Mind the gap! A survey comparing current strength training methods used in men’s versus women’s first team and academy soccer

Purpose: Much less is known about strength and conditioning (S&C) practice in women’s versus men’s soccer. The aim of this study was to compare S&C practice between coaches working in men’s or women’s soccer, at first team or academy level, worldwide.

Methods: A total of 170 participants, who were involved with S&C support at their soccer club (in Europe, USA and South America, within men’s or women’s first team or academy settings) completed a comprehensive online survey, designed to evaluate (i) their academic qualifications and S&C coaching experience; and their preferred methods for (ii) physical testing; (iii) strength and power development; (iv) plyometric training; (v) speed development; and (vi) periodization.

Results: Women’s academies had fewer weekly in-season S&C sessions than men’s academies (1.6±0.6 vs. 2.3±0.9, p=0.005). Relatively, fewer women’s academy S&C coaches (6%) used Olympic weightlifting movements than men’s academy S&C coaches (32%, p=0.030). Relatively, more women’s academy coaches (47%) used the Nordic hamstring exercise (NHE) compared to men’s academy coaches (15%, p=0.006), but relatively more women’s vs. men’s first team coaches (61% vs. 38%, p=0.028) and women’s vs. men’s academy (61% vs. 38% coaches, p=0.049) utilised rating of perceived exertion-based load prescriptions.

Conclusion: Notable differences in S&C practice exist between coaches of men’s and women’s soccer squads, particularly at academy level. Fewer weekly S&C sessions in women academy players may have implications for physical development, while the greater use of subjective load prescriptions in both academy and first team women’s squads may lead to sub-optimal performance gains.