theory?USU78 wrote: ↑June 2nd, 2021, 1:24 pm@Yossarian , here's something I just found that agrees with my earliest memories of the issue:
In the book, “The Civil War a Narrative, Fort Sumter to Perryville” by Shelby Foot, …. on page 386 he says, “Back in March after years of failing to interest the navy in his theory – and elderly civil engineer named Charles Eller, Jr., wrote and sent to the War Department a pamphlet applying the formula f = mv2 (Force Equals Mass times Velocity Squared) to demonstrate the superiority of the ram as a naval weapon. ….”I wasn't citing it as evidence I was accurate in that particular, just that it's not an unknown thing. I'm blaming my HS physics teacher. His class was not AP approved. Neither was his Calculus.Yossarian wrote: ↑June 3rd, 2021, 9:36 amThe force applied by an object is equivalent to its momentum per unit time. The momentum is the mass multiplied by the velocity, and the velocity is the distance per unit time. All together, F=(m*v)/t. The change in velocity per unit time is acceleration. This brings us to the F = ma equation. Force equals mass times acceleration.
Now I look back at how far we have ventured from the USU strength and conditioning program topic.
Eutaw St. Aggie
- USU78
- Pick'em Champ - '16 Weekly
- Posts: 15398
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 6:43 am
- Location: Sandy
- Has thanked: 7167 times
- Been thanked: 2086 times
Re: Strength and Conditioning Program
We old geeks whose slide rules are long gone, who, like me, listened to people like my HS teacher and my WWI and II Field Artillery Lt Colonel Grandfather (who caused a whole lot of damage in France and the Philippines) could probably, using the inaccurate but useful F=mv^2, still put some pretty big holes in yBu's defensive line, wouldn't you think?Yossarian wrote: ↑June 3rd, 2021, 9:50 amHa ha. That's funny how that information can stick in one's brain for so long (whether the information is accurate or not). I, too, was a product of an unsophisticated upbringing and school system lacking resources and instructors that were not on par with the "big city" folks. I shouldn't say that, though. I feel that my junior high and high school teachers were very good for a school of 500 kids total from grades 9-12. They even offered 3 AP classes when I was there.USU78 wrote: ↑June 3rd, 2021, 9:42 amWouldn't be surprised.Yossarian wrote: ↑June 3rd, 2021, 9:36 amMaybe Eller's lack of understanding of Newton's second law of motion is why he failed to interest the navy in his theory?USU78 wrote: ↑June 2nd, 2021, 1:24 pm@Yossarian , here's something I just found that agrees with my earliest memories of the issue:
In the book, “The Civil War a Narrative, Fort Sumter to Perryville” by Shelby Foot, …. on page 386 he says, “Back in March after years of failing to interest the navy in his theory – and elderly civil engineer named Charles Eller, Jr., wrote and sent to the War Department a pamphlet applying the formula f = mv2 (Force Equals Mass times Velocity Squared) to demonstrate the superiority of the ram as a naval weapon. ….”I wasn't citing it as evidence I was accurate in that particular, just that it's not an unknown thing. I'm blaming my HS physics teacher. His class was not AP approved. Neither was his Calculus.Yossarian wrote: ↑June 3rd, 2021, 9:36 amThe force applied by an object is equivalent to its momentum per unit time. The momentum is the mass multiplied by the velocity, and the velocity is the distance per unit time. All together, F=(m*v)/t. The change in velocity per unit time is acceleration. This brings us to the F = ma equation. Force equals mass times acceleration.
Now I look back at how far we have ventured from the USU strength and conditioning program topic.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Re: Strength and Conditioning Program
To determine how far off-topic we've gone, one must simply integrate how quickly the conversation diverged over the time it took to get here. Although, we must ensure sufficient step sizes to account for the highly variable rate of divergence caused by comments like this.Yossarian wrote: ↑June 3rd, 2021, 9:50 amHa ha. That's funny how that information can stick in one's brain for so long (whether the information is accurate or not). I, too, was a product of an unsophisticated upbringing and school system lacking resources and instructors that were not on par with the "big city" folks. I shouldn't say that, though. I feel that my junior high and high school teachers were very good for a school of 500 kids total from grades 9-12. They even offered 3 AP classes when I was there.USU78 wrote: ↑June 3rd, 2021, 9:42 amWouldn't be surprised.Yossarian wrote: ↑June 3rd, 2021, 9:36 amMaybe Eller's lack of understanding of Newton's second law of motion is why he failed to interest the navy in his theory?USU78 wrote: ↑June 2nd, 2021, 1:24 pm@Yossarian , here's something I just found that agrees with my earliest memories of the issue:
In the book, “The Civil War a Narrative, Fort Sumter to Perryville” by Shelby Foot, …. on page 386 he says, “Back in March after years of failing to interest the navy in his theory – and elderly civil engineer named Charles Eller, Jr., wrote and sent to the War Department a pamphlet applying the formula f = mv2 (Force Equals Mass times Velocity Squared) to demonstrate the superiority of the ram as a naval weapon. ….”I wasn't citing it as evidence I was accurate in that particular, just that it's not an unknown thing. I'm blaming my HS physics teacher. His class was not AP approved. Neither was his Calculus.Yossarian wrote: ↑June 3rd, 2021, 9:36 amThe force applied by an object is equivalent to its momentum per unit time. The momentum is the mass multiplied by the velocity, and the velocity is the distance per unit time. All together, F=(m*v)/t. The change in velocity per unit time is acceleration. This brings us to the F = ma equation. Force equals mass times acceleration.
Now I look back at how far we have ventured from the USU strength and conditioning program topic.
- These users thanked the author MalAgua for the post (total 2):
- sam tingey • USU78
-
- Posts: 3525
- Joined: November 5th, 2010, 3:14 pm
- Has thanked: 493 times
- Been thanked: 706 times
Re: Strength and Conditioning Program
My dad was a USU grad in Math and Physics, and was a HS Physics teacher for a couple of years. He also spent 2 years in the Army infantry. One of the first to cross the Rhine River. Fought in Battle of the Bulge. Helped free concentration camp he and his squad discovered. Awarded a Silver Star, 2 Bronze Stars , and a Purple Heart.
He knew all the formulas. A few years before he died I asked him what was the primary reason the American troops won the War. Strategy? Weaponry? Superior numbers? Luck? Some kind of formulas?
He looked at me and said, “Steve, we won because we (the Americans) had a sense of humor. It kept us going.”
He knew all the formulas. A few years before he died I asked him what was the primary reason the American troops won the War. Strategy? Weaponry? Superior numbers? Luck? Some kind of formulas?
He looked at me and said, “Steve, we won because we (the Americans) had a sense of humor. It kept us going.”
- These users thanked the author mcaggie1 for the post (total 2):
- USU78 • bluegrouse
-
- Posts: 10605
- Joined: November 14th, 2010, 11:56 pm
- Has thanked: 353 times
- Been thanked: 3130 times
Re: Strength and Conditioning Program
I like your dad.mcaggie1 wrote: ↑June 3rd, 2021, 11:34 amMy dad was a USU grad in Math and Physics, and was a HS Physics teacher for a couple of years. He also spent 2 years in the Army infantry. One of the first to cross the Rhine River. Fought in Battle of the Bulge. Helped free concentration camp he and his squad discovered. Awarded a Silver Star, 2 Bronze Stars , and a Purple Heart.
He knew all the formulas. A few years before he died I asked him what was the primary reason the American troops won the War. Strategy? Weaponry? Superior numbers? Luck? Some kind of formulas?
He looked at me and said, “Steve, we won because we (the Americans) had a sense of humor. It kept us going.”
Eutaw St. Aggie
-
- Posts: 10605
- Joined: November 14th, 2010, 11:56 pm
- Has thanked: 353 times
- Been thanked: 3130 times
Re: Strength and Conditioning Program
If we take the Reimann sum of the area under the curve describing deviation from original topic on the y-axis and time on the x-axis and we break up the time into small enough segments, we can get a very close approximation of the amount of energy and effort wasted in this thread.MalAgua wrote: ↑June 3rd, 2021, 11:15 amTo determine how far off-topic we've gone, one must simply integrate how quickly the conversation diverged over the time it took to get here. Although, we must ensure sufficient step sizes to account for the highly variable rate of divergence caused by comments like this.Yossarian wrote: ↑June 3rd, 2021, 9:50 amHa ha. That's funny how that information can stick in one's brain for so long (whether the information is accurate or not). I, too, was a product of an unsophisticated upbringing and school system lacking resources and instructors that were not on par with the "big city" folks. I shouldn't say that, though. I feel that my junior high and high school teachers were very good for a school of 500 kids total from grades 9-12. They even offered 3 AP classes when I was there.USU78 wrote: ↑June 3rd, 2021, 9:42 amWouldn't be surprised.Yossarian wrote: ↑June 3rd, 2021, 9:36 amMaybe Eller's lack of understanding of Newton's second law of motion is why he failed to interest the navy in his theory?USU78 wrote: ↑June 2nd, 2021, 1:24 pm@Yossarian , here's something I just found that agrees with my earliest memories of the issue:
In the book, “The Civil War a Narrative, Fort Sumter to Perryville” by Shelby Foot, …. on page 386 he says, “Back in March after years of failing to interest the navy in his theory – and elderly civil engineer named Charles Eller, Jr., wrote and sent to the War Department a pamphlet applying the formula f = mv2 (Force Equals Mass times Velocity Squared) to demonstrate the superiority of the ram as a naval weapon. ….”I wasn't citing it as evidence I was accurate in that particular, just that it's not an unknown thing. I'm blaming my HS physics teacher. His class was not AP approved. Neither was his Calculus.Yossarian wrote: ↑June 3rd, 2021, 9:36 amThe force applied by an object is equivalent to its momentum per unit time. The momentum is the mass multiplied by the velocity, and the velocity is the distance per unit time. All together, F=(m*v)/t. The change in velocity per unit time is acceleration. This brings us to the F = ma equation. Force equals mass times acceleration.
Now I look back at how far we have ventured from the USU strength and conditioning program topic.
Sometimes I find that the wanderings off the original topic path can be more interesting than the topic itself.
- These users thanked the author Yossarian for the post (total 2):
- sam tingey • bluegrouse
Eutaw St. Aggie
- sam tingey
- Pick'em Champ - '13, '16 FB Predict the Score; '17, '18 Bowl
- Posts: 3636
- Joined: October 2nd, 2012, 8:40 am
- Has thanked: 1838 times
- Been thanked: 894 times
Re: Strength and Conditioning Program
I come for weights and gains and I get math and physics. Bunch o' nerds around here. Bicep Curls!
Re: Strength and Conditioning Program
We could talk about the torques induced by the contracting bicep muscles and the long-term stresses associated with the jerk on the interfaces between muscles and bones...sam tingey wrote: ↑June 3rd, 2021, 12:14 pmI come for weights and gains and I get math and physics. Bunch o' nerds around here. Bicep Curls!
- These users thanked the author MalAgua for the post:
- sam tingey
-
- Posts: 10605
- Joined: November 14th, 2010, 11:56 pm
- Has thanked: 353 times
- Been thanked: 3130 times
Re: Strength and Conditioning Program
Or take it further into discussions of flexor and extensor muscle groups and how they function both in synchrony and opposition along with the Krebb's cycle role in muscle contraction.MalAgua wrote: ↑June 3rd, 2021, 12:44 pmWe could talk about the torques induced by the contracting bicep muscles and the long-term stresses associated with the jerk on the interfaces between muscles and bones...sam tingey wrote: ↑June 3rd, 2021, 12:14 pmI come for weights and gains and I get math and physics. Bunch o' nerds around here. Bicep Curls!
Eutaw St. Aggie
- sam tingey
- Pick'em Champ - '13, '16 FB Predict the Score; '17, '18 Bowl
- Posts: 3636
- Joined: October 2nd, 2012, 8:40 am
- Has thanked: 1838 times
- Been thanked: 894 times
Re: Strength and Conditioning Program
just as long as you aren't doing half reps or not reracking your weights, you can talk about these sciency things. Overhead Press!Yossarian wrote: ↑June 3rd, 2021, 12:50 pmOr take it further into discussions of flexor and extensor muscle groups and how they function both in synchrony and opposition along with the Krebb's cycle role in muscle contraction.MalAgua wrote: ↑June 3rd, 2021, 12:44 pmWe could talk about the torques induced by the contracting bicep muscles and the long-term stresses associated with the jerk on the interfaces between muscles and bones...sam tingey wrote: ↑June 3rd, 2021, 12:14 pmI come for weights and gains and I get math and physics. Bunch o' nerds around here. Bicep Curls!
- These users thanked the author sam tingey for the post:
- USU78
- BigBlueDart
- Pick'em Champ - '17 FB Predict the Score
- Posts: 9113
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 7:57 am
- Location: Syracuse, UT
- Has thanked: 254 times
- Been thanked: 1049 times
Re: Strength and Conditioning Program
Okay, so rather than doing a direct mathematical integration you're proposing that we take a discretized numerical approach? We can likely minimize the error from step size by using a more advanced method, like Runge-Kutta. Of course, that's going to increase our computational requirements. I suppose we could talk to folks at USU about using one of their clusters, and I could research some parallelized algorithms to use. Probably some existing libraries out there, so no need to re-invent the wheel, right?MalAgua wrote: ↑June 3rd, 2021, 11:15 amTo determine how far off-topic we've gone, one must simply integrate how quickly the conversation diverged over the time it took to get here. Although, we must ensure sufficient step sizes to account for the highly variable rate of divergence caused by comments like this.
- These users thanked the author BigBlueDart for the post:
- Yossarian
- sam tingey
- Pick'em Champ - '13, '16 FB Predict the Score; '17, '18 Bowl
- Posts: 3636
- Joined: October 2nd, 2012, 8:40 am
- Has thanked: 1838 times
- Been thanked: 894 times
Re: Strength and Conditioning Program
I find that i am sad that I understand everything you just said BBD. Bench Press!BigBlueDart wrote: ↑June 3rd, 2021, 2:19 pmOkay, so rather than doing a direct mathematical integration you're proposing that we take a discretized numerical approach? We can likely minimize the error from step size by using a more advanced method, like Runge-Kutta. Of course, that's going to increase our computational requirements. I suppose we could talk to folks at USU about using one of their clusters, and I could research some parallelized algorithms to use. Probably some existing libraries out there, so no need to re-invent the wheel, right?MalAgua wrote: ↑June 3rd, 2021, 11:15 amTo determine how far off-topic we've gone, one must simply integrate how quickly the conversation diverged over the time it took to get here. Although, we must ensure sufficient step sizes to account for the highly variable rate of divergence caused by comments like this.
- These users thanked the author sam tingey for the post:
- BigBlueDart
-
- Posts: 10605
- Joined: November 14th, 2010, 11:56 pm
- Has thanked: 353 times
- Been thanked: 3130 times
Re: Strength and Conditioning Program
Exactly. I do not plan on evaluating by allowing the time increment go to infinity. I don't see a reason for that level of accuracy in our calculation.BigBlueDart wrote: ↑June 3rd, 2021, 2:19 pmOkay, so rather than doing a direct mathematical integration you're proposing that we take a discretized numerical approach? We can likely minimize the error from step size by using a more advanced method, like Runge-Kutta. Of course, that's going to increase our computational requirements. I suppose we could talk to folks at USU about using one of their clusters, and I could research some parallelized algorithms to use. Probably some existing libraries out there, so no need to re-invent the wheel, right?MalAgua wrote: ↑June 3rd, 2021, 11:15 amTo determine how far off-topic we've gone, one must simply integrate how quickly the conversation diverged over the time it took to get here. Although, we must ensure sufficient step sizes to account for the highly variable rate of divergence caused by comments like this.
Eutaw St. Aggie
- JSHarvey
- Posts: 2245
- Joined: April 2nd, 2013, 12:45 pm
- Location: Sandy, UT
- Has thanked: 3529 times
- Been thanked: 352 times
Re: Strength and Conditioning Program
ROTFLOL
I'll be interested to hear the feedback (second hand) as the players get into the new program.
I'll be interested to hear the feedback (second hand) as the players get into the new program.
"The purpose of education is not to validate ignorance but to overcome it." Lawrence Krauss
"Thinking is the hardest work there is, that's why so few people do it!" Henry Ford
"Thinking is the hardest work there is, that's why so few people do it!" Henry Ford
-
- Posts: 3525
- Joined: November 5th, 2010, 3:14 pm
- Has thanked: 493 times
- Been thanked: 706 times
Re: Strength and Conditioning Program
Ellers inability to convince the Union Navy probably had nothing to do with Newton’s second law of motion, and everything to do with Farragut’s gigantic ego. He wanted to call all the shots, and sometimes that cost him. Best example was Vicksburg before Grant got there. Btw.....love Shelby Foote.Yossarian wrote: ↑June 3rd, 2021, 9:36 amMaybe Eller's lack of understanding of Newton's second law of motion is why he failed to interest the navy in his theory?USU78 wrote: ↑June 2nd, 2021, 1:24 pm@Yossarian , here's something I just found that agrees with my earliest memories of the issue:
In the book, “The Civil War a Narrative, Fort Sumter to Perryville” by Shelby Foot, …. on page 386 he says, “Back in March after years of failing to interest the navy in his theory – and elderly civil engineer named Charles Eller, Jr., wrote and sent to the War Department a pamphlet applying the formula f = mv2 (Force Equals Mass times Velocity Squared) to demonstrate the superiority of the ram as a naval weapon. ….”
The force applied by an object is equivalent to its momentum per unit time. The momentum is the mass multiplied by the velocity, and the velocity is the distance per unit time. All together, F=(m*v)/t. The change in velocity per unit time is acceleration. This brings us to the F = ma equation. Force equals mass times acceleration.