In the future, will offensive football be played more often under center, or from the shotgun?

 

 

I think you start to see more and more out of the shotgun and spread due to the increased level of athleticism of football players across all positions.  In my opinion, it gives the QB a little bit more time to go through a couple of progressions and create plays (with their feet potentially), especially if you have a weaker OL.

Football like all trends is one big circle. What is popular and in vogue this season, might change in 10/20 years. Early football single wing stuff was all directional snaping to different backs, then under center became more popular, now shotgun is the popular set. Honestly I think we will see a coaches adapt to what specialties their kids have.

All in cycles... Single Wing in the 40s, Wing t in the 50s, Wishbone in the 60s, I formation in the 70s and mixing in shotgun until the late 2000s into true spread and RPO stuff now. Defenses have changed with the times and the athletes have too. So many people use a variety of all of these systems. Many GAP schemes seem to be making a comeback sense the defenses seem to be faster and less gap discipline overall. I wouldn't be surprised to see all these ideas continually cycle into the distant future and they would adapt to the players they have on the field.

51 minutes ago, AppalachianTactician said:

All in cycles... Single Wing in the 40s, Wing t in the 50s, Wishbone in the 60s, I formation in the 70s and mixing in shotgun until the late 2000s into true spread and RPO stuff now. Defenses have changed with the times and the athletes have too. So many people use a variety of all of these systems. Many GAP schemes seem to be making a comeback sense the defenses seem to be faster and less gap discipline overall. I wouldn't be surprised to see all these ideas continually cycle into the distant future and they would adapt to the players they have on the field.

Well said, especially with the part you mention about the defenses.  I never understood people who don't utilize GAP schemes on defense.  

I will also add, that coaches must pick whatever scheme fits their players and gives them the best opportunity to win.  I don't care what the system is.  But so many teams run terrible spread offenses, I'm surprised we don't see more old school type offenses as defenses typically have fits with them since most teams are spread based on offense.

5 minutes ago, New Colonel said:

Well said, especially with the part you mention about the defenses.  I never understood people who don't utilize GAP schemes on defense.  

I will also add, that coaches must pick whatever scheme fits their players and gives them the best opportunity to win.  I don't care what the system is.  But so many teams run terrible spread offenses, I'm surprised we don't see more old school type offenses as defenses typically have fits with them since most teams are spread based on offense.

It has to be a mix of what the coaching staff knows and what they are comfortable with combined with what they think the kids will enjoy. Many believe that if you have an old system (tried and true) kids will not come out and play. To them it may seem boring. Therefore, even if its a bad product, if you are throwing the ball, more athletic kids may come and play for you and you'll eventually get better at it.. maybe

29 minutes ago, AppalachianTactician said:

It has to be a mix of what the coaching staff knows and what they are comfortable with combined with what they think the kids will enjoy. Many believe that if you have an old system (tried and true) kids will not come out and play. To them it may seem boring. Therefore, even if its a bad product, if you are throwing the ball, more athletic kids may come and play for you and you'll eventually get better at it.. maybe

I think you are right in this. Kids want to do what they see on Saturdays, but at the end of the day I think winning helps. Look at Belfry, and Johnson Central. Many of the states "Best" most storied programs run some of those "tried and true" offenses. 

But coaches doing what they are comfortable with is the most important part of this whole equation. I couldn't run the west coast offense without a lot of study, deep dive, and maybe a mentor helping me through it.  Its all about what the coach is willing to do to help his kids win ball games. 

38 minutes ago, AppalachianTactician said:

It has to be a mix of what the coaching staff knows and what they are comfortable with combined with what they think the kids will enjoy. Many believe that if you have an old system (tried and true) kids will not come out and play. To them it may seem boring. Therefore, even if its a bad product, if you are throwing the ball, more athletic kids may come and play for you and you'll eventually get better at it.. maybe

You are right, many kids do transfer because of your old system or do not play.  Now, this is me probably being a crusty curmudgeon, but I'd let them walk or not play..... If a kid is going to bounce on you because of whatever system you are running, they aren't truly in it anyway.  And you will definitely have issues with that kid(s) down the line..... He's not getting the ball enough, you aren't doing this or that right to set little Timmy for success.  I don't care if it's boring, because if it's boring, defenses many times don't take it seriously. 

 

Your job as a coach is to put kids in the best positions for the team to be successful, even if the kids or their family don't like it.  It's a team sport, not a me sport, and right now we are definitely in the me era of sports.  I'd let that kid go be someone else's headache personally because I don't want the drama that'll undoubtedly plague the season.

I think at the high school level, where overall quarterback play is so variable, the shotgun allows teams to be able to put an athlete at the position, giving them more options. It allows the QB more options to run designed plays for him, and it opens up the quick passing game. Plus it works for run heavy, or pass heavy schemes. I think there will always be a time and place for under the center formations, but with the way the game has gotten faster, under center stuff will become a smaller and smaller part of the offensive formations you see.

I am old and still live under center about 98% of the time. 

I am often amazed when I see a team have third or fourth and less than 1 or the same situation goal to go and they lineup in the shotgun..... which makes it 4 1/2 yards or more. Asked a rather successful coach about it and he said teams seldom take a direct snap in practice so they wouldn't do it in a game since not many QBs are comfortable with it. Whatever floats your boat, but seems like you're giving away yardage.

We are getting to the point that more and more guys that get into coaching never played under center. They have never done it so as strange as it sounds they don’t know how to coach it. On top of that you have guys that have never coached against under center offenses and often don’t really understand them. A lot of modern defenses are based out of nickel personnel. 
 

Under center hits at a different tempo. The vision for the LB and DBs is different. There are a lot of things you can do under center to hide issues that you can’t in the gun. 
 

As far as being in the gun for short yardage or goal line goes. What a lot of teams are doing is basically playing single wing football. They are gaining an extra blocker. Until the split T became a thing that was how football was played. The argument that you are snapping the ball back is used often. Under center you take the ball away from the line to send it back to the line. 

On 3/31/2025 at 12:57 PM, New Colonel said:

Well said, especially with the part you mention about the defenses.  I never understood people who don't utilize GAP schemes on defense.  

I will also add, that coaches must pick whatever scheme fits their players and gives them the best opportunity to win.  I don't care what the system is.  But so many teams run terrible spread offenses, I'm surprised we don't see more old school type offenses as defenses typically have fits with them since most teams are spread based on offense.

Do you mean gap schemes on offense or are you saying there are guys running defenses that aren’t assigning defenders gaps?

On 4/4/2025 at 5:26 PM, 9068 said:

I am often amazed when I see a team have third or fourth and less than 1 or the same situation goal to go and they lineup in the shotgun..... which makes it 4 1/2 yards or more. Asked a rather successful coach about it and he said teams seldom take a direct snap in practice so they wouldn't do it in a game since not many QBs are comfortable with it. Whatever floats your boat, but seems like you're giving away yardage.

Short yardage really isn't all that different out of the gun. Even under center, the quarterback has to hand the ball off to the back who is at least 3-4 yards deep, which requires taking the ball from center, and footwork to get to the mesh point. The gun also allows a little more variety and forces the defense to defend the whole field and not just stack the middle. The only issue with the gun is that it takes the QB sneak off the table. 

1 hour ago, rjs4470 said:

Short yardage really isn't all that different out of the gun. Even under center, the quarterback has to hand the ball off to the back who is at least 3-4 yards deep, which requires taking the ball from center, and footwork to get to the mesh point. The gun also allows a little more variety and forces the defense to defend the whole field and not just stack the middle. The only issue with the gun is that it takes the QB sneak off the table. 

That was my main point. Usually the QB is your best or one of your best athletes and capable of making plays.