Skip to content

Updated Review of the Applied Physiology of American College Football: Physical Demands, Strength and Conditioning, Nutrition, and Injury Characteristics of America's Favorite Game.

PMID 28338375 (2017): injury, load — Injury risk (study note for endurance athletes).

Last updated/Feb 23, 2026, 11:13 PM

Study note • PMID 28338375

Updated Review of the Applied Physiology of American College Football: Physical Demands, Strength and Conditioning, Nutrition, and Injury Characteristics of America's Favorite Game.

International journal of sports physiology and performance2017 • DOI 10.1123/ijspp.2016-0783
Evidence C56/100
Action 2: Consider

Worth trying if it fits your goal and context.

ELI5

In plain language

While there are various avenues for performance improvement in college American football (AF), there is no comprehensive evaluation of the collective array of resources around performance, physical conditioning, and… (review; participants).

In this review, the abstract reports associations involving Injury risk (not necessarily causation). Treat this as a signal, not a guarantee; confirm methods and context in the full paper.

Takeaways

What the abstract suggests

  • Study question: While there are various avenues for performance improvement in college American football (AF), there is no comprehensive evaluation of the collective array of resources around performance, physical conditioning, and…
  • In this review, the abstract reports associations involving Injury risk (not necessarily causation).
  • Population: participants.
  • Protocol cues: abstract may omit dose/timing; use the full paper to replicate accurately.

Protocol

Protocol (as reported)

  • Intervention/exposure: injury, load.
  • Dose/time/duration: abstract doesn’t include enough detail; use the full paper’s methods section.
  • Outcomes: Injury risk.
  • Replication note: abstracts often omit adherence and timing; confirm details before changing training or supplementation.

Fit

Who it helps, and who should skip it

Who it helps

  • Athletes similar to the study population (participants) working on injury risk.
  • Athletes who can measure Injury risk with a repeatable workout or time-trial effort.

Who should skip

  • If you have symptoms or conditions that make the intervention risky, get professional guidance.
  • If you’re near race day and can’t safely test, defer the experiment.

Methods

What the study actually did

  • Design: review.
  • Population: participants.
  • Outcomes measured: Injury risk.
  • Source: PubMed PMID 28338375 (2017) — International journal of sports physiology and performance.

Results excerpt

What the abstract reports

Collectively, game demands may require a combination of upper- and lower-body strength and power production, rapid acceleration (positive and negative), change of direction, high running speed, high-intensity and repetitive collisions, and muscle-strength endurance.

Note: excerpts are short; for full context, read the paper.

Limits

Limitations & bias

  • Abstract-only summaries can miss critical details (population, protocol, adherence, and context).
  • Reviews and consensus statements mix protocols and populations; recommendations may not match your exact constraints.
  • If your context differs (elite vs recreational; cycling vs running), adjust expectations and be conservative.
  • This is performance information, not medical advice.

Coaching beta

Get a plan that adapts to your life.

Join the 26weeks.ai TestFlight beta for adaptive coaching, recovery-aware adjustments, and race-week reminders.

Keep going

Sources