I was talking with a member of the gym the other day who had recently hurt his back squatting.
He was frustrated. He didn’t want it to happen again, so like every other dude who goes through something like this, he started spiraling and grasping at straws for solutions.
His immediate thoughts included never back squatting again and completely revamping his program to be more…
Dare I even use the word?
Functional.
I seriously hate this term.
Why?
The fitness world is full of buzzworthy, vague concepts that end up representing things that aren’t easily measurable or clearly observable. They don’t have clear boundaries, and when you ask people to define them, it’s often like there’s a cloud in their brain where the definition is supposed to be.
And it’s usually a different cloud for everyone.
The word means one thing to one person and something completely different to someone else.
On top of that, these words can create a weird emotional reaction. It’s almost like sounding the trumpet and letting the room know you have some idea what you’re talking about because you used the fancy confusing term.
Functional has got to be at the top of the list for this phenomenon.
So why is that a problem?
Because people often use words like this as placeholders for something they want but haven’t actually figured out how to define.
You ask someone what they want from their training and they say:
“I want something more functional.”
You ask:
“What does that mean?”
And there’s usually a couple seconds of staring where their face looks like a frozen computer screen with the loading bar on it, like you’re downloading a song from LimeWire and just hoping you don’t get a computer virus.
It’s because they don’t really know what they mean.
They have a feeling.
They have an image.
They have an idea that sounds right.
But they haven’t defined the actual problem they’re trying to solve.
And that’s where this gets interesting.
So What Does Functional Actually Mean?
Circling back to the gym member.
He was asking me what I thought about different exercises, types of training and programming in general.
He asked:
“What do you think about kettlebells?”
Now, as frustrating as this can sometimes be when talking to me, I usually don’t give a straight answer without asking for context first.
So I asked:
“As far as what?”
He let out a few sputtering sentences before finally saying:
“I feel like they’re more functional.”
Insert Clint Eastwood get off my lawn face here.
Or an extreme eye roll from your favorite movie character.
But don’t worry.
I’m getting better at holding it together in these situations.
Here’s the first thing I want you to understand:
No exercise is inherently more functional than another.
An exercise’s function is relative to the adaptation you’re trying to create and the function you’re trying to improve.
Exercises build qualities.
Think back to the RPG character-stats idea.
They don’t all build the same skills, and they don’t all build them in the same way, but they’re all simply tools for developing physical qualities.
That’s why comparing something like a quad extension to a Turkish get-up by asking which one is “more functional” is a pretty useless question.
They’re tools for different jobs.
Are we trying to improve someone’s ability to get up from the ground?
Okay. The Turkish get-up has a pretty direct relationship to that.
But the quad extension can strengthen the quads involved in the standing portion, so it can still be one piece of the puzzle.
Are we trying to build the leg muscles?
The quad extension probably has an advantage.
Are we trying to develop absolute strength?
Now we’re asking a different question.
The point isn’t which exercise wins the Functional Olympics.
The point is:
What are we using the exercise for?
Stop Judging Exercises by How They Look
This is where I think people get themselves into trouble.
They look at an exercise and decide whether it’s functional based on its appearance.
The exercise looks athletic, so it must be athletic.
It looks like a sport, so it must be sport-specific.
It looks complicated, so it must be advanced.
It looks easy on the joints, so it must be safer.
You see boxers shadowboxing with dumbbells or an unloaded barbell because they think punching against resistance will build explosiveness.
You see people standing on Bosu balls because they think being unstable is automatically a better way to build core strength.
You see basketball players attaching bands to their legs and practicing box-outs and jumps because they think making the exercise look more like basketball will make them more explosive.
The look of an exercise doesn’t determine the adaptation it creates.
It doesn’t need to look exactly like your sport.
And honestly, the more unique and fancy something looks, the more likely I am to at least ask what the hell we’re actually trying to accomplish.
The exercise is a tool.
Not a religion.
So What Should You Actually Do?
Now apply this to your entire program instead of one exercise.
What does your daily life ask of you?
Are you a firefighter or construction worker who needs to carry heavy gear all day?
Are you an older person who wants to be able to play with your grandkids?
Are you playing recreational sports with your friends?
Are you trying to build as much muscle as possible?
Are you trying to become stronger?
Are you trying to stay athletic?
Answer those questions first.
Then choose the tools that develop the qualities you actually need.
That’s what makes something functional.
Not whether it looks cool.
Not whether somebody on Instagram called it functional.
Whether it serves the function you’re trying to improve.
Back to the Guy Who Hurt His Back
So why did this guy ask me about kettlebells?
It’s a question I’ve heard constantly for years.
Kettlebells look functional to people because they seem less taxing on the body and more closely related to the kinds of movements you might perform in sports or everyday life.
And I understand where he’s coming from.
He had hurt his back doing a barbell back squat.
He didn’t want it to happen again.
In his mind, a kettlebell looked safer and more athletic than putting a heavy barbell on his back.
But notice what happened.
He had an unpleasant result and immediately started looking for a completely different-looking tool.
That’s where I want you to slow down.
Step One: Figure Out What Went Wrong
You got hurt.
Okay.
Before you completely redesign your life, let’s investigate.
Maybe you had accumulated too much training volume over too many weeks.
Maybe you weren’t recovering enough and this was simply the day the bill came due.
Maybe you lost your brace.
Maybe there was a technical issue during the lift that you weren’t aware of.
Maybe the way you were loading the squat wasn’t a good fit for you anymore.
Maybe there are other factors involved.
Maybe you didn’t adequately prepare for what you were asking your body to do that day.
There could be a lot of things to consider.
The point is not to immediately decide what the answer is.
The point is to figure out what the actual problem might be.
And let’s say, for the sake of this article, that after looking at everything, we decide that the barbell back squat just isn’t agreeing with him right now.
Fine.
Now we have something useful to work with.
Step Two: Consider Your Options
This is where people—and especially the bros—
Don’t worry.
I’m a semi-retired bro.
I can say that.
They tend to have a meltdown for a couple days and decide they need to completely redesign their workouts.
Easy fix:
No more back squatting.
Only kettlebells.
Okay.
Take a breath.
First, what was the back squat doing in the program?
For most people, it’s there to build strength in the legs.
And yes, the squat has earned its reputation as the king of lower-body exercises because you can load it heavily for absolute lower-body strength.
But that doesn’t mean it’s the only way to get strong.
Maybe you make Bulgarian split squats your primary lower-body strength movement.
It’s still a squat pattern.
You can get brutally strong with them.
Have you ever seen someone Bulgarian split squat with 120-pound dumbbells?
It’s crazy.
And now you’ve got a reasonable substitution that accomplishes much of what you’re trying to accomplish without unnecessarily blowing up the entire program.
But let’s go deeper.
What Are You Actually Training For?
This guy isn’t just some random dude trying to lose 15 pounds.
He’s a former college quarterback in his mid-20s.
He still plays recreational sports with his friends and wants to compete at a high level.
He’s training like an athlete.
So his goal isn’t simply to build muscle or lose weight.
He’s trying to remain athletic.
That means we care about qualities like strength and explosiveness in the lower body.
Now we have context.
And once we have context, we have options.
Maybe he continues back squatting while working on his brace, lowering the weight, slowing the eccentric and modifying the setup.
Maybe he back squats every other week and uses a hack squat on the alternating weeks.
Maybe he switches to split squats.
Maybe he moves the back squat later in the workout and uses a different loading strategy.
Maybe he uses a Zercher squat.
Maybe the best solution is something else entirely.
And the program isn’t just the exercise.
We also need to consider the warm-up and movement preparation.
We can prepare the hips, back, feet and ankles.
And because we’re talking about athleticism, we might put explosive jumping or ballistic movements earlier in the workout while the nervous system is fresh.
There are a ton of options.
That’s the point.
You don’t need one magical replacement.
You need a toolbox.
Step Three: Pick Something and Get Back in the Lab
Let’s say he switches to Bulgarian split squats.
He does his movement preparation.
He does his explosive work.
He progresses his split squats consistently for 8–12 weeks.
Now we have something we didn’t have before:
Data.
His back feels better.
He’s getting stronger.
His lower-body training is progressing.
Maybe he feels just as athletic—or more athletic.
Okay.
Looks like the change was probably a good one.
If it isn’t working?
Try something else.
Maybe a Zercher squat.
Maybe another variation.
Maybe we modify the back squat.
Then we collect more data.
Analyze it.
Adjust.
Repeat.
That’s how I approach training.
And honestly, it’s how I think you should approach a lot of problems.
Stop Using Words to Do Your Thinking For You
Here’s the takeaway.
The next time you notice yourself using a word and you get that cloud feeling in your brain instead of a clear definition, stop.
Ask yourself:
What the hell am I actually trying to define?
In this case, the guy wasn’t really looking for something “more functional.”
He was looking for a safer way to continue training like the athlete he wanted to be after having a problem with his back squat.
That’s a much better question.
Once you’ve defined the actual problem, back up and figure out what went wrong.
Get your ducks in a row.
And if they aren’t in a row, line them up.
Then look at your options.
Brainstorm.
Pick something that fits the goal you’re actually chasing.
Put it into practice.
Get back in the lab.
Collect data.
Analyze it.
Adjust.
And do it again.
Because that’s the part I really want you to take away from all of this:
Don’t fall in love with the tool.
Fall in love with the process of figuring out what works for you.
And if you ever catch yourself using a fancy word because it makes you feel like you know what you’re talking about, but you can’t actually define what the word means?
Stop.
Figure out what the fuck you actually mean.
Leave a Reply