Strength training debates are louder than ever—traditional lifts vs. “functional” training, capacity vs. transfer, force production vs. athletic expression. And yet, most of the arguments miss what actually matters. In this episode, we break down why both sides of the strength debate are partially right—and fundamentally incomplete. We unpack what functional strength actually means, how the term has been watered down, and why simply getting stronger doesn’t guarantee better on-field performance—especially in highly skilled sports like baseball and softball. We discuss: Why definitions matter when talking about functional strength The real value (and limitations) of traditional strength training Diminishing returns and why strength doesn’t scale linearly with performance How sagittal-dominant training creates asymmetries and movement restrictions Why sport and position specificity matter more than most programs acknowledge The difference between building capacity and being able to express it How strength gains can actually reduce performance if they limit movement options From high-level athletes to youth players, this conversation reframes how coaches should think about strength, power, and transfer—without throwing squats, hinges, or heavy lifts out the window. The goal isn’t choosing a side. It’s understanding what strength is for—and how to apply it without breaking the athlete.