New Girls DA Clubs Announced

Playmaker38 said:
I think you might need to put your reading glasses on. Nobody here is touting the DA as a flawless system. Just your argument that it is the worst thing that has ever happened to Women’s soccer.

There is literally nothing forcing players to play 90 minutes. Those who are capable do, substitution rules allow for 7 subs except for the oldest age group. So, the DA has made a provision whereby only 3 field players are actually required to play the whole game.

There is nothing forcing players to train the 4 days a week. It just requires that the clubs make the 4 days a week available. A lot of clubs have taken it on themselves to make one of these 4 days a strength and conditioning day, or a film session, this is a positive so stop trying to make it a negative.

There are 100% flaws to the DA, as there is with everything, but there are also flaws in your argument as you’re making the facts suit your agenda, where these facts also apply to other areas of the sport such as high school soccer.

I imagine given your proclivity to use medical articles to dictate how you approach the game (one would guess every other aspect of life too) that your child has never once headed a ball and is banned from ever doing so.
Click to expand...

All hat, no cattle. Still nothing but personal attacks and deflection. That said, I will consider your statement that GDA isn't flawless to constitute progress. Since you're at least willing to concede that GDA has flaws, how do you feel about GDA eliminating the HS ban?

Let me also give a warm welcome to the WA newcomers. Now that the issue of GDA rules increasing knee injury risk is about to become a moot point in WA, do you fellas have an opinion on the pill as a means of reducing ACL injury risk?
 
End of the Line said:
All hat, no cattle. Still nothing but personal attacks and deflection. That said, I will consider your statement that GDA isn't flawless to constitute progress. Since you're at least willing to concede that GDA has flaws, how do you feel about GDA eliminating the HS ban?

Let me also give a warm welcome to the WA newcomers. Now that the issue of GDA rules increasing knee injury risk is about to become a moot point in WA, do you fellas have an opinion on the pill as a means of reducing ACL injury risk?
Click to expand...

Have you ever taken the pill? “The pill” has several variations, some more estrogen based, others with more progestorone. Some chemical make ups will cause girls to put on weight, others violent mood swings, others acne. Please tell me which pill specifically reduces the risk of ACL tears in all women and doesn’t cause them to put on weight or turn into the devil? Because that is a pill I can get behind.

I can also get behind ACL prevention as part of warm ups and training... which funnily enough I have seen at DA clubs and on DA teams.

Your premise seems to be that the DA causes ACL tears.. reality is, weak ACLs and supporting muscles cause ACL tears, or abnormal contact. Strengthen the supporting muscles and reduce the risk, it’s not the only solution but it is a solution.

My opinion on high school soccer has nothing to do with DA existing or not. I think high school soccer is poor quality with a few exceptions to the rule. I have no issue with players forgoing high school to train and play with like minded people. I also have no issue with players choosing ecnl so they can play high school.

Also, the heading... answer my question.
 
Playmaker38 said:
.... reality is, weak ACLs and supporting muscles cause ACL tears, or abnormal contact. Strengthen the supporting muscles and reduce the risk, it’s not the only solution but it is a solution.
Click to expand...
this is actually not the most current research, ACL prevention is not about strengthening supporting muscles but rather training the neural networks
 
Soccer43 said:
this is actually not the most current research, ACL prevention is not about strengthening supporting muscles but rather training the neural networks
Click to expand...

I can see how that would be true. What I would see as strengthening the muscles around the ligaments (the jumping and landing I see in pregame and warm ups) could definitely also be part of training the neural networks. One and the same I imagine.

Definitely no expert on ACL prevention. Just not a fan of the rhetoric being spewed by EOL
 
Playmaker38 said:
I can see how that would be true. What I would see as strengthening the muscles around the ligaments (the jumping and landing I see in pregame and warm ups) could definitely also be part of training the neural networks. One and the same I imagine.

Definitely no expert on ACL prevention. Just not a fan of the rhetoric being spewed by EOL
Click to expand...

No, it has nothing to do with strengthening the muscle around the ligaments. That's what I used to think but that is not the current research. It is the neural pathways between the muscle movements and the brain. May not like EOL but he does have some accurate knowledge.
 
Soccer43 said:
No, it has nothing to do with strengthening the muscle around the ligaments. That's what I used to think but that is not the current research. It is the neural pathways between the muscle movements and the brain. May not like EOL but he does have some accurate knowledge.
Click to expand...

Can you explain that? I understand the need to retrain neural pathways after an injury. But what does neural pathways have to do with injury prevention if you have never had neural pathway damage? I’m certainly no expert, but everything I’ve read about neural pathways has to do with preventing a second ACL injury after the first injury. Thanks for the help.
 
Soccer43 said:
Here is one article that talks about this and how neuroplastic changes in the brain rather than strength training are an important part of ACL prevention.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2938326/
Click to expand...

Here is the Summary paragraph --

In young female athletes, ACL tears are a common and debilitating injury. Given the detrimental effect of ACL injury, considerable effort has been directed toward the development of injury-prevention strategies. Although ACL injury-prevention training is being advocated in various sport settings, programs are being implemented without a thorough understanding of why they work and how they are best delivered. Ongoing research suggests that the protective effect afforded by injury-prevention training may be the result of skill acquisition associated with central adaptations (ie, motor learning). Future research efforts should be directed at identifying optimal training methods that elicit long-term changes in behavior that are considered ACL protective.
​
I don't see how that supports the "neural networks" argument.
 
This pilot study was performed on 4 females...

You might also want to read more about how settled the science is regarding the pill and ACL prevention before giving EOL any credit for accurate knowledge.

I’m glad there is ongoing research and over time as it continues I’m sure we’ll get a better understanding, but for now these are just ideas to be studied further. My kid will definitely not be skipping the weight room.
 
I hesitated to even get into this with this crowd because no one looks into the research but rather focuses on tearing down the individual posts to to debate statements made This was only one article that I posted that I thought would be a simple one to shift through. There is more research about this not just this one study. This research direction is about making a link to reinforcing cognitive links between the musculature and the nerve excitability which comes from the brain. These are neural networks. You can do your own research on neur0muscular training (or also called INT) and ACL injury prevention. You can also talk to the doctors at the CHLA youth sports medicine program.

My comment about EOL was not in regards to the pill. I don't really have a comment about this but rather some of the other posts. I get there is a lot of hating on EOL but EOL does make some valid points. It is helpful to do the research to see what is out there, not just debate a lowly poster on a public forum.
 
I have read all the research that is out there on this topic. Your conclusion that developing supporting muscles to prevent ACL injuries is not important is inaccurate. That is not to say there are not other contributing factors although I don’t think that science is settled yet.

I do agree with CHLA’s advice on their website about how to help prevent ACL injuries. They have not abandoned strength training:
  • Don’t forget your “core:” The core muscles that include your abdominal, back, buttock and hip muscles help to stabilize your body so that you are putting less stress on your knees and ankles. Multiple training programs that target the core as well as incorporating plyometrics and movement training exercises have been shown to decrease the risk of an ACL tear.
 
Wow, that is very impressive that you have read ALL the research that is out there. Not sure that is possible but maybe you are an orthopedic surgeon or similar to have looked at ALL the research on this topic. This is why I don’t start discussions on these types of topics because the energy is about trying to discredit a poster rather than having a real discussion about the research. The original comment was on strengthening the muscles around the knee joint and how THAT is not effective. No one said anything about building core strength. Of course that is necessary and helpful. Like I said, everyone can look at the research and I am not going to go back and forth about this. Thought I would put something helpful out there but don’t have a need to debate the information.

And by the way, your quote above reinforces what I am talking about...incorporating plyometrics and movement training exercises, not strength training around the knee joint
 
Playmaker38 said:
Have you ever taken the pill? “The pill” has several variations, some more estrogen based, others with more progestorone. Some chemical make ups will cause girls to put on weight, others violent mood swings, others acne. Please tell me which pill specifically reduces the risk of ACL tears in all women and doesn’t cause them to put on weight or turn into the devil? Because that is a pill I can get behind.

I can also get behind ACL prevention as part of warm ups and training... which funnily enough I have seen at DA clubs and on DA teams.

Your premise seems to be that the DA causes ACL tears.. reality is, weak ACLs and supporting muscles cause ACL tears, or abnormal contact. Strengthen the supporting muscles and reduce the risk, it’s not the only solution but it is a solution.

My opinion on high school soccer has nothing to do with DA existing or not. I think high school soccer is poor quality with a few exceptions to the rule. I have no issue with players forgoing high school to train and play with like minded people. I also have no issue with players choosing ecnl so they can play high school.

Also, the heading... answer my question.
Click to expand...

This is great stuff. In a discussion about knee injury avoidance, the best you can do is claim that the pill makes women violent and fat and then change the subject to heading soccer balls? You must have learned how to debate in anti-vaxer school.
 
Soccer43 said:
Wow, that is very impressive that you have read ALL the research that is out there. Not sure that is possible but maybe you are an orthopedic surgeon or similar to have looked at ALL the research on this topic. This is why I don’t start discussions on these types of topics because the energy is about trying to discredit a poster rather than having a real discussion about the research. The original comment was on strengthening the muscles around the knee joint and how THAT is not effective. No one said anything about building core strength. Of course that is necessary and helpful. Like I said, everyone can look at the research and I am not going to go back and forth about this. Thought I would put something helpful out there but don’t have a need to debate the information.

And by the way, your quote above reinforces what I am talking about...incorporating plyometrics and movement training exercises, not strength training around the knee joint
Click to expand...

The actual content of the article you referenced includes this point (which I consider to be the essential element of it) --

We (Pollard et al) demonstrated that increased use of the hip musculature appears to underlie the protective effect afforded by injury-prevention training. More specifically, girls, adolescent girls, and women who underwent a 10-week ACL injury-prevention training program decreased their knee-extensor moments and increased their hip-extensor moments during landing. Furthermore, greater energy was absorbed at the hip (relative to the knee) posttraining. As a result of these findings, we have proposed that injury-prevention training may decrease mechanical loading at the knee through increased use of the hip musculature.
​
I read that, in the context of the article, to be saying that the incidence of knee injuries in female athletes can be reduced by teaching them a different way to jump and land. Kind of like ballet vs. breakdance.
 
Strengthening all muscles is important. It is precisely because other muscles are strong that the load does not land entirely on the knee ligaments. Neuromuscular adaptation is generated by resistance training AND explicitly taught movement patterns. I have no query with the idea that explicitly teaching movement patterns might be beneficial. However, there are no muscles around the knee (quad, glutes - which are considered core but are involved in knee action, hamstring) that should not be strengthened. Also, the purpose of plyometrics is to build strength (it uses multiple muscle groups in tandem). I don’t want to discredit any poster, only ideas. I would guess we actually agree on a lot here. My debate is only with the idea that strengthening muscles is no longer important.
 
Soccerfan2 said:
Strengthening all muscles is important. It is precisely because other muscles are strong that the load does not land entirely on the knee ligaments. Neuromuscular adaptation is generated by resistance training AND explicitly taught movement patterns. I have no query with the idea that explicitly teaching movement patterns might be beneficial. However, there are no muscles around the knee (quad, glutes - which are considered core but are involved in knee action, hamstring) that should not be strengthened. Also, the purpose of plyometrics is to build strength (it uses multiple muscle groups in tandem). I don’t want to discredit any poster, only ideas. I would guess we actually agree on a lot here. My debate is only with the idea that strengthening muscles is no longer important.
Click to expand...

Many years ago I took Cramer Chemical Company's correspondence course on athletic training. There were many things in that course that I had never heard of before. One that has stuck with me over the years is that isolated development of muscle strength not related to the sport in which an athlete is going to participate can be destructive, and knees were used as an example - it is possible, for instance, to build up enough strength in the big muscles through weight or resistance training so that the muscle can tear up joints to which they are attached (or whose movement they effect) when a situation occurs during the sporting activity that is outside of the stresses encountered during the muscle development training. The rule of thumb was that big muscles can tear up small muscles, so those small muscles (the ones that align and/or stabilize joints during the operation of the joint in question) need to be developed as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top