The relationship of selected physical factors to football ability
by Jeffry Daniel Felton
A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE
in Physical Education
Montana State University
© Copyright by Jeffry Daniel Felton (1976)
Abstract:
The purpose of this study was to determine: (1) if a single variable of strength, speed, or agility is
related to football ability as perceived by coaches and players; (2) if any relationships exist between the
variables of strength, speed, and agility; and (3) if there is any relationship between football ability as
perceived by coaches and football ability as perceived by players.
It was hypothesized that there would be no significant relationships between the variables of strength,
speed, or agility, or between any of these variables and football ability as perceived by coaches or
players. Twenty-two members of the 1975 Montana State University varsity football team were utilized
as subjects.
To measure the strength factor, maximum efforts for each subject were collected in the bench press, leg
press, and a modified Roger's Short Strength Index. Speed was measured by timing each subject in the
40 yard dash. Agility was measured by timing each subject on two different drills. Each subject was
asked to evaluate the football playing ability of each of the other subjects by ranking them from one to
22. Members of the coaching staff were asked to rank the 22 subjects in the same manner.
Performance on each of the strength variables was found to be significantly related to performance in
the same variable during different data collection periods. Performance in the bench press was
significantly related to performance in a modified Roger's Short Strength Index during each of the data
collection periods. Significant relationships were found to exist between performance in the speed
variable during each of the data collection periods. Speed was not significantly related to strength.
Speed was significantly related to agility during the off-season data collection period. Significant
relationships were found to exist between performance on the two agility drills during the off-season
data collection period. Coaches ratings were significantly related to speed during each data collection
period, and to agility drill #1 during the post-season, and to agility drill #2 during the off-season data
collection period. Players ratings were significantly related to speed during the pre-season, and to
agility drill #1 during the post-season data collection period. Significant relationships were found to
exist between football ability as perceived by coaches and football ability as perceived by players. STATEMENT OF PERMISSION TO COPY
In presenting th is thesis in p a r tia l fu lfillm e n t of the
requirements fo r an advanced degree a t Montana State U n iv e rs ity , I
agree th a t the Library shall make i t fr e e ly a v a ila b le fo r inspection.
I fu rth e r agree th a t permission fo r extensive copying o f th is thesis
fo r scholarly purposes may be granted by my major professor, o r, in
h is absence, by the D ire cto r o f L ib ra rie s .
I t is understood th a t any
copying or pu blicatio n on th is thesis fo r fin a n c ia l gain shall not be
allowed w ithout my w ritte n permission.
Name
Date
THE RELATIONSHIP OF SELECTED PHYSICAL
FACTORS TO FOOTBALL ABILITY
by
JEFFRY DANIEL FELTON
A thesis submitted in p a r tia l fu lfillm e n t
of the requirements fo r the degree
MASTER OF SCIENCE
in
Physical Education
Approved:
^jTadrman, Examining''Committee
Head,
"jor Departm^it
Graduate Dean
MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY
Bozeman, Montana
May, 1976
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The author would lik e to express his appreciation to Dr. G.S.
Don M orris, Mr. Herb Agocs, and Dr. Gary Evans fo r th e ir capable
assistance and guidance in th is study.
A special note o f thanks to
Dr. Al Suvak who helped with the s t a t is t ic a l treatment o f th is study.
The author considers i t a p riv ile g e to have worked under the
astute supervision of Dr. Nyles Humphrey, Chairman, who gave so
u n s e lfis h ly of his time.
Special thanks go to Ginny, K risten , and Danny fo r th e ir
patience and understanding, and to Mr. and.Mrs. Bernard Cummings and
Mrs. Judith Felton fo r t h e ir encouragement.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
VITA
.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
.
.
.
TABLE OF CONTENTS . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. . . .
Ii
iii
.
.
LIST OF TABLES .
iv
vi
ABSTRACT .........................
v ii
Chapter
1.
INTRODUCTION
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.. Statement o f the Problem
D elim itatio n s
.
.
.
.
;
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Research Design
.
.
...
.
.
.
2
.........................
.
.
2
.
.
...
.
.
.
.
. . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
. . .
.
.
.
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Growth and Development Factors
.
Sociometric Studies
.........................
Summary
.
.
.
.
.
Motor Fitness Tests
.
.
2
.
.
S ta tis tic a l Analysis ........................................................
2.
I
.
.
J u s tific a tio n of the Thesis
I
.........................
D e fin itio n s ...................................... ......
.
.
...............................
. Lim itatio n s
Hypothesis
.
3
.
3
.
3
.
.
.
.
.
4
.
.
.
.
.
5
.
.
.
5
.
.
............................................
.
.
.
.
.
.
7
13
15
V
Page
3.
PROCEDURES......................... ...........................................
Data C ollectio n
.
.
.
S ta tis tic a l Analysis
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
17
.
.
.
............................... ......
19
,
21
A g ilit y D r i ll #1
A g ilit y D r ill #2 .
.
.
..
.
.
4. . ANALYSIS OF DATA . . ' .........................
.
.
.
.
.
.
22
..................................
Relationships Between Strength Variables . . .
Relationships Between Speed Variables .
.
.
23
.
23
.
.
.
24
.
.
.
24
Relationship o f Strength to Speed and A g ilit y
...
27
Relationship o f Speed to Strength, and A g ility
.
.
30
Relationship of A g ilit y to Strength and Speed
.
.
30
Relationships Between A g ilit y Variables
Relationship o f Coaches Ratings to
Strength, Speed, and A g ilit y
. .
.
Relationship of Players Ratings to
Strength, Speed, and A g ilit y
. .
5.,
17
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
35
Relationship of Coaches Ratings to Players Ratings.
37
D is c u s s io n ............................... ■ .
37
.
Conclusions
.
.
.
. .
Recommendations
.
.
. . ..
.
.
.
. . . . . . .
. . .
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
33
.
.
.
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
REFERENCES
.
. . .
.
'.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
40
.
42
. .
43
. ....
44
vi
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Page
1.
Relationships Between Strength Variables
.........................
25
2.
Relationships Between Speed Variables
...............................
26
3.
Relationships Between A g ility Variables ...............................
27
4.
Relationship o f Strength to Speed and A g ilit y V ariables.
29
5.
Relationship of Speed to Strength and A g ilit y V ariables.
31
6.
Relationship of A g ilit y to Strength and Speed V ariables.
34
7.
Relationship o f Coaches Ratings to Strength,
Speed, and A g ilit y Variables ..........................................................
36
Relationship of Players Ratings to Strength,
Speed, and A g ilit y Variables . . . . .
.................................
36
8.
ABSTRACT
The purpose o f th is study was to determine: ( I ) i f a single
v a riab le o f stren gth, speed, or a g il it y is re la te d to fo o tb a ll a b ilit y
as perceived by coaches and players; (2) i f any relatio n sh ip s e x is t
between the variables of strength, speed, and a g il it y ; and (3) i f there
is any re la tio n s h ip between fo o tb a ll a b il it y as perceived by coaches
and fo o tb a ll a b il it y as perceived by players.
I t was hypothesized th a t there would be no s ig n ific a n t
relationsh ips between the variables of strength, speed, or a g i l i t y , or
between any o f these variables and fo o tb a ll a b il it y as perceived by
coaches or players. Twenty-two members of the 1975 Montana State
U niversity v a rs ity fo o tb a ll team were u t iliz e d as subjects.
To measure the strength fa c to r, maximum effort's fo r each
subject were co llected in the bench press, leg press, and a modified
Roger's Short Strength Index. Speed was measured by tim ing each
subject in the 40 yard dash. A g ilit y was measured by timing each
subject on two d iffe r e n t d r i l l s .
Each subject was asked to evaluate
the fo o tb a ll playing a b il it y of each of the other subjects by ranking
them from one to 22. Members of the coaching s t a ff were asked to rank
the 22 subjects in the same manner.
Performance on each o f the strength variables was found to be •
s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to performance in the same v a riab le during
d iffe r e n t data c o lle c tio n periods. Performance in the bench press was
s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to performance in a modified Roger's Short
■Strength Index during each o f the data c o lle c tio n periods. S ig n ific a n t
relationsh ips were found to e x is t between performance in the speed
v a riab le during each of the data c o lle c tio n periods. Speed was not.
s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to strength. Speed was s ig n ific a n tly related to
a g il it y during the off-season data c o lle c tio n p e rio d ., S ig n ific a n t
relationsh ips were found to e x is t between performance on the two
a g il it y d r i l l s during the off-season data c o lle c tio n period. Coaches
ratings were s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to speed during each data c o lle ctio n
period, and to a g il it y d r i l l #1 during the post-season, and to a g ilit y
d r i l l #2 during the off-season data c o lle c tio n period. Players ratings
were s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to speed during the pre-season, and to
a g il it y d r i l l #1 during the post-season data c o lle c tio n period.
S ig n ific a n t relatio n sh ip s were found to exist.between fo o tb a ll a b ilit y
as perceived by coaches and fo o tb a ll a b il it y as perceived by players.
Chapter I
INTRODUCTION
Numerous attempts have been made;to id e n tify the character- .
is tic s o f outstanding fo o tb a ll players.
Football coaches have
tr a d itio n a lly been concerned with s iz e , strength, speed, and a g ilit y to
assess p o ten tial fo o tb a ll playing a b i l i t y (Evans, 1972; Cegelski,
.
:
1975).
This study was a fu rth e r attempt to examine relationsh ips
between these factors and fo o tb a ll a b i l i t y .
Statement of the Problem
The purpose of th is study was to in ve s tig ate the relationsh ips
between the selected physical facto rs o f strength, speed, and a g ilit y
and th e ir re la tio n s h ip to fo o tb a ll a b il it y as perceived by coaches and
players.
S p e c ific a lly , an attempt was made to determine:
1.
i f a single v a riab le o f strength, speed, or a g il it y is
re la te d to fo o tb a ll a b il it y as perceived by coaches and
players,
2.
i f any relatio n sh ip s e x is t between the variab les of
strength, speed, and a g i l i t y ,
3.
'
i f there is any re la tio n s h ip between fo o tb a ll a b ilit y as
perceived by coaches and fo o tb a ll a b il it y as perceived by
. players.
2
Del im itatio n s
Twenty-two members o f the 1975 Montana State U niversity v a rs ity
fo o tb a ll team were u t iliz e d as subjects in th is study.
mental variab les included measurements of:
Five experi­
( I ) strength, (2) speed,
(3) a g i l i t y , and fo o tb a ll a b il it y as perceived by (4) coaches, and
(5) players.
Lim itations
The te s ts used to measure strength, speed, and a g il it y were
assumed to be v a lid and appropriate in dicators of these factors
(Holland, 1975).
I t was recognized th a t each coach's judgement
regarding the fo o tb a ll playing a b il it y o f individual players may have
been influenced by preconceived ideas th a t the coach had about an
in d iv id u a l's a b i l i t y (Cronbach, 1960).
No attempt was made to
determine the degree o f m otivation or the IeveL o f fa tig u e a ffe c tin g
the subjects performance on tests of strength, speed,"or a g ilit y .
No consideration was given to the e ffe c t of somatotype on performance
in the selected physical fa c to rs .
D efin itio n s
Football playing a b i l i t y .
perceived by coaches and players.
Strength.
The a b il it y to play fo o tb a ll as
■
Overall body strength as measured by each subjects
performance on the follow ing physical tasks:
( I) . bench press, (2) leg .
3
press, and (3) a modified Roger's Short Strength Index.
Speed.
AgiI i t y .
Timed running speed fo r 40 yards.
Ease and speed o f movement in changing direction s and
positions o f the body (C larke, 1967).
Hypothesis
I t was hypothesized th a t there would be no s ig n ific a n t
relationsh ips between the variables of stren gth, speed, or a g i l i t y , or
between any of these variab les,and fo o tb a ll a b ilit y as perceived by
coaches or p layers.
Research Design
A quasi-experimental design was used for. the c o lle c tio n o f
data.
G eneralizations based upon the re su lts o f th is study can be
applied only to the population involved.
In tern a l v a lid it y was con­
tr o lle d by the in v e s tig a to r through consistency in the adm inistration
o f.te s tin g procedures.
External v a lid it y was questionable.
S ta tis tic a l Analysis
C orrelation c o e ffic ie n ts were used to determine the degree o f
re la tio n s h ip between each o f the variab les studied., The p ro b a b ility o f
committing, a Type I e rro r was set a t .0 5 .
4
J u s tific a tio n o f the Thesis
Of primary concern to fo o tb a ll coaches today is the id e n ti­
fic a tio n o f factors which may be in d ic a tiv e o f p o ten tial fo o tb all
playing a b il it y .
I f the variables o f strength, speed, and a g il it y can
be measured and used to enhance the prediction o f performance in
fo o tb a ll, then the task of re c ru itin g and selecting team personnel w ill
be f a c ilit a t e d .
Chapter 2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
In vestig ato rs in a number o f studies of fo o tb a ll a b ilit y have
recognized th a t there are factors other than physical a b il it y which are
re la te d to performance (Evans, 1972).
discussed in th is review o f lit e r a t u r e .
These fa c to rs .w ill not be
The studies reviewed in th is
chapter have been included because o f t h e ir relevance to th is in v e s ti­
gation.
Most a b il it y prediction studies have u t iliz e d white athletes
as subjects (Evans, 1972).
Several in vestig ations have attempted to
re la te success in fo o tb a ll to growth and development fa c to rs .
A
number o f research findings have attempted to support the contention
th a t fo o tb a ll playing a b il it y is re la te d to performance on tests of
motor fitn e s s .
Other studies have concerned themselves with the
re la tio n s h ip o f psychological or social factors to success in fo o tb a ll.
Therefore, th is review o f lit e r a t u r e has been divided in to the
follow ing categories:
1.
Growth and Development Factors.
2.
Motor Fitness Tests.
3. '.Sociometric Studies.
•
Growth and Development Factors
In separate in vestig ations u t iliz in g the Medford Boy's Growth
Study, S helly (1 9 60 ), Wiley (1 9 63 ), and K elly (1969) made comparisons
■=
6
of m a tu rity , s tru c tu re , physique, stren gth, in te llig e n c e , and motor
c h a ra c te ris tic s among elem entary, ju n io r high, and high school
a th le te s .
The subjects were given a b a tte ry of tests to measure speed,
stren gth, a g i l i t y , and reaction tim e.
Anthropometric measurements were
taken, and a roentgenologic study was used to determine s keletal age.
Shelly (1960) reported th at outstanding young fo o tb all players were
found to be superior to others th e ir own age in strength, m atu rityj and
motor a b il it y which contributed to th e ir successful a th le tic perform­
ance.
Outstanding young fo o tb a ll players also tended to be t a l l e r and
heavier than other ath le te s and non-participants th e ir own age (S h e lly ,
1960; W iley, 1963).
In a study which attempted to describe somatotypes of outstand­
ing college fo o tb a ll p layers. C arter (1968) found th a t these athletes
were characterized by t h e ir height and w eight, by high degrees of
endomorphy and mesomorphy, and by a low degree.of ectomorphy.
He found
s ig n ific a n t size and somatotype d ifferences among college fo o tb all
players a t d iffe r e n t levels o f com petition, and between backs and
lineman.
His findings appear to support those of e a r lie r studies by
Sheldon (1 9 4 0 ), and DiGiovanna (1 9 4 3 ), and suggests th a t c ertain
somatotypes are w ell suited to achieve success in fo o tb a ll.
7
Motor Fitness Tests '
Clarke (1967) id e n tifie d seven elements of motor fitn e s s :
( I ) muscular stren gth, (2) muscular endurance, (3) cardiovascular
endurance, (4) muscular power, (5) speed, (6) a g i l i t y , and (7) balance.
In vestig ato rs have attempted to re la te performance on te s ts of motor
fitn e s s to fo o tb a ll playing a b il it y .
In an e a rly study a t Iowa State U n iv e rs ity , M ille r (1936)
attempted to determine the re la tio n s h ip o f nineteen variables to fo o t­
ball a b il it y as determined by a subjective ra tin g scale.
S ig n ific a n t
c o rrelatio n s were found between the subjective ratings o f the players
and player performance on s e v e ra l.o f the te s t v a riab le s .
In separate studies a t Iowa State U n iv e rs ity , Brechler (1940)
and Cormack (1940) compared the subjective ratings of high school
fo o tb a ll players and coaches with the re su lts of a b a tte ry of tests
designed to measure desirable a ttrib u te s of high school fo o tb a ll
players.
S ig n ific a n t c o rrelatio n s were found between the subjective
ratings of players and coaches and player, performance on. several o f the
te s t items.
’
•
■Brace (1943) in ve s tig ate d the v a lid it y o f performance on
fo o tb a ll achievement te s ts as a p a r tia l basis fo r the selection o f .
players a t the U n iversity of Texas..
He concluded th a t a b a tte ry of .
te s ts could be devised to .a s s is t .the coach .in the id e n tific a tio n and
selection of fo o tb a ll players..
8
Wilhelm (.1951) examined the re la tio n s h ip o f c e rta in measurable
j t r a it s to success in f o o t b a ll.
He administered 44 .te s ts to measure
physical, m ental, and visual t r a it s o f 65 college freshman fo o tb all
players and 65 non-football players.
He id e n tifie d 25 t r a i t s which
distinguished the fo o tb a ll players from the n o n -fo o tb a ll players;
Among these t r a i t s were:
( I ) arm g ir t h , (2 ) to ta l body s tre n g th ,.(3)
arm push, (4) c a lf g ir th , (5) weight, (6) power, (7) speed, and (8)
a g il it y .
He concluded th a t successful fo o tb a ll players were stronger
and possessed g reater speed and a g il it y than lion-successful footb all
players.
Some in vestig ato rs have attempted, to re la te fo o tb a ll playing
a b il it y to the amount o f time played in fo o tb a ll games.
Ellena (1959)
studied the re la tio n s h ip o f selected physiological factors to fo o tb all
performance at the U niversity o f C a lifo rn ia a t Los Angeles.
He
concluded th a t speed and strength were s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to the .
time played in fo o tb a ll games, and th a t the to ta l number o f minutes
played was the best in d ic a to r o f an in divid uals fo o tb a ll playing
a b il it y .
In another study at the U n iv e rsity o f Utah, Birch (1963) used
nine motor performance te s ts to compare motor performance to the time
played in in te rc o lle g ia te fo o tb a ll games.
However, none o f the te s t
items were found to be s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to the time played in
fo o tb a ll games.
Thompson (1959) investigated the re la tio n s h ip o f pre-season
physical te s tin g to post-season rank o f selected high school fo o tb all
players.
He administered the Roger's Strength Index, Cozens A g ility
Run, the 20 yard dash, and the C a lifo rn ia Mental M a tu rity Test to 24
high school fo o tb a ll players.
He reported a high c o rre la tio n between
the strength index and the coaches subjective evaluation o f players.
He concluded th a t the strength index was the best means fo r id e n tify in g
p o ten tial fo o tb a ll players as compared to the other te s t items.
A llen (1965) used the Cowell and Ismail Football Rating Scale
to measure fo o tb a ll a b il it y and attempted to id e n tify a common fa c to r
which contributed to fo o tb a ll playing a b i l i t y .
His study is one o f the
few extensive studies on college fo o tb a ll players which includes
somatotype assessment (C a rte r, 1968).
He analyzed te s t scores of 82
subjects on 44 experimental variables which included measures of:
( I ) physical fa c to rs , (2) motor a b il it y fa c to rs , (3) strength fa c to rs ,
(4) psychological fa c to rs , and (5) body s tru c tu ra l fa c to rs .
He fa ile d
to is o la te a common contrib uting fa c to r, but found s ig n ific a n t c o rre la ­
tions between the factors of stren gth, speed, a g i l i t y , and the standing
long jump and fo o tb a ll a b il it y .
In another study to determine the e ffe c ts o f selected variables
on performance in fo o tb a ll, Norred (1966) studied the re la tio n s h ip of
speed, a g i l i t y , power, stren gth, scholastic aptitude and achievement,
and perso n ality needs to performance in college fo o tb a ll.
Thirty-one
10
members of the 1963 U n iv e rsity o f Alabama fo o tb a ll team served as
subjects.
game film s .
Player performance was graded, based upon the analysis o f
The re la tio n s h ip o f the independent variab les to
in divid ual performance was then determined s t a t is t ic a lly .
He concluded
that the number of plays in which each subject p a rtic ip a te d was
s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to the q u a lity of his performance.
No s ig n if­
icant re la tio n s h ip between a single v a riab le and fo o tb a ll performance
was id e n tifie d .
However, the fa s te r a th le te s were also more a g ile and
had greater arm strength and strength per pound than did the slower
subjects.
Polychronis (1967) examined the re la tio n s h ip between tests of
general motor a b il it y and the coaches rankings o f fo o tb a ll a b ilit y at
the U n iversity of Utah.
Thirty-one freshman fo o tb a ll players who were
candidates fo r the v a rs ity fo o tb a ll team were tested in the 40 yard
dash, the Sargent Jump T e s t, and the I l l i n o i s A g ilit y Run p rio r to the
s ta r t o f spring p ra c tic e .
Coaches rankings of fo o tb a ll a b il it y were
based upon the analysis o f film s o f intrasquad games during the spring
p ra c tic e .
Polychronis concluded th a t there were s ig n ific a n t re !a -
.
tionships between each o f the te s t items and the coaches rankings of
fo o tb a ll a b i l i t y , and stated th a t speed and a g il it y were re la te d to
successful performance in f o o t b a ll.
Price (1967) attempted to determine the re la tio n s h ip between
the coaches subjective rankings o f a b i l i t y and scores achieved in
■
11
selected tests o f stren gth, speed, and a g il it y .
One hundred and nine
U n iversity o f Washington fo o tb a ll players were tested fo r arm strength,
leg strength, speed, and a g il it y .
Total strength was determined by the
composite of arm and leg strength.
Players were evaluated only by the
coach or coaches responsible fo r t h e ir s p e c ific p o sitio n .
Subjective
evaluations made by the coaches indicated the rank order o f players
according to t h e ir offensive or defensive positions p rio r to the
completion o f spring p ra c tic e .
were divided in to two groups.
For purposes o f comparison the players
Group I consisted p rim a rily o f members
of the f i r s t and second teams who would engage in the m a jo rity of
playing time during the regular fo o tb a ll season.
comprised of the remaining players.
members of the follow ing groups:
Group I I was
Comparisons were also made between
( I ) offensive backs, (2) offensive
lineman, (3) defensive backs, (4) defensive lineman, and (5) combined
groups.
Price concluded th a t arm strength and a g il it y were not
s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to the coaches rankings of a b i l i t y , and that
overall body strength as indicated by to ta l strength was essential to
performance in fo o tb a ll.
Speed and leg strength were not found to be
v a lid in dicators fo r placing in divid ual players by position in rank
order.
When positions were not involved and the requirement was only
to assign players to Group I or Group I I , speed and leg strength were
s ig n ific a n t fa c to rs .
12
A method fo r selecting players fo r positions was studied by
Cooper (1967).
Cooper lis te d 25 t r a it s on a. questibnaire th a t was '
sent to high school and college fo o tb a ll coaches throughout the state
o f Oregon.
A b attery o f te s ts was designed to measure each o f the 14
t r a it s rated most highly by coaches.
These te s ts were administered tb
members o f the W illam ette V alley Conference high school, a l l - s t a r
fo o tb a ll team, and to members o f a v a rs ity fo o tb all team from the same
league.
The te s t resu lts o f t h e .a ll- s ta r s and the v a rs ity fo o tb all
players were compared by p o sitio n .
Strength, speed, and a g il it y were
three o f the nine t r a it s in which the performance of the a ll- s t a r
fo o tb a ll players was.found to be superior to th a t o f the v a rs ity
.
fo o tb a ll players.
Jordan (1970) investigated the influence o f selected physical
variables on the performance o f quarterbacks in the Southern Conference
during the 1969 fo o tb a ll season.
Seven quarterbacks were tested tb
determine t h e ir level of proficien cy in regard to the follow ing
variab les selected by major college coaches: . ( I ) a g i l i t y , (2) 40 yard
dash, (3) v is io n , (4) quickness in running and throwing, (5) grip
strength, and (6) the fo o tb a ll throw fo r distance.
The physical, te s t
measures were then correlated with' the cumulative s ta tis tic s compiled
by each quarterback during th a t season.
He concluded th a t the a g ilit y
te s t, the 40 yard dash, arid the fo o tb a ll throw fo r distance were the
best in dicators of a quarterbacks p o te n tia l for. success in the.Southern
..
13
Conference.
Sociometric Studies
Rhodes (1950) constructed a fo o tb a ll c la s s ific a tio n index which
consisted of a p la y e r's personal h isto ry index and a physical te s t
index.
The fo o tb a ll c la s s ific a tio n index was administered to 685 high
school fo o tb a ll players:
The resu lts indicated th a t th e .s u b je c tiv e
evaluation o f players by t h e ir coaches was s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to .
player evaluation based upon. the fo o tb a ll c la s s ific a tio n index.
He
concluded th a t the t r a i t s necessary to be a successful high school
fo o tb a ll player were measurable to some degree.
Cowell and Ismail (.1961) investigated the v a lid it y o f a
fo o tb a ll a b il it y ra tin g scale in re la tio n to social in teg ra tio n and
academic a b il it y a t Purdue U n iv e rs ity .
F o rty -fiv e freshman fo o tb all
players were u t iliz e d as subjects fo r th is study.
Each subject was
rated by his teammates and coaches on the follow ing c h a ra c te ris tic s :
( I ) condition, (2) aggressiveness, (3) team p lay, (4) a ttitu d e toward
coaching, (5) a b il it y at playing th e ir p o sitio n , (6) perseverance,
(7) blocking, (8). ta c k lin g , and (9) fo o tb a ll knowledge.
Cowell and
Ismail found th a t the social in teg ra tio n o f the team increased
according to the length of time the players played to g eth er, and was
affected by the intense competition fo r places on the. team.
Football
a b il it y and academic a b i l i t y were not found to be s ig n ific a n tly re la te d
I
14
to each o th e r, but fo o tb a ll a b il it y was s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to social
acceptance.
A p la y e r's a ttitu d e toward coaching and his a b il it y to
play his position were recommended as c r it e r ia fo r the selection of
fo o tb a ll players.
They concluded th a t there are s ig n ific a n t r e la ­
tionships between the ratings of players by coaches and ratings by
fe llo w players.
:
Salato (1961) examined the re la tio n s h ip between physical and .
social fa c to rs , a th le tic p a rtic ip a tio n , and the s e le c tio n .o f fo o tb all
players.
He u t iliz e d the Cowell and IsmaiT Football Rating Scale and
collected data on the personal distance and. social behavior of 20.0
successful v a rs ity fo o tb a ll players from fiv e Chicago C atholic high
schools.
He concluded th a t personal distance and social behavior Were
re la te d to the selection o f high school fo o tb a ll players.
Schendel (1963) attempted to compare personality character­
is tic s o f ath le te s to those of non-athletes in the ninth grade, tw e lfth
grade, and a t the college le v e l.
Football was one o f several team
sports in which an attempt was made to id e n tify d iffe re n c e s.
He
concluded th a t s p e c ific differences do e x is t between the psychological .
c h a ra c te ris tic s o f ath le te s and those o f n o n -a th le te s .. L i t t l e
s im ila r ity was found between the differences which distinguished
a th letes from non-athletes at the d iffe r e n t le v e ls .
Few differences
in personality were found to e x is t between a th letes who were rated as
regulars, s u b s titu te s , or outstanding. .
15
Berger and L i t t l e f i e l d (1969) compared the p e rs o n a litie s o f
outstanding fo o tb a ll-p la y e rs with those o f no n-athletes.
T h irty
subjects in each group were given the C a lifo rn ia Psychological
Inventory.
This study fa ile d to id e n tify any s ig n ific a n t differences
between the p ersonality c h a ra c te ris tic s o f outstanding fo o tb all
players and non-athletes.
Summary
The review of lit e r a t u r e suggests th a t previous studies have
fa ile d to is o la te a common physical fa c to r re la ted to fo o tb a ll playing
a b ility .
Growth and development facto rs may be re la ted to success in
fo o tb a ll a t the elem entary, ju n io r high, and high school le v e l.
Certain somatotypes appear to be well suited to achieve success in
fo o tb a ll.
Other studies support the contention th a t fo o tb a ll playing
a b il it y is re la te d to the time played in fo o tb a ll games.
Cumulative
records and the analysis of game film s have also been used to evaluate
fo o tb a ll playing a b i l i t y .
Several studies have been concerned with
psychological and social factors as re la te d to success in fo o tb a ll.
Cowell (1961) and others have found s ig n ific a n t c o rrelatio n s between
the ratings of players by coaches and ratings by fe llo w players.
The
review of lit e r a t u r e appeared to support the contention th a t fo o tb all
playing a b il it y is re la te d to c e rta in elements of motor fitn e s s .
numerous studies, the te s ts used to enhance the p re d ic tio n .
In •
16
id e n tific a tio n , and selection o f p o te n tia l fo o tb a ll players have been
based in part on various measurements o f strength, speed, and a g il it y .
However, "the accurate prediction o f successful fo o tb a ll a b ilit y
remains an unsolved problem in a th le tic s today (Evans, 1972)."
Chapter 3
PROCEDURES
Twenty-two members o f the 1975 Montana S tate U n iversity v a rs ity
fo o tb a ll team were u t iliz e d in this, study.
P rio r to the s ta rt of
pre-season p ra c tic e , each member of the coaching s t a f f was asked to
designate the 22 best fo o tb a ll players on the team.
These players were
lis te d by each coach in rank order from one to 22 on the basis of
fo o tb a ll playing a b i l i t y , and regardless of p o sitio n .
Based upon the
composite score o f the coaches evaluation s, those 22 players with the
lowest to ta l score were designated as subjects.
. Data C ollection
• Data was collected during each o f three established data
c o lle c tio n periods.
-
The three data c o lle c tio n periods were designated
as the post-season (November 5 to December 12, 1974), the.off-season .
(January 15 to A pril 5, 1975), and the pre-season (August 18 to
September 6, 1975).
Subjects were required to perform the same tasks
in an id e n tic a l manner during each o f the established c o lle c tio n .
periods.
Subjects were clothed in gym shorts and T -s h irts fo r a ll
te s tin g procedures.
Football: cleats were worn, while te s tin g speed and
a g i l i t y bn a clay surface.
Each of the 22 subjects was asked to evaluate the fo o tb all
'
playing a b il it y of each o f the other subjects by ranking them from, one
18
to 22.
Members of the coaching s t a f f were asked to rank the 22
subjects in the same manner.
Previous studies by Cowell (1961) and
others suggest th a t there are s ig n ific a n t co rrelatio n s between the
ratings o f players by coaches and ratings by fe llo w players.
I t should
be noted th a t the personal distance o f the subjects involved in th is
study was not examined.
Personal distance refers to the degree of
social acceptance or re je c tio n w ithin ones own group (C ow ell, 1964).
The personal distance of the subjects involved in th is study may have
influenced t h e ir ratings of one another.
To measure the strength fa c to r, each subject was required to
perform one maximum re p e titio n of the ,bench press using a Universal
Weight Machine during each c o lle c tio n period.
Maximum e ffo rts fo r each
subject in the leg press were collected, in the same manner during the .
post-season and off-season data c o lle c tio n periods.
Testing in the leg
press was lim ite d to these c o lle c tio n periods due to the p o s s ib ility of
in ju ry to the subjects near the s ta r t o f the com petitive season.
A
modified Roger's Short Strength Index was also administered during each
c o lle c tio n period.
Each subject was required to perform a maximum
number o f re p e titio n s o f pull-ups and a maximum number of bar dips.
The strength index was then computed using the follow ing formula:
P = pull-ups,D = bar dips, BW=body w eight, H=height, and SI=Strength .
index; (P + D) x (BW + (H - 6 0 ))= S I.
10
19
The speed fa c to r was measured by timing each subject in the 40
yard dash with the use of a hand held stopwatch.
from a three point stance.
Subjects were started
Timing began with the su b jec t's i n i t i a l
movement and ended when the su b ject's torso broke an imaginary plane a t
the fin is h .
Each subject completed three te s ts during each data
c o lle c tio n period.
Means were computed fo r the three t r i a l s during,
each data c o lle c tio n period.
A g ilit y was measured by timing each subject on two d if f e r e n t .
a g il it y d r i l l s with the use of a hand held stopwatch.
started from a three point stance.
Subjects were
Timing began with the subject's
i n i t i a l movement and ended when the su bject's torso broke an imaginary
plane at the fin is h .
Each subject completed two t r i a l s on each of the
a g il it y d r i l l s during the post-season and off-season data c o lle c tio n
periods.
Means were computed fo r the two t r ia ls on each a g il it y d r i l l
during each c o lle c tio n period.
Descriptions o f the two a g il it y d r i l l s
used in th is study w ill follow on pages 21 and 22.
S ta tis tic a l Analysis
C orrelation c o e ffic ie n ts were used to make the follow ing
comparisons:
1.
comparisons between the strength v a riab le s ,
2.
comparisons between the speed v a riab le s ,
3.
comparisons between the a g il it y v a riab le s ,
20
4.
strength to the speed and a g il it y v a ria b le s ,
5.
speed to the strength and a g il it y v a riab le s ,
6.
a g il it y to the strength and speed v a ria b le s ,
7.
coaches ratings to the stren gth, speed, and a g il it y
v a ria b le s ,
8.
players ratings to the stren gth, speed, and a g il it y
v a ria b le s ,
9.
coaches ratings to the players ra tin g s .
The resu lts of these comparisons w ill be presented in Chapter 4.
21
A g ility D r ill #1
Al I sides
10 yards
Subjects were instructed to run to each point as quickly as
possible.
Each subject started at point A and proceeded to points B,
C, D, A, and back to point B to complete the te s t.
22
A g ility D r i ll #2
Finish
A S ta rt
Step over the bags
Al I sides
20 yards
backwards
Carioca
Subjects were instructed to move to each point as quickly as
possible.
Each subject started a t point A and ran to point B where he
picked up a r o ll of tape.
From point B to point C the subject moved
la t e r a lly by doing the carioca, which involves a series of a lte rn a tin g
fro n t and rear la te r a l cross steps.
At point C the subject picked up
another r o ll of tape and ran backwards to point A.
From point A the
subject moved la t e r a lly to point D, stepping over the blocking dummies
which lay in his path.
Chapter 4
ANALYSIS OF DATA .
The purpose of th is study was to in vestig ate the relationsh ips
between the selected physical factors of strength, speed, and a g ilit y
and th e ir re la tio n s h ip to fo o tb a ll a b il it y as perceived by coaches and
p lay e rs .
C orrelation c o e ffic ie n ts were used to make comparisons
between the experimental variables u t iliz in g data collected during
three established data col lection^periods.
The resu lts o f these
comparisons are presented in tables and figures in th is chapter.
N fo r each ta b le is 22.
The
Any c o rre la tio n o f .404 or greater indicates
sig n ifican ce beyond the .05 level of confidence.
For the purpose of
constructing tables fo r th is chapter, the follow ing abbreviations were
used.
The post-season, off-season, and pre-season data c o lle ctio n
periods w ill be designated by the words Post, O ff, and Pre.
BP re fe rs
to the bench press, LP re fe rs to the leg press, and RSI re fers to a
modified Roger's Short Strength Index.
A-] refers to a g il it y d r i l l #1,
and Ag refers to a g il it y d r i l l #2.
Relationships Between Strength Variables
•
Strength was measured by te s tin g each subject in the bench
press, the leg press, and a modified Roger's Short Strength Index.
S ig n ific a n t re la tio n s h ip s were found to e x is t between performance in
the bench press during each of the data, c o lle c tio n periods.
24
S ig n ific a n t relationsh ips were found to e x is t between performance in
the leg press during the post-season and off-season data c o lle ctio n
periods.
S ig n ific a n t relatio n sh ip s were also found to e x is t between
performance in a modified Roger's Short Strength Index during each o f
the data c o lle c tio n periods.
Performance in the bench press was found
to be s ig n ific a n tly .r e la te d to performance in the strength index during
each o f the data c o lle c tio n periods.
Performance in the leg press was
not s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to performance in the bench press or the
strength index during any of the data c o lle c tio n periods.
The resu lts
o f these comparisons are presented in Table I on page 25.
*
Relationships Between Speed Variables
-
■.
,
Speed was measured by timing each subject in the 40 yard dash.
S ig n ific a n t re la tio n sh ip s were found to e x is t between the results
collected during each o f the data c o lle c tio n periods.
The results o f
these comparisons are presented in Table 2 on page 26.
Relationships Between A g ilit y Variables .
A g ilit y was measured by tim ing each subject on two d iffe re n t
a g il it y d r i l l s .
Performance on a g i l i t y ,d r ill #1 during, the post-season
data c o lle c tio n period was not found to be s ig n ific a n tly re la ted to .
performance on the same d r i l l during the pff-seasdn. Performance on
*
a g il it y d r i l l . #2 during the post-season data c o lle c tio n period was not
found to be s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to performance on the same d r i l l
25
Table I
R e la tio n s h ip s Between S tre n g th V a ria b le s
BP
Strength
RSI
O ff
Pre
Post
O ff
X
.8 8 *
.9 0 *
.10
.1 8 .
O ff
.8 8 *
X
.9 3 *
.12
Pre
.90*
.93*
X
Post
.10
.12
•■.18
Post
BP
Post
LP
Post •
O ff
Pre
. 73* -
.68*
.6 7 *
.16
.8 0 *
.78*
.6 8 *
.12
.14
.8 4 *
.81*
.69*
.12
X
.96*
.13
.04
.01
.16
.14
.9 6 *
X
.14
.02
.11
X
.84*
. 79*
LP
O ff
RSI
Post
.7 3 *
.8 0 *
.84*
.13
.14
Off
.6 8 *
.7 8 *
.81*
• 04.
.02 :
.8 4 *
X
.8 3 *
Pre
.6 7 *
,6 8 *
.69*
.01
.11
.7 9 *
.83*
X
in d ic a te s s ig n ifican ce beyond the .05 level o f confidence.
26
Table 2
Relationships Between Speed Variables
Speed
40 yard dash
Post
Post
O ff
Pre.
. X
.90*
.84*
O ff
. 90*
X
Pre
.84*
.8 7 *
,
in d ic a te s sign ificance beyond the .05 level of confidence.
.8 7 *
X
27
during the off-season.
Performance on a g il it y d r i l l #1 during the
post-season and the off-season data c o lle c tio n periods was found to be
s ig n ific a n tly , re la te d to performance on a g il it y d r i l l #2 during the
off-season, but was not s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to performance on a g ilit y
d r i l l #2 during the post-season data c o lle c tio n period.
The resu lts of
these comparisons are presented in Table 3.
Table 3
Relationships Between A g ilit y Variables
A2
A1
A g ili t y
aI
.
O ff
Post
O ff
X
.36
.36
X
CO
Post
Post
.40
. Post
;
.37
Off.
■
.40 .
'
.63*
.68*
X
.38
.38
X
A2
O ff
.63*
.68*
^indicates s ig n ifican ce beyond the .05 level o f confidence.
Relationship of Strength to Speed a n d .A g ility
Performance in the bench press, leg press, and a modified
Roger's Short Strength Index was not s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to
performance in the 40 yard dash during any o f the d a ta .c o lle c tio n
periods.
Performance, in the bench press during the post-season and
off-season data c o lle c tio n periods was not s ig n ific a n tly re la ted to
..
28
performance on a g i l i t y d r i l l #1 or a g i l i t y d r i l l #2 during these same
data c o lle c tio n periods.
Performance in the bench press during the
pre-season data c o lle c tio n period was s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to
performance on a g i l i t y d r i l l #1 during the off-season, but was not
s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to performance on th is same a g i l i t y d r i l l during
the post-season data c o lle c tio n period.
Performance in the bench press
during the pre-season data c o lle c tio n period was not s ig n ific a n tly
re la te d to performance on a g il it y d r i l l #2 during the post-season or
off-season data c o lle c tio n periods.
Performance in the leg press was
not s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to performance on a g il it y d r i l l #1 or a g il it y
d r i l l #2 during any o f the data c o lle c tio n periods.
Performance in a
modified Roger's Short Strength Index during the post-season and
off-season data c o lle c tio n periods was not s ig n ific a n tly re la ted to
performance on a g i l i t y d r i l l #1 during the post-season, or to a g ilit y
d r i l l #2 during the post-season or off-season data c o lle c tio n periods.
Performance in the strength index during the post-season and off-season
data c o lle c tio n periods was s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to performance on
a g il it y d r i l l #1 during the off-season data c o lle c tio n period.
Performance in the strength index during the pre-season data co lle ctio n
period was not s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to performance on a g il it y d r i l l #1
or a g il it y d r i l l #2 during the post-season or off-season data
c o lle c tio n periods.
Table 4 on page 29.
The re su lts of these comparisons are presented in
29
Table 4
R e la tio n s h ip o f S tre n g th to Speed and A g i l i t y V a ria b le s
40 yard dash
. A-|
Ag
Strength
Post
O ff
Pre
Post
. O ff
Post
O ff
Post
.25
.09
.23
.25
.33
.27
.28
O ff
.27
.08
.22
.24
.31
.32
.22
Pre
.30
.13
.25
'. 31
.44*
.36
.33
Post
.26
.19
.18
.04
.00
.06
.14
O ff
.30
.26 '
.22
.00
.04
.04
.20
Post ■
.29
.01
.12
.21
.42* .
.29
.23
O ff.
.17
.04
.06
.14
.46*
.27
.14
Pre
.04
.21
.01
.08
.26
.13
.06
BP
.
LP
RSI.
*In d ic a te s sig n ifican ce beyond the .05 level of confidence.
30
R e la tio n s h ip o f Speed to S tre n g th and A g i l i t y
Performance in the 40 yard dash was not found to be s ig n if i­
cantly' re la te d to performance in the bench press, leg press, or a .
modified Roger's Short Strength Index during any o f the data c o lle c tio n
periods.
Performance in the 40 yard dash during the post-season and
off-season data c o lle c tio n periods was found to be s ig n ific a n tly
re la te d to performance on a g il it y d r i l l #1 and a g il it y d r i l l #2 during
the off-season data c o lle c tio n period.
However, i t was not s ig n if i­
cantly re la te d to performance on a g il it y d r i l l #! or a g i l i t y d r i l l #2
during the post-season data c o lle c tio n period. . Performance in the 40 .
yard dash during the pre-season data c o lle c tio n period was found to be
s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to performance on a g il it y d r i l l #1 during both,
the post-season and off-season, and to a g il it y d r i l l #2 during the
off-season data c o lle c tio n period.
Performance in the 40 yard dash
during the pre-season data c o lle c tio n period was not s ig n ific a n tly
re la te d to performance on a g il it y d r i l l #2 during the post-season data
c o lle c tio n period.
The re su lts of these comparisons are presented in.
Table 5 on page 31.
Relationship of A g ilit y to Strength and Speed
Performance on. a g il it y d r il l. #1 during the post-season data
c o lle c tio n period was not s ig n ific a n tly .r e la te d to performance in the
bench press during, any of the data c o lle c tio n periods.
Performance on
Table 5
R e la tio n s h ip o f Speed to S tre n g th and A g i l i t y V a ria b le s
BR
LR
RSI
A1
A2
Speed
Post
O ff
40 yard dash time
Pre
Post
O ff
Post
O ff
Pre
Post
Post
.25
.27
.30
.26
.30
.29
.17
.04
.31
.51*
.10
Off
.09
.08
.13
.19
.26
.01
.04
.21
.36
.5 2 *
.04
.70*
Rre
.23
.22
.25
.18
.22
.12
.06
.01
.44*
.60*
.14
.76*
*In d ic a te s sig n ifican ce beyond the .05 level o f confidence.
Off
*
O ')
Post
CO
O ff
32
a g i l i t y d r i l l #1 during the off-season data c o lle c tio n period was n o t ,
s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to performance in the bench press during the
post-season or off-season, but was s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to performance
in the bench press during the pre-season data c o lle c tio n period.
Performance on a g il it y d r i l l #2 during the post-season and off-season
data c o lle c tio n periods was not s ig n ific a n tly re la ted to performance in
the bench press during any of the data c o lle c tio n periods.
Performance
on a g i l i t y . d r i l l #1 and a g il it y d r i l l #2 during the post-season and
off-season data c o lle c tio n periods was not s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to
performance in the leg press during any of the data c o lle c tio n periods.
Performance on a g il it y d r i l l #1 during the post-season data c o lle ctio n
period was not s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to performance in a modified
Roger's Short Strength Index during any of the data c o lle c tio n periods.
Performance on a g il it y d r i l l #1 during the.off-season data c o lle ctio n
period was s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to the strength index during the
post-season and off-season, but was not s ig n ific a n tly re la te d during
the pre-season data c o lle c tio n period.
Performance on a g i l i t y d r i l l #2
during the post-season and off-season data c o lle ctio n periods was not
s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to performance in the strength index during any
of the data c o lle c tio n periods.
Performance on a g il it y d r i l l #1 and a g ilit y d r i l l #2 during the
post-season data c o lle c tio n period was not s ig n ific a n tly re la ted to
performance in the 40 yard dash during the post-season or off-season
33
data c o lle c tio n periods.
Performance on a g il it y d r i l l #1 and a g il it y '
d r i l l #2 during the off-season data c o lle c tio n period was found to be
s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to performance in the 40 yard dash during each of
the data c o lle c tio n periods.
Performance on a g il it y d r i l l #1 during
the post-season data c o lle c tio n period was found to be s ig n ific a n tly
re la te d to performance in the 40 yard dash during the pre-season data
c o lle c tio n period.
Performance on a g i l i t y d r i l l #2 during the ,
post-season data c o lle c tio n period was not s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to
performance in the 40 yard dash during the pre-season. , The results of
these comparisons are presented in Table 6 on page 34.
R elationship o f Coaches Ratings to Strength, Speed, and A g ility
P rio r to the s t a r t of pre-season p ra c tic e , members of the
fo o tb a ll coaching s t a f f a t Montana State U niversity ranked each of the ' .
subjects from one to 22 on the basis o f fo o tb a ll playing a b i l i t y ,
regardless of po sitio n .
The coaches ratings were not s ig n ific a n tly
re la te d to performance in the bench press, leg press, or the modified
Roger's Short Strength Index during any o f the d a ta .c o lle c tio n p e rio d s ...
Coaches ratings were s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to performance in the 40
yard dash during each o f the data c o lle c tio n periods.
Coaches ratings
were s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to performance on a g il it y d r i l l #1 during
the post-season data c o lle c tio n period, and /to performance on a g ilit y
d r i l l #2 during the off-season data c o lle c tio n period.
Coaches ratings
Table 6
R e la tio n s h ip o f A g i l i t y to S tre n g th and Speed V a ria b le s
BP
LP
RSI
40 yard dash
Post
O ff
Pre
Post
O ff
Post
O ff
Pre
Post
O ff
Pre
Post
.25
.24
.31
.04
.00
.21
.14
.08
.31
. 36
.44*
O ff
.33
.31
.4 4 *
.00
.04
.4 2 *
.4 6 *
.26
.5 1 *
.5 2 *
.60*
Post
.27
.32
.36
.06
.04
.29
.27
.13
.10
.04
.14
O ff
.28
.22
.33
.14
.20
.23
.14
.06
.6 3 *
.70*
.7 6 *
A g ilit y
A
aT
A
a 2
L
*In d ic a te s sign ificance beyond the .05 level o f confidence.
35
were not s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to performance on a g il it y d r i l l #1
during the off-season data c o lle c tio n period, or to performance on
a g il it y d r i l l #2 during the post-season data c o lle c tio n period.
The
resu lts o f these comparisons are presented in Table 7 on page 36.
Relationship, o f Players Ratings to Strength, Speed, and A g ility
Each o f the subjects was asked to evaluate the fo o tb a ll playing
a b il it y of each o f the other subjects as well as themselves, by ranking
them from one to 22.
The players ratings were not s ig n ific a n tly
re la te d to performance in the bench press, leg press, or the modified
Roger's Short Strength Index during any of the data c o lle c tio n periods.
Players ratings were not s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to performance in the 40
yard dash during the post-season and off-season data c o lle c tio n
periods, but were s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to performance in the 40 yard
dash during the pre-season data c o lle c tio n period.
Players ratings
were s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to performance on a g ilit y d r i l l #1 during
the post-season data c o lle c tio n period.
Players ratings were not
s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to performance on a g il it y d r i l l #1 during the
off-season data c o lle c tio n period, or to performance on a g ilit y d r i l l
#2 during the post-season or off-season data c o lle c tio n periods.
resu lts of these comparisons are presented in Table 8 on page 36.
The
Table 7
R e la tio n s h ip o f Coaches R atings to S tre n g th , Speed, and A g i l i t y V a ria b le s
BR
CR
RSI
LP
Post
O ff
Pre
1.8
.33
.25
.
40 yard dash
Post
O ff
Post
O ff
Pre
.07
.02
.17
.04
.16
Post
O ff
Pre
.5 2 * .4 7 * .6 0 *
A2
Al
Post
O ff
Post
O ff
.5 8 * .30
.28
.54*
*In d ic a te s sig n ifican ce beyond the .05 level o f confidence.
Table 8
■ -•
Relationship o f Players Ratings to Strength, Speed, and A g ilit y Variables
LP
BP .
. Post
PR .
.17
RSI
O ff
Pre
Post
O ff
Post
.17
.17
.08
.07
.15
40 yard dash
A1
A2
O ff. Pre
Post
O ff
Pre
Post. O ff
Post
O ff
.01
.31
.17
.4 2 *
.4 3 * .06
.18
.20
.01
^ In d ic a te s sign ificance beyond the .05 level of. confidence.
37
R e la tio n s h ip o f Coaches R atings to P layers Ratings
S ig n ific a n t relatio n sh ip s were found to e x is t between fo o tb all
a b il it y as perceived by coaches and fo o tb a ll a b il it y as perceived by
players.
Discussion
Many in vestig ations have shown a s ig n ific a n t re la tio n s h ip
between a single v a riab le o f stren gth, speed, or a g i l i t y or a
combination o f these variab les and fo o tb a ll playing a b i l i t y .
The
relatio n sh ip s which were found to e x is t between these variab les in th is
study, and th e ir re la tio n s h ip to fo o tb a ll playing a b i l i t y w ill be
discussed in d iv id u a lly .
Several studies have suggested th a t strength is essential to
performance in fo o tb a ll.
The re su lts o f th is study indicated th a t
coaches ratings and players ratings were not s ig n ific a n tly re la ted to
strength.
S ig n ific a n t relatio n sh ip s were found to e x is t between
performance in the bench press and performance in a modified Roger's
Short Strength Index during each data c o lle c tio n period.
However,
performance in the leg press was not s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to
performance in e ith e r the bench press or the strength index during any
o f the data c o lle c tio n periods.
This may have been due to the fa c t
th a t the leg press involved an e n tir e ly d iffe r e n t muscle group than did
the bench press or the strength index.
I f the bench press or a
38.
modified Roger's Short Strength Index are assumed to be v a lid
indicators o f o v e rall body stren gth, the resu lts o f th is study show
th a t the leg press was not.
Many coaches have suggested th a t strength is a p re req u isite to
speed (Holland, 1975).
The re su lts o f th is study indicated th at
strength was not s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to speed.
the findings of several previous^ studies.
This is contrary to
I f strength can be assumed
to be a p re re q u is ite to speed, then the measures of strength u tiliz e d
in th is study were riot.
No s ig n ific a n t re la tio n sh ip s were found to e x is t between
performance on a g il it y d r i l l #1 during d iffe r e n t data c o lle c tio n
periods.
No s ig n ific a n t relatio n sh ip s were found to e x is t between
performance on a g il it y d r i l l #2 during d iffe r e n t data c o lle c tio n
periods.
No s ig n ific a n t re la tio n sh ip s were found to e x is t between
performance on the two a g il it y d r i l l s except during the off-season data
c o lle c tio n period.
Speed was s ig n ific a n tly re la ted to a g il it y during
the off-season data c o lle c tio n period, but was not s ig n ific a n tly
re la te d to a g i l i t y during the post-season.
Performance on a g il it y
d r i l l #1 was found to be somewhat re la te d to strength during the
off-season data c o lle c tio n period.
The lack of consistency in
performance on the two a g il it y d r i l l s suggests th a t these d r i l l s may
not have been r e lia b le in dicators of a g i l i t y .
Therefore, very l i t t l e
emphasis can be placed on the s ig n ific a n t relationsh ips th a t these
d r i l l s had w ith the other physical parameters.
As indicated in previous studies by Cowell (1961) and others,
s ig n ific a n t re la tio n sh ip s were found to e x is t between fo o tb a ll a b ilit y
as perceived by coaches and fo o tb a ll a b il it y as perceived by players.
Coaches appeared to place a greater emphasis on speed in the evaluation
o f fo o tb a ll a b il it y than did the players.
I t is also in te re s tin g to
note th a t the coaches ratings had a higher degree o f re la tio n s h ip to
each physical parameter than did the players ra tin g s .
The resu lts of
th is study suggest th a t the determining facto rs upon which the coaches
based th e ir evaluations of fo o tb a ll a b il it y were d iffe r e n t from those
upon which the players based the evaluations o f other players and
themselves. .
Chapter 5
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The purpose o f th is study was to in vestig ate the relationsh ips .
between the selected physical facto rs o f strength, speed, and a g ilit y
and th e ir re la tio n s h ip to fo o tb a ll a b il it y as perceived by coaches and
players.
S p e c ific a lly , an attempt was made to determine:
1.
i f a single v a ria b le o f stren g th , speed, or a g il it y is
re la te d to fo o tb a ll a b i l i t y as perceived by coaches and
players,
2.
i f any relatio n sh ip s e x is t between the variab les of
stren gth, speed, and a g i l i t y ,
3.
i f there is any re la tio n s h ip between fo o tb a ll a b ilit y as
perceived by coaches and fo o tb a ll a b il it y as perceived by
players.
It . was hypothesized th a t there would be no s ig n ific a n t
relatio n sh ip s between the variables of strength, speed, or a g i l i t y , o r .
between any of these variab les and fo o tb a ll a b il it y as perceived by
coaches or players.
Twenty-two members of the 1975 Montana State U n iv e rsity v a rs ity
fo o tb a ll team were u t iliz e d as subjects in th is study.
C orrelation
c o e ffic ie n ts were used to make comparisons between the fiv e
experimental v a riab le s .
Data was co llected during each o f three
established data c o lle c tio n periods.which were designated as the
41
post-season, the off-season, and the pre-season.
To measure the strength fa c to r, each subject was required to •
perform one maximum re p e titio n in the bench press.
Maximum e ffo rts fo r
each subject were also co llected in the leg press, and a modified
Roger's Short Strength Index was adm inistered.
The speed fa c to r was
measured by tim ing each subject in the 40 yard dash w ith the use of a
hand held stopwatch.
A g ilit y was measured by timing each subject on
two d iffe r e n t a g i l i t y d r i l l s with the use of a hand held stopwatch.
Each of the 22 subjects was asked to evaluate the fo o tb a ll playing
a b i l i t y of each o f the other subjects by ranking them from one to 22.
Members of the coaching s t a f f were asked to rank the 22 subjects in the
same manner.
Performance on each of the strength variables was found to be
s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to performance in the same v a ria b le during
d iffe r e n t data c o lle c tio n periods.
Performance in the bench press was
s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to performance in a modified Roger's Short
Strength Index during each o f the data c o lle c tio n periods.
Performance
in the leg press was not s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to performance in the
bench press or the strength index during any of the data c o lle c tio n
periods.
S ig n ific a n t relatio n sh ip s were found to e x is t between
performance in the speed v a riab le during each of the data c o lle ctio n
periods.
Speed was not s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to strength during any of
the data c o lle c tio n periods.
Speed was s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to
42
a g il it y during the off-season data c o lle c tio n period.
No s ig n ific a n t
relatio n sh ip s were found to e x is t between performance on the same
a g il it y d r i l l s during d iffe r e n t data c o lle c tio n periods.
S ig n ific a n t
relatio n sh ip s were found to e x is t between performance on the two
a g il it y d r i l l s during the off-season data c o lle c tio n period.
Coaches
ratings were s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to speed during each o f the data
c o lle c tio n periods, and to a g il it y d r i l l #1 during the post-season,
and to a g il it y d r i l l #2 during the off-season data c o lle c tio n period.
Players ratings were s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to speed during the
pre-season, and to a g il it y d r i l l #1 during the post-season data
c o lle c tio n period.
S ig n ific a n t re la tio n sh ip s were found to e x is t
between fo o tb a ll a b il it y as perceived by coaches and fo o tb a ll a b il it y
as perceived by players.
Conclusions
The follow ing conclusions were made based upon the resu lts of
th is study.
1.
Speed and a g i l i t y were s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to the
. evaluation o f fo o tb a ll a b i l i t y by.coaches and players.
2.
Strength was not s ig n ific a n tly re la ted to speed.
3.
A g ilit y was s ig n ific a n tly re la te d to strength and speed.
4.
There were s ig n ific a n t re la tio n sh ip s between fo o tb a ll
a b il it y as perceived by coaches and fo o tb a ll a b ilit y as
perceived by players.
Recommendations
The follow ing recommendations are made concerning fu rth e r
research on th is to p ic .
1.
More physical parameters should be included in order to
ascertain which parameters i f any are s ig n ific a n tly
re la te d .
2.
D iffe re n t in dicators of stren gth, speed, and a g ilit y
should, be u t iliz e d to v e r ify or disprove the r e l i a b i l i t y
. o f those used in th is study.
3.
.
The e ffe c t o f personal distance on subjective evaluation
should be considered by including a sociom etric analysis
in the comparisons.
4.
A la rg e r number o f subjects could be u t iliz e d .
5.
A composite index of physical parameters should be
developed which could in d ic a te i f a re la tio n s h ip exists
between fo o tb a ll a b il it y and the index.
REFERENCES'
A lie n , N. A fa c to r analysis of selected college fo o tb a ll a b il it y te s t
items. Unpublished doctoral d is s e rta tio n , U niversity of Oregon,
1965. .
Berger, R. A ., & L i t t l e f i e l d , D. H.. A comparison, between fo o tb all
a th letes and non-athletes on p e rs o n a lity . Research Q u arterly,
1969, 40, 663.
B irch, I . C. Relationship of motor performance to time played in
in te r c o lle g ia te fo o tb a ll. Unpublished master's th e s is . U niversity
o f Utah, 1963.
Brace, D. K. V a lid ity o f fo o tb a ll achievement tests as measurements
of motor learning and as a p a r tia l basis fo r the selection of
players. Research Q u a rte rly , 1943, 14, 372-377.
B rechler, P. W. A te s t to determine p o te n tia l a b il it y in fo o tb a ll.
Unpublished m aster's th e s is , Iowa S tate U n iv e rs ity , 1940. .
C a rte r, J. E. Somatotypes of college fo o tb a ll players.
Q u a rte rly , 1968, 39, 476-482.
C egelski, B.
Personal in terview .
Research
Bozeman, Montana, September .3,. 1975.
C larke, H. H. A pplication of measurement to health and physical
education. Englewood C l i f f s , New Jersey: P re n tic e -H a ll, 1967.
Cooper, G. A method fo r selectin g players fo r positions in American /
Fo o tb all. Unpublished doctoral d is s e rta tio n , U n iv e rsity of Utah, .
1967.
•
Cormack, H. A te s t fo r p o te n tia l footb all, capacity.
master's th e s is , Iowa State U n iv e rs ity , 1940.
Unpublished
Cowell, C. C ., & Is m a il, A., H., V a lid ity o f a fo o tb a ll ra tin g scale
and it s re la tio n s h ip to social in teg ra tio n , and academic a b ilit y .
Research Q u a rte rly , 1961, 32, 461-467.
Cowell, C. C ., & Schwehh, H. M. Modern prin cip les and methods in
secondary school physical education. Boston: A llyn & Bacon, 1964.
Cronbach, L. J. Essentials of psychological te s tin g .
■ Harper & Row, I960.
New York:
45
DiGiovanna, V. The re la tio n of s tru c tu ra l and functional measures to
success in college a th le tic s . Research Q u arte rly , 1943, 14, 199216.
—
E lle n a , J. D. Relation o f physiological facto rs to fo o tb a ll
performance. Unpublished master's th e s is , U n iversity of
C a lifo rn ia , Los Angeles, 1959.
Evans, V. A fa c to r and.discrim inant analysis o f fo o tb a ll playing
a b il it y among black high school a th le te s . Unpublished doctoral
d is s e rta tio n . Northwestern State U n iv e rs ity , Natchitoches,
Louisiana, 1972.
Holland, S.
Personal in terv ie w .
Bozeman, Montana, August 5, 1975.
Jordani J. H. The influence o f selected physical variab les on the
performance o f quarterbacks in the Southern Conference.
Unpublished doctoral d is s e rta tio n . U n iv e rsity of Alabama, 1970.
K e lly , B. J. Single year and lo n g itu d in al comparisons o f m a tu rity ,
physique, s tru c tu ra l, stren gth, and motor c h a ra c te ris tic s of
seventeen and eighteen year old high school ath le te s and nonp a rtic ip a n ts . Unpublished doctoral d is s e rta tio n . U niversity of
Oregon, 1969.
M ille r , H. G. The contributions of physical capacities and a b i l i t i e s ,
as measured by motor t e s t , to success in college fo o tb a ll.
Unpublished master's th e s is , Iowa S tate U n iv e rs ity , 1936.
Norred, R. G. The e ffe c ts of c e rta in selected variab les on performance
in fo o tb a ll. Unpublished doctoral d is s e rta tio n , U niversity of
Alabama, 1964.
Polychrdnis , A. The re la tio n s h ip of general motor a b il it y to v a rs ity
fo o tb a ll coaches rankings of fo o tb a ll a b il it y . Unpublished .
master's th e s is , U n iversity of Utah, 1967.
P ric e , N. G. The re la tio n s h ip o f college fo o tb all players strength,
. speed, and a g il it y to the coaches rankings of a b i l i t y . Unpublished
m aster's th e s is , U niversity o f Washington, 1967. .
Rhodes, W. J. The construction of scales fo r.p re d ic tin g a b ilit y to
play in te rs c h o la s tic fo o tb a ll. Unpublished.doctoral d is s e rta tio n ,
U n iversity of Houston, 1950.
46
S a la to , S. R. Physical and social facto rs a ffe c tin g the selection of
fo o tb a ll players. Unpublished master's th e s is , Purdue U n iv e rs ity ,
1961.
Schendel, J. S. The differences between the psychological character­
is tic s of ninth grade, tw e lfth grade, and college athletes and
non-participants in a th le tic s . Unpublished doctoral d is s e rta tio n .
U n iversity o f Oregon, 1963.
Sheldon, W. H ., Stevens, S. S ., & Tucker, W. B.
The v a rie tie s of
human physique. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1940.
S h e lly , M. F. M a tu rity , s tru c tu re , motor a b i l i t y , and in te llig e n c e
p ro file s of outstanding elementary and ju n io r high school athletes
Unpublished master's th e s is . U n iv e rsity o f Oregon, 1960.
Thompson, M. W. Relationship of pre-season physical te s tin g and post­
season rank of selected high school fo o tb a ll players. Unpublished
master's th e s is , Washington S tate U n iv e rs ity , 1959.
W iley, R. C. Single year and lo n g itu d in al comparisons of m a tu rity ,
physique, s tru c tu ra l, stren gth, and motor c h a ra c te ris tic s of
twelve year old a th le te s and n o n -p articip an ts. Unpublished
doctoral d is s e rta tio n , U n iv e rsity of Oregon, 1963.
Wilhelm, A. The re la tio n s h ip of c e rta in measurable t r a i t s to success
in fo o tb a ll. Unpublished doctoral d is s e rta tio n , U niversity of
Indiana, 1951.
MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES
3
762 1001 3689 2
N378
F3^7
cop.2
Felton, Jeffry D
The relationship of
selected physical fac­
tors to football abili­
ty
DATE
IS S U E D
TO
W-I ^
a
^
/ / !
-
JjL I **
* t H(m\ W
MIL 2 0
w c te -
* r
^sr