JFIFC    $ &%# #"(-90(*6+"#2D26;=@@@&0FKE>J9?@=C  =)#)==================================================iK" }!1AQa"q2#BR$3br %&'()*456789:CDEFGHIJSTUVWXYZcdefghijstuvwxyz w!1AQaq"2B #3Rbr $4%&'()*56789:CDEFGHIJSTUVWXYZcdefghijstuvwxyz ?Ƕ̤R4` ܿ+b1/GJխMhݔ_M?MM]#; ْݯ!8A5F.gmq}=z hIh [I{`O^#-,awb0+:宑ͽENT`N ASA019mD>c1YW52 )hTo"!+ڲb cZ$%Ap55J-'|Tr7*F+4]İa 4H4C Z;CZofB#mu?ZT,Ս8Sia/& n?xYskKNeQN=*q<"uR)ym:MQپc/uLTѰMM;vk%+uNRLYY&ߛQa!8[2l<'6pYƩ2֘4J$Ns .yg#U4-׀W>1uidG2Np;(*u"v9+Tw46 Q*@=]DY;+59#(N=lw DkX>ds< $[o_ /Үf(-Sn#zx+'E_EAkyl.' DVW Gӕ--z:φ&KVԶa%x=+uMBSL$R5wnLArz4'ڣUc[U2Ž'n%ncm{Q[]~Ku^֖./dS\fVV;+@.V hךfۖnuQj)CL$cw_kЯtkY#BK=x]͍^z}SfWWD=# cj:uΡ<Np=:B>v%'ZtbjVJQ5Fn@ VMe%*/K4Qajrڢu[Yy^,9)gizݗe_.`t"hY[V ZlaW$w^)?>Q}iV7'@/b`vKnJ>V緡Xl+ 0$ҰEap\uZƬZ|IN$c5\ml/<0r*\+xov6iS"=Mr\ikm5W6Q@ j1m|Ebf4$Ηh?0*=2g!CkߥQ?#Ӵ &9eU] J-Ηm1$Xk#?SN VdsyZTL0PZ4fFYɠ7 +DCa>L $ Wull*lU&tc.SdzEu\ ^}k}$U`B6C"b(*Rw*>.-!w`謯^ G# ?I][Y?h_CYw0ܣ8\\?[G؞QLg82;,vz?t:ȿֆ<br>Bottom Line: <br>High schools or colleges should never copy exactly a pro team's strength and conditioning program. The difference between these levels is staggering.<br><br>Best For Colleges: The vast majority of Division I colleges do something very similar to the BFS program. All the programs featured in this journal are quite similar. However, there are some major differences between Division I colleges and high schools.<br>One organizational difference is the many two and three-sport athletes at the high school level. Many athletes are always in an in-season training cycle. This throws college periodization programs into an unmanageable situation. The primary in-season goal for a college program is to maintain. Should a 16-year old three-sport athlete always be in a maintenance cycle? Of course not! This would be absurd.<br>What if a Division I athlete misses a workout? He might lose his scholarship. How about the high school athlete? The BFS Program is designed to cre