Re: Ron Erhardt RIP.
posted at 3/23/2012 1:34 PM EDT
In Response to Re: Ron Erhardt RIP.
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: Ron Erhardt RIP. : zbellino ~ Been avidly following and leisurely studying the game of football for as long as I can remember, and I gotta admit that unfortunate as it is, the depth of knowledge I have about Ron Erhardt, comes from His name ringing a bell + the info you provided in Post #1 right here... I know we've been at direct odds over a few of The Pats Moves and basic policies, And I am sorry such trivialities has grown into heated arguments on matters of such miniscule importance really. IF you personally have any more pretty d#mn cool & interesting info (even IF random) regarding Erhardt's implementing of this design, please throw em out for us; I'd like to know, and I'm sure I'm probably not the single football fan who actually thinks this stuff is pretty interesting. I dug the Run and Pass interweaving that'cha offered, BUT I'm seriously intrigued if ya happen to know anything extra in terms of what you were saying about Erhardt's schemes being extremely open and adaptable based on individuals, and the unique nuances from always differing groups personell on one's team at any given time...? Any random in-depth or even broad basics in terms of the differing systems, schemes, players, ANY-thing- would be well appreciated...? This is cool stuff... Strategy nvt, ya know?
Posted by LazarusintheSanatorium[/QUOTE]
I didn't think of it as heated, but I digress.
Yeah, re: Erhardt, he got a reputation as "Ground Ron" his first few seasons in NY. But in reality, he actually loved to pass. If you listen to him, and I think this goes a long way to explain why BB does things on offense and defense the way he does, he was pretty clear late in the 80's with the Giants and later with the Steelers that when he ran a lot, it was because he had bad WRs and TEs.
As such, looking at his trajectory, his offense opened up and closed up based on the personell that he had. At one point, it was incredibly open with the Giants and Steelers each. They were running the basic empty backfields and single back four wides, and with the Giants the 2TE setups NE has been running the last five seasons.
It really looks like BB's philosophy we see here, where he likes to do the things he feels they do best the most, while trying to periphrally improve their versatility. Vice-versa, he likes to "take away" what the opponent does best. In short, like Erhardt ... BB tries to name the game and the rules of play before he will even agree to play. Really a great overall strategy .... real gamblers never gamble and never take risks, but always try to cultivate a "sure thing."
At that point people started calling him "Air Erhardt" in reference to "Air Coryell" that other system that the late 1970's birthed, along with the most notable "West Coast" and the least studied, but most ballyhooed (with Manning) Ted Marchibroda K-Gun/No Huddle, that people discuss as revolutionary every single time a Marchibroda "tree" guy starts running it.
In essence, the Erhardt-Perkins offense is really a set of basic philosphies (passing early in the game to build leads, and sitting on leads by winding clock) play-naming protocols (using names instead of numbers). The latter part gives it it's complexity, as any play can be run from any number of formations. So a basic dive play by a RB can be modified to run from shotgun, single back, pro-set, etc, without even changing the personell. You can just audible at the line for the sake of giving the defense a different "look."