I love to train. I love to teach and coach, too. I just have a keen interest in the whole process. Having said this, I find myself examining some strength and conditioning practices and am having difficulty making sense of training.
I don't believe the process should be too complicated in helping prepare others to do battle, functional as a tactical operator, or compete on the athletic playing field. An elemental approach might involve asking what are the needs, what is the functional level, what outcomes really matter, and how do I monitor outcomes? Training doesn't need to be too much more complicated than this.
A few threads that are probably way undervalued in regards to training are coaching development and coaching science. In other words, stealing the title from the Bill Belichick book, the "education of the coach." I think training sense is greatly improved not by JUST experience, but what happens WITH experience. In other words, what did I learn from experience and what do I do with that knowledge? (can I adapt?)
Without including experiential learning in the process, training takes on a life of itself and has less meaning to meaningful outcomes and more meaning to just going through the motions of training, to just studying aspects of sports science, and to just paying lip service to coaching pedagogy (it's old-fashioned).
Training effort without meaning attached to it is really wasted training effort.