Key result
Small-sided games beat SAQ training for reducing resting heart rate and blood pressure in youth.
Why the study?
Speed, Agility, and Quickness training and small-sided games impose different physical demands in youth football, but evidence directly comparing their cardiovascular responses following a structured training intervention remains limited.
Does Speed, Agility, and Quickness (SAQ) training compared to small-sided games (SSGs) improve cardiovascular measures in male youth football players?
RCT (n=36)
Open-label
1:1 ratio
Does Speed, Agility, and Quickness (SAQ) training compared to small-sided games (SSGs) improve cardiovascular measures in male youth football players?
Both SAQ and SSG training modalities effectively improve cardiovascular measures in youth football players, with SSGs providing a slightly greater benefit for resting heart rate and blood pressure, and SAQ providing a slightly greater benefit for post-exercise heart rate recovery.
Favors SSG over SAQ for resting HR and BP reductions in youth players; extends comparative evidence on football conditioning modalities.
Backgroun Speed, Agility, and Quickness (SAQ) training and small-sided games (SSGs) are widely used in youth football but impose different physical and football-specific demands. Evidence directly comparing their cardiovascular responses following a structured training intervention remains limited. Objective To compare cardiovascular response patterns following an 8-week SAQ or SSG training programme in male youth football players. Methods Thirty-six male youth football players were randomly allocated to an SAQ group ( n = 18) or an SSG group ( n = 18). Cardiovascular outcomes were assessed before and after the 8-week intervention and included resting heart rate (HR), post-shuttle-run HR, systolic blood pressure (SBP), and diastolic blood pressure (DBP). Pre-to-post changes were examined using a two-way mixed-design analysis of variance, with time as the within-subject factor and group as the between-subject factor. Results Both groups demonstrated reductions in all four cardiovascular outcomes. Significant time × group interactions were observed for resting HR, post-shuttle-run HR, SBP, and DBP. SSG training produced greater numerical reductions in resting HR, SBP, and DBP, whereas SAQ training produced a slightly greater reduction in post-shuttle-run HR. Conclusion The findings indicate different cardiovascular response patterns following SAQ and SSG training rather than universal superiority of either modality. SSGs may be useful when cardiovascular conditioning is integrated with football-specific technical and tactical demands, whereas SAQ training provides a more targeted stimulus for acceleration, agility, and neuromuscular performance. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT07633210, registered on 03/06/2026. Retrospectively registered.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sayed et al. (2026) conducted an RCT in youth football players (n=36). Speed, Agility, and Quickness (SAQ) training vs. Small-sided games (SSGs) was evaluated on Resting heart rate (MD 0.88, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.44, p=0.003). Small-sided games produced greater reductions in resting heart rate, systolic blood pressure, and diastolic blood pressure compared to speed, agility, and quickness training in youth football players.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: