People with a "intermediate understanding of weightlifting and program design" have a long history of not having the faintest clue what they are talking about. Given how frequently fashions have shifted over the past 20-30 years, the armchair experts can't have all been right about whose routines are "terrible" and contain "massive flaws". Plyos or no plyos? O-lifts? HIT? Bodybuilding? Draw-ins, bracing, stabilization or old fashioned situps? Linear or non-linear periodization? 4-times a day training or "lots of rest"?
It's almost like there might be multiple ways of doing this stuff and that a lot of it doesn't matter nearly as much as people think, especially in a population that has to play a ton of their actual sport.
A lot of this IMO stems from confusing two populations, to wit: "elite athletes who are already beastly strong and conditioned, and training skills on a near full-time basis" and "the pool of perennial beginners/intermediates who make up the vast majority of sport science study populations, internet fora and personal training $$$".
It's almost like there might be multiple ways of doing this stuff and that a lot of it doesn't matter nearly as much as people think, especially in a population that has to play a ton of their actual sport.
A lot of this IMO stems from confusing two populations, to wit: "elite athletes who are already beastly strong and conditioned, and training skills on a near full-time basis" and "the pool of perennial beginners/intermediates who make up the vast majority of sport science study populations, internet fora and personal training $$$".