## 1 Introduction  
High-intensity actions characterized by requiring high-force production in short periods of time are the determinants of final performance in football. Notably, linear sprinting and vertical jumping account for 61% of the physical actions preceding a goal-scoring opportunity [1]. In this context, the incorporation of diverse neuromuscular performance assessments should be conducted in a manner that both informs and aligns with the specific actions of the sport. This will contribute to providing relevant information about neuromuscular performance and athlete adaptations during the competitive period. The countermovement jump (CMJ) emerges as a widely embraced tool in team sports within this framework [2]. Moreover, jump height, kinetics and kinematics of the CMJ are frequently linked to pivotal actions in team sports, including muscle strength, maximal sprint durations, and change of direction times [2]. Indeed, several studies have reported changes in the various metrics of the CMJ, whether in discrete variables or through the analysis of force, power, velocity, and displacement-time curves, suggesting that this test is a sensitive tool for identifying longitudinal and cross-sectional adaptations [3, 4]. While interventions incorporating strength and/or power training have exhibited increases in the kinetics, kinematics, and outcomes of the CMJ [5], the scientific literature presents a less definitive stance on the adaptations in the CMJ over the course of a season (or multiple seasons) in team sports [3, 4, 6]. This ambiguity may arise due to the concurrent training of various physical capacities and the regular weekly competition schedule inherent to team sports [3; 4; 6]. However, when individual analysis was carried out, 60% of the players have shown a meaningful change in jump height at certain points in the season. Several factors may influence these variable responses among individuals and between studies: the type of equipment used to measure jumping, sporting background, or genetic profile [7], among others. This latter aspect (i.e., genetic characteristics) have been recognized as a key factor in sporting success [7]. However, until recently, analyzing these traits in athletes was considered impractical due to high costs. Nevertheless, advancements in technology have made genetic testing more affordable, opening up possibilities for growth in this area and the potential to influence the daily practices of coaches, fitness trainers, and athletes. The relationship between genetics and aspects related to strength and power in sports constitutes an area of great interest in sports research [8]. In this context, an athlete's ability to develop muscle strength and power is significantly influenced by their genetic makeup [9]. Research has demonstrated substantial genetic diversity in response to strength and power training, as well as in the predisposition to specific types of muscle fibers [10; 11]. It is relevant to note that specific genetic variants play a crucial role in determining the response to training and neuromuscular capacity, especially in genes such as Angiotensin Converting Enzyme (\(ACE\)) and Alpha-actinin 3 (\(ACTN3\)). For example, the DD genotype of the I/D polymorphism (rs4646994) in the \(ACE\) gene and the CC genotype of the c.1729C\(>\)T polymorphism (rs1815739) in the \(ACTN3\) gene indicate a predisposition to power and strength [12]. Specifically, the T allele of the c.34C\(>\)T polymorphism (rs17602729) in the Adenosine Monophosphate Deaminase 1 (\(AMPD1\)) gene, along with genes related to muscle damage such as the c.*800A\(>\)G polymorphism (rs8111989) in Creatin Kinase Muscle-specific (\(CKM\)) and two polymorphisms [c.49C\(>\)T (rs2700352) c.37885C\(>\)A (rs28497577)] in Myosin-like chain kinase 1 (\(MLCK\)), have been associated with professional football players [13].