Not willing to give in to ''silly bullshit'', or arrogance?

Coach Ripp,
I have been training well since the last setback. I have gained bodyweight and took my squat to 98kg for 3 sets of 5. I have also been doing well in practice, despite the national team coaches telling me I am ''going to lose the train'' (not be competitive).
Yesterday, a guy fell on top of my knee when it was bent, and felt strong pain in my knee. Today the physiotherapist told me it was just a small tear in the MCL, and I shall be ok soon. She also prescribed several unilateral leg exercises, and band isolation exercises to work the ''stability of the ligaments''.
Even though I am grateful for the physio's help, I can't find a reason to do these ''exercises'' I have been asked to do, even though she said they were a compliment to strength training.
It completely goes against what I've learned to be true. These isolation and unilateral exercises are not functional movements, involve little muscle mass and they can't be done in any way possible that would drive a systemic adaptation. It seems that a properly-performed heavy squat would produce stronger ligaments, and overall strength adaptation throughout the body, better than any ''stability'' exercise can.

I trust your word coach, and the word of the people here, because it has proven to be worth it's value. Probably, I should know your opinion on the subject right now, but do you think that any of these ''stability training exercises'' can be useful in any situation?

Thanks Coach Ripp

I can think of no mechanism by which isolation exercises would work better than compound movements for rehab of any structure.

The exercises your PT gave you will do nothing for you that a loaded, full ROM squat won't do far better. Just continue to train as best you can while your knee heals up.

They have a short range of motion, or no range of motion at all (leg adduction, single leg balance exercises), involve little muscle mass, and cannot be loaded properly, and therefore cannot drive physiological adaptation. However, these exercises give you the subjective sense of accomplishment, as you're ''working'' to not lose your balance, or you feel the ''burn'' in a speciic region of the body, so many people associate this things with effectiveness.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe

I can think of no mechanism by which isolation exercises would work better than compound movements for rehab of any structure.

---

What about your neck or fingers? Not trying to be difficult, just curious.

I reserve single leg "functional training" for only my meekest of patients. I will leave it there.

devil's advocate:

In SS:BBT 3rd Ed, you say that in the press, tissues such as the supraspinatus are not the primary muscles producing the movement, but rather function as stabilizers (paraphrasing). If this is meant to imply that they act isometrically rather than concentrically & eccentrically, couldn't one argue that the press will not optimally rehab such a tissue, if such a tissue will only be optimally rehabbed by including concentric and/or eccentric contractions?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigA

What about your neck or fingers? Not trying to be difficult, just curious.

---

You want to do single finger exercises? Single neck exercises?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spacediver

devil's advocate:

In SS:BBT 3rd Ed, you say that in the press, tissues such as the supraspinatus are not the primary muscles producing the movement, but rather function as stabilizers (paraphrasing). If this is meant to imply that they act isometrically rather than concentrically & eccentrically, couldn't one argue that the press will not optimally rehab such a tissue, if such a tissue will only be optimally rehabbed by including concentric and/or eccentric contractions?

---

If it's primary function is isometric, how is rehab optimized by including isolation concentric/eccentric movement? IOW, why is this -- "if such a tissue will only be optimally rehabbed by including concentric and/or eccentric contractions?" -- your assumption?

I have tried to talk with another PT about this before, but people tell me I am too young to hold this opinions, even though they recognize the value of the arguments. They tell me that ''balance'' training and ''stability'' training is essential to develop the ''stabilizer'' muscles groups of the body. Nevertheless, I don't seem to understand how people might think that balance exercises and exercises with bands would develop this structures, and a full ROM squat would not.


Thank you SS coaches for the answers, aswell as the community members.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spacediver

devil's advocate:

In SS:BBT 3rd Ed, you say that in the press, tissues such as the supraspinatus are not the primary muscles producing the movement, but rather function as stabilizers (paraphrasing). If this is meant to imply that they act isometrically rather than concentrically & eccentrically, couldn't one argue that the press will not optimally rehab such a tissue, if such a tissue will only be optimally rehabbed by including concentric and/or eccentric contractions?

---

The concentric function of the supraspinatus is to assist the deltoid through the first few degrees of abduction. The role of the rotator cuff muscles during the far majority of "functional" activities is to work together isometrically to stabilize the glenohumeral joint while the many larger, stronger muscles (pecs, lats, deltoids, teres major, biceps, triceps, etc.) that operate the joint create movement much like they do during the press so your example is not a great one.