What is the “least modern” offense that you have seen be successful in the modern era.

[CrushBlock]

What is the “least modern” offense you have seen be successful at the high school level. For the love of fullbacks, let me know. We are talking I formation and older. T, Wing T, single wing, variations of all.

Do you think modern offenses are inherently superior?

 

[SFUWO]

What is the “least modern” offense you have seen be successful at the high school level. For the love of fullbacks, let me know. We are talking I formation and older. T, Wing T, single wing, variations of all.

Do you think modern offenses are inherently superior?

I think modern offenses are dependent on the talent you have yrs in and yr out. If you build your whole offensive scheme around a QB what happens when you don't have a QB to run the offense? One thing about old offenses is you can plug and play better with the talent you have.

 

[VolNation85]

The modern era for me is the last 25-30 years. With that being said, the first thing that come to mind is the Split Back Veer as perfected by Doug Smith and Appomattox from 2015-2022. Next is the Single Wing by Giles, Riverheads, and Staunton River. I guess you can throw in the I- formation at Salem too.

 

[CrushBlock]

More teams would win more games if they ran the Delaware wing t.

Too much of this new age finicky stuff is ran nowadays that is built for programs that can recruit (colleges)

Wing t with motley at cburg was awesome to watch.

 

[Phoebus Fan]

Idk what Stone Bridge does anymore but that wing T kicked our ass in 2007.

 

[TS69]

Riverheads has won a lot of games over the past years with the double wing offense, incorporating much wing t philosophy. Watched them on film and in Salem several times.

 

[K7w5]

Oldest offenses still in use are the single wing and T(not the wing T, full house backfield). T formation might be the oldest formation in football. The single wing is less old, but single wing teams now have more in common with the single wing teams of the distant past than T teams do with their ancestors.

The wing T is a synchronizing of the two. Single wing plays from an under center look with T backs. Goes a lot deeper than just that aspect of course.

Funny enough the Double Wing is pretty modern, despite looking the most archaic to me. It’s creator only died in 2018. Important to note I’m speaking of the double wing offense, not just a double wing formation. Double wings have been used for a long long time.

 

[CrushBlock]

Oldest offenses still in use are the single wing and T(not the wing T, full house backfield). T formation might be the oldest formation in football. The single wing is less old, but single wing teams now have more in common with the single wing teams of the distant past than T teams do with their ancestors.

The wing T is a synchronizing of the two. Single wing plays from an under center look with T backs. Goes a lot deeper than just that aspect of course.

Funny enough the Double Wing is pretty modern, despite looking the most archaic to me. It’s creator only died in 2018. Important to note I’m speaking of the double wing offense, not just a double wing formation. Double wings have been used for a long long time.

interesting point. The border between formations and offensive playbook/overall strategy is a blurry boundary.

Many “wing - t” teams that aren’t actually executing the storied Delaware wing t.

I called cromers offense at cburg a wing t because it looked like it was borrowing many concepts from that, but running it out of a pistol placement of the qb.

A lot of modern teams borrow classic concepts (like gap-down-backer line assignments) and implement them in unique ways in “modern” formations.

Its why high school football is the most fun level of football. Teams will have identities that pair with their X’s and O’s, even if only for a season. Love it

Maybe I just don’t have an eye for the details but most of what I see on saturdays and sundays feels homogenous.