History of American Football Positions - Age of Confusion

Age of Confusion

The trend of naming offensive positions for the role or build of player in it continued. In some cases, this obfuscates important details. A recent diagram of a short punt formation for offense in youth football had no quarterback, but two fullbacks at the depth of the QB shown above, and a halfback at the position labeled FB above. Some discussions of the single wing previously diagrammed claim it has no quarterback. And many is the time when a player in the farthest back position, in a formation similar to the short punt shown above, is referred to as quarterback! Position names no longer needed to reflect any given player's combined roles on offense and defense when few played both ways. As a result, position naming on defense has become less confusing and more informative. However, position naming on offense, while tending to eliminate obsolete distinctions, has also tended to hide important ones and confuse others.

Offenses and defenses continued to adapt to the increases in forward passing favored by the rules. Below is diagrammed a 3-4-4 (or simply "3-4") defensive formation and an offensive formation it might line up against across the lines of scrimmage, as popular beginning in later portions of the 20th century:

FS SS

CB CB
OLB ILB ILB OLB
__________________E_______NT______E___________________
WR T G C G T TE
QB WR RB RB

Beginning with the defensive line, one notices a slight departure from previous nomenclature with the position labeled "NT". Why not simply "T"? The superfluous designator "middle" when the defense was playing with an odd number on the line less than seven, as in "middle guard", was discussed above. (This invites the unanswered question of whether, if the defense has an eight-player line, it includes a "left center" and "right center".) "NT" stands for "nose tackle", "nose" having been introduced with guards to indicate a position "on the nose" of the opposing center, although "nose guard" had not been a popular term, probably because it suggested a piece of protective equipment. There is justification for the extra word, in that the tackle in a 3-player defensive line could well play off center; however, this distinction is not maintained with teams using such a tactic, so the position could and probably should be referred to simply as "tackle"—or "defensive tackle" (DT) in a player roster (see below).

The linebacker (LB) positions are straightforwardly distinguished as inside (ILB) and outside (OLB). When there are only three linebackers, the one inside is labeled middle linebacker (MLB), and the outside positions can instead be named as left and right. The defense's halfbacks have been renamed cornerbacks (CB), a fitting term given that they play at the edges or "corners". The term has no spurious indicator of the depth as which they are positioned in the defensive backfield.

Finally there are shown two safeties. In this case they are distinguished as "free safety" (FS)—also known as "weak safety"—and "strong safety" (SS). The strong safety is on the side following the strong (tight end) side of the balanced offensive line (see above), and has responsibility for covering (guarding as a pass receiver) the TE, while the free safety has no such coverage assignment. However, the coverage played by defense does not always easily allow assignment of such distinct names for safeties. A formation with more than two safeties could have them described by their relative geometric placement—outside, shallow, deep, etc.-but such is not general practice; however, see the discussion of the "nickel" below.

The offense is diagrammed in what was for some time referred to as a "pro set"-- "set" indicating that the players are stationary, although one back may go in motion from it. This particular version is said to have a "deuce", "flank" backfield. From the description above of the straight T, this formation can be seen to be derived by splitting one end and moving the halfback on the opposite side to a flanker position. Instead of "SE" and "FL" for those positions, however, we see "WR", for "wide receiver".

In the 1960s, teams would distinguish between flankers (e.g. the New York Jets professional football club's George Sauer) and split ends (e.g. his teammate, Don Maynard) on their player rosters. For a relatively brief period, game rules had been adopted in some codes, requiring different uniform numbers for line players from those of backs, and the position naming distinction carried on for a while after the rules were amended to require only certains sets of numbers for ineligible and eligible receivers of forward passes. It became commonplace for ends to shift into backfield positions and vice versa. By the 1970s, the common practice changed to refer to flankers and split ends both as wide receivers or, more colloquially, "wideouts"—they play from wide of the rest of the formation.

Note, however, that the playing rules still distinguish between ends and backs on offense. There are differences as to the motions, the players in those positions are allowed to make, during and preparatory to their team's snapping the ball. At the time they snap the ball, the team is required to have seven players (minus any number their side is playing short in Canadian football) on their line of scrimmage, which includes split or tight ends, but not flankers or wingbacks.

Meanwhile, the distinction between fullback and halfback was erased, each replaced by "running back" (RB). That term became popular during the 1960s as well, although even into the 1970s, some playing the pro set kept the HB-FB distinction. So, for instance, in the flank formation shown above, those positions were named as in the straight T, while in the "split" version of the deuce backfield, the fullback occupied the other halfback position shown in the straight T. The distinction referred to the build of the players, the fullback being a stronger runner more or less straight ahead, and the halfback faster to attack the defense's flanks. However, on many teams there was no strong distinction between those backs, and since their major role was running with the ball, "running back" was most descriptive without maintaining a spurious geometric connotation that'd become outmoded by their lining up in different depth relationships.

Alternative names for RBs are "deep backs" and "setbacks", although the latter is disfavored because it has also been used for backs in general, both on offense and defense. There is, moreover, a generic term for the deeper-playing backs (CB & S) on defense: "defensive back" (DB), appropriately enough. Note that the term excludes the linebackers, even though they be backs in the traditional sense because they are usually not on their team's line of scrimmage. There also exist the generic terms "defensive lineman" (DL) and "offensive lineman" (OL), although the latter refers only to the interior linemen, excluding the ends because of their eligibility to receive forward passes.

However, to this day many teams maintain the offense's fullback-halfback distinction, especially in "full house" backfields, i.e. those with a quarterback and three running backs, that is, no backs playing wider as wingbacks or flankers. This is confusing enough, when the fullback plays slightly forward of the halfbacks, as in the Y formation shown below, later used to run the wishbone system (the backs forming a letter Y or a resemblance to a wishbone):

E T G C G T E
QB

FB
HB HB

At least, that one is an easy enough derivation to visualize from the original diamond, with the depth of the fullback inverted with respect to the halves. However, some formations have placed the heavy back even more starkly forward, to function as a blocker for the running backs. In the diagram below of the V formation used by Dartmouth College in the 1950s, the respective position names have been rationalized as "BB" (a not-very-popular designation, "blocking back") and RB:

E T G C G T E
QB BB

RB RB

(The running and blocking backs can be seen to form a letter V.) However, in its time the running backs were known as halfbacks and the blocking back as fullback. Another such example is the I formation, shown below in a with-wingback version:

WR T G C G T TE
WB QB

FB TB

The diagram shows the more geometrically rational designation of tailback behind the fullback. However, some would label the deepest back in this form of deuce backfield "HB", considering one halfback to have moved behind the fullback, who is in both the role of blocking back and the heavy up-the-middle runner. Those who would emphasize the blocking role of the FB (the "up back") might even label the deepest back, "RB", with a BB instead of FB. Few, however, would use the straightforwardly geometric labels of QB, HB, and FB in that order from front to back.

Note also that the wingback is on the wing of a tackle rather than an end. This is accepted nomenclature where an end is split ("WR" above). The wingback is just behind and outside of the "interior lineman" (line player other than end). However, it is not uncommon for a wingback to be outside the tight end in an I or other formation where the opposite end is split.

In the power I formation, instead of the wingback shown above, there is another deep back in the traditional halfback position. That position in the power I is probably called "halfback" more than any other name. In the triple I, where all the backs are in one line perpendicular to the lines of scrimmage, one could hope for the backs to be called quarter-, half-, full-, and tailback in order of depth, but various names are probably used.

The diagram below of an "ace" formation deliberately mixes terms/symbols for wide receivers:

E T G C G T WR
SB QB WR

RB

On the left are represented the more traditional and descriptive terms "end" and "slotback" (SB). The latter is for a position that would be labeled "FL", except that the back is in a "slot" between tackle and end (instead of outside of the end), here illustrating a double "wide slot" formation. (It is wide because the end is fully split, rather than merely flexed—see above.) There being no tight end, there seems to be no need to label either end as split; both are. But on the right, the slotback and end positions are merely labeled as wide receivers. Note that the single running back here is shown to one side of the center-quarterback combination, but that "ace" RB could as well be directly behind them.

In some cases, the specific terminology of certain coaches has made its way into the general parlance. Coaches, having no motivation to publicize their plans, usually adopt cryptic codes for certain positions, using letters, numbers, or short names for their convenience. One set of designations which has been making the rounds, as of this writing on Web sites, purporting to explain football is the letters X, Y, and Z to designate receivers. It is doubtful that many coaches agree on the use of these terms to designate specific positions consistently from play to play, and those letters do not seem to enlighten but only to obscure. (One manual for football spectators, in the 1960s, explained that someone calling offensive plays in the huddle would point to primary, secondary, and tertiary receivers while giving them those letters; those designations would vary depending on the play, not on the positions those receivers occupied.) However, one such letter designation has caught on recently: "H-back", illustrated in the offensive formation below:

E T G C G T E
QB WB

HB RB

Here the H-back is represented by the symbol, appropriately enough, "HB". The H-back position is like that of the "wingback deep" position previously described in a version of the single wing formation, and here is shown behind a wingback to emphasize that, although more often the H-back and wingback, if there is one, are on opposite sides of the set. It is possible to say the abbreviation "HB" is already taken up by the halfback. The H-back does occupy a position about the same as the halfback in the diamond formation of the 19th century. It is likely that "H-back" is a term derived by back formation (pun unavoidable) from the abbreviation for halfback, although arbitrary letter designation by some coach is just as good an explanation.

You may see an offensive formation like that below, described as one of three tight ends:

E T G C G T E
QB WB

RB RB

However, it is labeled above as a version of the wing T, i.e. a T formation wherein one deep back has been replaced by a wingback. The description of its having three tight ends is absurd, inasmuch as a line can have only two ends, but comes about when the wingback position is occupied by a player most suited to blocking who otherwise usually plays tight end. If the extra blocker up front is actually in a line position, then, considering that a potential eligible receiver is being sacrificed, it would be better to conceive the formation as having an extra tackle or guard:

E T G C G T T E
QB

RB
RB

In the same vein as a formation's supposedly having three tight ends, examine the shotgun formation below. This is similar to the short punt formation shown previously, except that potential forward pass receivers are more widely spread. It is therefore, like the double wide slot offensive formation shown previously, a type of spread formation:

WR T G C G T WR
WB WB WR

TB

However, many would label the tailback above as quarterback, even though the position is clearly the deepest back! Until 1960, the formation above would have been called a double wing, and the tailback labeled a fullback, there being no need for the tailback designation when the backs assume so few intermediate depths. However, the deep back position above is usually occupied by a player who habitually plays QB, so the habitual position name tends to stick, as with the "extra tight end".

The identification engendered by the T formation of quarterback as someone who takes the snap is so strong nowadays that some describe the single wing formation diagrammed previously (under "more position names"), wherein the quarterback is positioned behind other interior line players than the center (and therefore cannot conveniently receive the snap), as having no quarterback! Such descriptions may have the QB as BB, although the system used may involve that player considerably as a ballcarrier or receiver, not just a blocker.

On defense meanwhile, an opposite philosophy to position naming is sometimes followed from that of the supposed third offensive end. Instead of the position name following the player to a different position, a new position name may be applied in such a substitution situation. This occurs when a team that usually uses four defensive backs (counting cornerbacks and safeties) adds a fifth, thus producing the "nickel" defense (a nickel being a 5 cent piece). It will be said that the extra DB is the "nickel back", even though coverage assignments will be redistributed, and therefore no particular DB is functionally or positionally in a "nickel" position, distinct from the other four. Nor, if a sixth DB is added, could one distinguish between the "nickel" and the "dime" back. However, if they are subbed in one at a time, an observer may apply "seniority" in naming one "nickel", etc. A roster will usually simply list such players as S, CB, or simply DB.