Menu

HomeHow it worksContact UsContact Us

Game exposure shapes intensity and performance in Division I college football.

Lever JR, Fusco A, Landow L, Hunt R, Leiszler M, Appelman A et al. · Journal of sports sciences · 2026

Researchers tracked GPS/accelerometer workload for 232 Division I college football players across 10 seasons (over 4,000 player-games) to see how much playing time changes measured game demands. Players who played more snaps accumulated more total load, but their load per snap was actually lower; for offensive players higher total load was linked to better performance, while for defenders more running and sprinting per snap was linked to worse performance.
Takeaway: Judge game workload per snap rather than by totals, since players with limited playing time work harder on each play.
Abstract (source)

Game participation in American football is highly variable, complicating interpretation of external training loads during competition. This study aimed to provide a longitudinal, exposure-aware characterization of external training loads in Division I NCAA American football and to examine exploratory associations between load and on-field performance. External training load data were collected from 232 players across 10 competitive seasons (4,084 player-game observations) using wearable tracking devices. Total and exposure-normalized (per-snap) external training load metrics were examined by positional group and game exposure using linear mixed-effects models. Total external training load increased with greater game exposure across all metrics. In contrast, exposure-normalized external training load decreased with increasing exposure, with per-snap PlayerLoad higher in Low compared with Moderate (Δ = 8.73 AU·snap -1 , d = 0.83, p -1 , d = 1.10, p < 0.001). Exposure-related reductions in per-snap load were consistent across positional groups despite positional differences in absolute load. For offense, higher total external training load was positively associated with performance (β = 0.015, p < 0.001). In contrast, greater exposure-normalized running and sprinting distance were associated with lower defensive performance (all p < 0.01). These

Findings: highlight a robust exposure - load trade-off and the importance of accounting for game exposure when interpreting competition demands.

Read the original