Looks like the NSCA doesn't agree with doyle or the u of i.

[tazclone]

Looks like the u of i stretched the truth to cover their arse and the NSCA doesn't like it. Guess that is what you get when you are allowed to investigate yourself. They sent an 18 page response. Nice little article. Too bad the local media didn't question the u of i response. INstead the NSCA had to issue a press release to force the issue.

Iowa staff misused exercise that led to rhabdo, experts say | Hawk Central

 

[tm3308]

There's not really much new in there. I didn't see any disciplinary action suggested. A lot of points that strongly suggested that the workout not be used again, which had already been decided.

 

[tazclone]

There's not really much new in there. I didn't see any disciplinary action suggested. A lot of points that strongly suggested that the workout not be used again, which had already been decided.

Nothing new? Are you kidding me? They even break the points of contention down at the end of the article.


New stuff in there

1. The u of i stated the workout was backed by research. The NSCA disputes that.
2. The u of i stated the workout was "common". The NSCA disputes that statement.
3. The u of i stated that the strength and conditioning staff were not to blame but the article stated..."Epley also said that a mistake likely was made by the Iowa strength and conditioning staff to have an intense workout after a three-week break and that too many repetitions were required.
   “Coaches always need to allow their athletes to acclimate to the intensity of a workout before adding additional intensity,” Epley said. “It would appear that there were an excessive number of repetitions.”

BTW- Something I found interesting. Others have claimed that the "SAME" workout has been used in the past so the staff should have expected the same results. In this article they quote the u of i report that says "“Based on their past experience, the football coaches, strength coaches or athletic trainers did not have reasons to suspect that a similar workout in 2011 would cause exertional rhabdo in 13 players and the temporary incapacitation of many other players with significant leg pain and stiffness.” I have contended that something had to be different with this workout and it looks as though something was.

What is truly sad is the media and the BOR just accept an investigation that was done internally that places no blame. They accept it with no questions. It is pathetic that a national organization feels obligated to write a response to protect their industry.

 

[Steve]

New stuff in there

1. The u of i stated the workout was backed by research. The NSCA disputes that.
2. The u of i stated the workout was "common". The NSCA disputes that statement.
3. The u of i stated that the strength and conditioning staff were not to blame but the article stated...“Coaches always need to allow their athletes to acclimate to the intensity of a workout before adding additional intensity,â€￾ Epley said. “It would appear that there were an excessive number of repetitions.â€￾

There is something that is very revealing to me in the investigations....

The word "inappropriate" doesn't seem to be in the u of i's vocabulary - not the case with the NSCA.

The u of i doesn't appear to have the guts to admit that somebody screwed up big time. The response is to simply talk around the issue, talk about the future, and act like the case is closed.

 

[CYlent Bob]

Check out comment #2 at that Hawk Central link. There's a guy who doesn't let his full-blown tinfoil head shield stop him from drinking deeply of the Kool Aid.

The NSCA as sponsors of New World Order social realignment? Sure, why not?

 

[edr247]

New stuff in there

1. The u of i stated the workout was backed by research. The NSCA disputes that.
2. The u of i stated the workout was "common". The NSCA disputes that statement.
3. The u of i stated that the strength and conditioning staff were not to blame but the article stated..."Epley also said that a mistake likely was made by the Iowa strength and conditioning staff to have an intense workout after a three-week break and that too many repetitions were required.
   “Coaches always need to allow their athletes to acclimate to the intensity of a workout before adding additional intensity,â€￾ Epley said. “It would appear that there were an excessive number of repetitions.â€￾

BTW- Something I found interesting. Others have claimed that the "SAME" workout has been used in the past so the staff should have expected the same results. In this article they quote the u of i report that says "“Based on their past experience, the football coaches, strength coaches or athletic trainers did not have reasons to suspect that a similar workout in 2011 would cause exertional rhabdo in 13 players and the temporary incapacitation of many other players with significant leg pain and stiffness.â€￾ I have contended that something had to be different with this workout and it looks as though something was.

What is truly sad is the media and the BOR just accept an investigation that was done internally that places no blame. They accept it with no questions. It is pathetic that a national organization feels obligated to write a response to protect their industry.

One of the previous squat workouts (there seemed to have been two in the past) occurred during the middle of the training season (IIRC) and the other after a one week break. The difference here was that this involved a three week break.

 

[tm3308]

New stuff in there

1. The u of i stated the workout was backed by research. The NSCA disputes that.
2. The u of i stated the workout was "common". The NSCA disputes that statement.
3. The u of i stated that the strength and conditioning staff were not to blame but the article stated..."Epley also said that a mistake likely was made by the Iowa strength and conditioning staff to have an intense workout after a three-week break and that too many repetitions were required.
   “Coaches always need to allow their athletes to acclimate to the intensity of a workout before adding additional intensity,â€￾ Epley said. “It would appear that there were an excessive number of repetitions.â€￾

BTW- Something I found interesting. Others have claimed that the "SAME" workout has been used in the past so the staff should have expected the same results. In this article they quote the u of i report that says "“Based on their past experience, the football coaches, strength coaches or athletic trainers did not have reasons to suspect that a similar workout in 2011 would cause exertional rhabdo in 13 players and the temporary incapacitation of many other players with significant leg pain and stiffness.â€￾ I have contended that something had to be different with this workout and it looks as though something was.

What is truly sad is the media and the BOR just accept an investigation that was done internally that places no blame. They accept it with no questions. It is pathetic that a national organization feels obligated to write a response to protect their industry.

There were a few new details, but the big picture really hasn't changed. All of those points you listed would strongly indicate the need to stop using the workout. Which the program had already decided to do. So the report doesn't really change what happens going forward, because the changes it demands have already been made.

 

[tazclone]

One of the previous squat workouts (there seemed to have been two in the past) occurred during the middle of the training season (IIRC) and the other after a one week break. The difference here was that this involved a three week break.

I had not seen that. Where did you get that info? Not doubting you but would like to read it.

And if that is the case then the strength and conditioning staff should really get looked at hard and should be reprimanded. But they weren't.

 

[tazclone]

There were a few new details, but the big picture really hasn't changed. All of those points you listed would strongly indicate the need to stop using the workout. Which the program had already decided to do. So the report doesn't really change what happens going forward, because the changes it demands have already been made.

The new details would point directly at the strength and conditioning staff being responsible for putting 13 guys in the hospital. The new info states the staff was at fault for misinterpreting the science. The new info says that the staff was at fault for doing the workout immediately following a three week break. The new info also hints that the u of i lied to the BOR about this workout being "common."


The u of i report does not place any blame. None. They say the workout is "common" and they don't know why the results were different but they won't use the workout anymore. I am laughing as I type that. It is typical u of i media release.

1. We don't know what happened
2. Nobody is to blame
3. We are working to ensure it doesn't happen again.
4. Rinse and repeat

You are correct that it won't change anything going forward. It will continue to be status quo for the u of i. However, shouldn't there be some sort of reprimand for putting 13 guys in the hospital? If you were a member of the BOR, would you be asking yourself why the u of i told you this was "common" when the NSCA claims it is not? Wouldn't that cause you to wonder of the u of i is being honest with you? Wouldn't that cuse you to wonder about their "independent" internal investigation?
Don't you think it odd that the NSCA released a statement that contradicted the u of i's report? I can't tell from the article but it looks like the NSCA just released a statement. They weren't interviewed but released a statement. Don't you find it a little odd that they would release a statement that accuses a member of wrong doing?

 

[tm3308]

The new details would point directly at the strength and conditioning staff being responsible for putting 13 guys in the hospital. The new info states the staff was at fault for misinterpreting the science. The new info says that the staff was at fault for doing the workout immediately following a three week break. The new info also hints that the u of i lied to the BOR about this workout being "common."


The u of i report does not place any blame. None. They say the workout is "common" and they don't know why the results were different but they won't use the workout anymore. I am laughing as I type that. It is typical u of i media release.

1. We don't know what happened
2. Nobody is to blame
3. We are working to ensure it doesn't happen again.
4. Rinse and repeat

You are correct that it won't change anything going forward. It will continue to be status quo for the u of i. However, shouldn't there be some sort of reprimand for putting 13 guys in the hospital? If you were a member of the BOR, would you be asking yourself why the u of i told you this was "common" when the NSCA claims it is not? Wouldn't that cause you to wonder of the u of i is being honest with you? Wouldn't that cuse you to wonder about their "independent" internal investigation?
Don't you think it odd that the NSCA released a statement that contradicted the u of i's report? I can't tell from the article but it looks like the NSCA just released a statement. They weren't interviewed but released a statement. Don't you find it a little odd that they would release a statement that accuses a member of wrong doing?

Obviously things will be spun to be as much in favor of the UI as possible. I don't expect any less, from any public institution in any field.

Now if the release had called for disciplinary action, that would be one thing. But they aren't. How seriously do they regard the issue, given that they aren't demanding punishment? Personally, I feel like somebody has to be at fault. And the coaches are the easiest (and most practical) place to point the finger.

 

[RayShimley]

Obviously things will be spun to be as much in favor of the UI as possible. I don't expect any less, from any public institution in any field.

Now if the release had called for disciplinary action, that would be one thing. But they aren't. How seriously do they regard the issue, given that they aren't demanding punishment? Personally, I feel like somebody has to be at fault. And the coaches are the easiest (and most practical) place to point the finger.

Apparently they felt serious enough about it to issue an unsolicited 18 page response to the U of I's "investigation." That says something in itself.

 

[tm3308]

Apparently they felt serious enough about it to issue an unsolicited 18 page response to the U of I's "investigation." That says something in itself.

I'm not saying they don't think it's serious. But if they felt it were a case of gross negligence, I would expect them to call for disciplinary measures, and kick Doyle out of the association.

 

[tazclone]

Obviously things will be spun to be as much in favor of the UI as possible. I don't expect any less, from any public institution in any field.

Now if the release had called for disciplinary action, that would be one thing. But they aren't. How seriously do they regard the issue, given that they aren't demanding punishment? Personally, I feel like somebody has to be at fault. And the coaches are the easiest (and most practical) place to point the finger.

What is the NSCA going to do? doyle does not work for them, he is merely a paying member. They can't demand punishment, they can't dole out punishment. Having belonged to national organizations, it is not good that they come out and accuse a member of wrongdoing. National organizations simply do not do that. Most times the organization finds a way to back their member. They obviously did not like the u of i dragging their name into this mess and insinuating that they agree with his practices. BTW- Ken Miller asks some good questions in his blog. Questions the media and the BOR should be asking. Here is his blog Des Moines' Sports Station - 1460 KXNO

There is a difference between spinning and lying. u of i is flirting with that line. And while you might not expect more, I hope that an ISU coach is NEVER responsible for putting 13 kids in a hospital and if they are, I hope they are reprimanded.

 

[tazclone]

I'm not saying they don't think it's serious. But if they felt it were a case of gross negligence, I would expect them to call for disciplinary measures, and kick Doyle out of the association.

Wow, you have lost a lot of respect from me. They claim he is negligent. They claim that the u of i lied about it being a common practice. They made some pretty serious claims.

 

[DJK15]

The National Strength and Conditioning Association? Seriously? I guess there's an association for everything these days.

 

[tazclone]

FWIW- the complete statement from the NSCA...

National Strength and Conditioning Association Speaks Out on Keeping Student Athletes... -- COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo., March 29, 2011 /PRNewswire/ --

One thing that is interesting is the u of i claims the basis of this workout stems from a paper published in 2008 in the Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research (which of course is wrong). Anyone see anything odd about that...like timing? Didn't they perform this workout in 1999, 2044, and 2007?

 

[tazclone]

I hadn't seen this but here is the whole u of i report.
Read the final report on the rhabdo incident | Hawk Central

Interesting to me is 2 of the hospitalized players had drug tests the day after the workout and the urine was documented as "brown."

I am only about half way through it but I urge people to read it. It is an easy read and pretty interesting. There are some glaring contradictions to Mason's overview or what was reported as her overview.

 

[cohawk]

I hadn't seen this but here is the whole u of i report.
Read the final report on the rhabdo incident | Hawk Central

Interesting to me is 2 of the hospitalized players had drug tests the day after the workout and the urine was documented as "brown."

I am only about half way through it but I urge people to read it. It is an easy read and pretty interesting. There are some glaring contradictions to Mason's overview or what was reported as her overview.

What's interesting about brown urine. If your kidney's and liver aren't functioning normally, or you are severely dehydrated, your urine can turn the color of Coke.

I find it odd at how obessessed Cyclone fans are anytime something happens. They always seem to make more out of it than anyone else.

ISU is currently letting someone who assaulted a peace officer play Spring ball. That same player beat someone so silly before attending ISU he had to get his jaw wired shut. Where' the outrage from Cyclone fans? For the record, I couldn't care less if ISU decides to play him. They are intimately more aware of his circumstances than I am.

Some of you sound like those crazy birthers when it comes to anything Hawkeye.

 

[RayShimley]

What's interesting about brown urine. If your kidney's and liver aren't functioning normally, or you are severely dehydrated, your urine can turn the color of Coke.

I find it odd at how obessessed Cyclone fans are anytime something happens. They always seem to make more out of it than anyone else.

ISU is currently letting someone who assaulted a peace officer play Spring ball. That same player beat someone so silly before attending ISU he had to get his jaw wired shut. Where' the outrage from Cyclone fans? For the record, I couldn't care less if ISU decides to play him. They are intimately more aware of his circumstances than I am.

Some of you sound like those crazy birthers when it comes to anything Hawkeye.

Sure, I'll give you that we're obssessed with any Hawkeye scandal, but at least we do it on our own board.

 

[RayShimley]

The National Strength and Conditioning Association? Seriously? I guess there's an association for everything these days.

Apparently it's the associatin who publishes the scientific journal that the U of I cited (incorrectly) to justify the use of the workouts that put these kids in the hospital. I can see why they would be worked up about this.

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research—a bi-monthly, 350-page journal

The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research is the NSCA’s scientific journal. This quarterly publication prints original research information important to strength and conditioning practitioners. Many educational institutions, researchers, and professionals retain this journal as a valuable reference.
The research journal addresses a wide variety of questions concerning conditioning, sport and exercise demands. This ranges from research on the effects of training programs on physical performance and function to the underlying biological basis for exercise performance.

https://www.nsca-lift.org/Membership/WhyJoin/Benefits/publications.asp