Pro's only reinforce the meta they do not create its change

If you take a look at traditional NA sports, there is a stagnation in the development of changing strategies. Consider the length of time the NFL only had a run first oriented offense. For decades the risk of moving the ball forward due to pass seemed a poor choice. In addition, on the defensive side of the ball the 4-3 (4 down linemen 3 linebackers) was dominant for years until the 3-4 (3 down linemen 4 linebackers) came into favor and receded again. In the NBA the low post presence has dominated the game since its inception. In these examples the drive to change comes at extreme economic cost. The value of consistently winning games is the highest priority for professional teams. The best strategy is to rely on consistent winning strategies with thousands of iterations of field testing. As a result the value of winning professional games comes at a secondary cost --- innovation. The innovation in these sports or changes in the meta come from the amateur ranks, namely the college and high school ranks. In the college football scene there are a tremendous and wide variety of strategies and formations being used. From spread offenses, triple options, and ball control there is a wide variety of metas in play. In the college hoops scene there is a tremendous variety of zone defense, teams that emphasize motion offense, or guard dominated play. The variety of offensive and defensive present in the college game is too long to accurately list. In essence the innovation in strategy comes from the lower tiers of play, the upper tiers only sharpen the execution to a razor point. So if you want to change the meta it’s up to the community to develop strategies to combat it. If the general player base knew the strengths of the current meta (i.e ability based champions going mid to take advantage of power spike) and why it is employed so exclusively it could help innovation.
Report as:
Offensive Spam Harassment Incorrect Board