Mayer: Some High School Football Offenses Must Evolve

I often hear the term "it's a different game" when referring to a higher level being compared to a lower level within the same sport. For instance, when hitters advance to high school baseball they often see off-speed pitches on a consistent basis like never before. Basketball players have to deal with more advanced zone defenses and complex set plays in college. As tennis players move up they must incorporate different serves and deal with opponents who can cover more court and hit at much greater speeds.

It's not actually a different game, but simply the evolution of the sport as the players advance physically and mentally. The stakes are raised and the games advance in a myriad of ways.

Football is not an outlier. Schemes become increasingly complex as players progress and the speed of the game ramps up dramatically. What I have found most interesting about high school football is the extreme differences in evolution between classes (at least in Indiana).

While the 4A and 5A teams often exhibit complex offensive schemes and are not afraid to pass, the trend has not trickled down to many of the 1A and 2A teams. Obviously this is a serious generlization. In no way can you put all teams under an umbrella of progressive or "ancient" game planning. In fact, I started thinking about this subject after doing a segment on Goin2TheEndzone, breaking down the Sullivan offense. The Golden Arrows are a 2A school.

Sullivan has a fascinating offense. They are not afraid to spread the field with multiple receivers and throw it deep. They also have a solid running game and use many fakes at the line of scrimmage involving wide receivers. It's not surprising to see the Golden Arrows use multiple receiver end arounds and receiver double reverses in a game.

At the same time, I've covered games where a lower class team seems to be playing football out of the 1950's. The team lines up again and again in the I-formation or some kind of a jumbo set with multiple backs (whether they are running backs, full backs, or tight ends in the backfield) and run up the middle. Every so often you see them dare to call a stretch run.

I understand why these teams don't use extremely complicated offenses with constant moving parts and pass plays that go thirty plus yards. The same goes for zone defenses that require defenders to adjust at the last minute and cover offensive players that are often bigger or faster. The athletes at the lower levels are usually not as physically gifted, that's a simple fact of life.

Still, I feel that taking the risk of implementing some kind of complexities in the offense, whether it's more sweeps, reverses, or play action passes would be worth it. When a defense knows the play will be a run up the middle 75% of the time, it becomes a game of field position and which team doesn't turn the ball over. I say take some chances and trust your players. It may be a bit of an adjustment  for players who regularly use less then ten plays a game. However, players are smarter then ever being raised in an age where professional and collegiate football schemes are being broken down for everyone to study.