Excellent Article On The Patriots And Erhardt-Perkins

[manxman2601]

How the terminology of the Erhardt-Perkins system has helped maintain the dominance of Tom Brady and the Patriots - Grantland

Other teams have dabbled in the no-huddle, but they can't commit to it like the Patriots can, for one simple reason: terminology. No team that uses the Coryell or true West Coast systems can adapt easily to a fully functional up-tempo no-huddle because, simply, they can't communicate that efficiently. The Patriots are built to communicate in one- or two-word designations, and so, with judicious use of code words, it's simply a matter of translating what they already do into a no-huddle pace.

 

[signbabybrady]

That was awesome!!!

 

[Zeus]

Great stuff. Thanks for sharing.

 

[Welkerstache]

Wow. Impressive! Thanks for posting.

I suppose a single route in isolation is meaningless, since it's combo routes that effectively attack a specific player or coverage. It makes sense to name combo routes rather than individual routes.

The Pats' EP system truly seems to be an evolution of the game, so once again Patriots' offensive coaches are going to be poached to install it for other teams.

 

[Brandon_Cox]

Great and informative article

 

[manxman2601]

Wow. Impressive! Thanks for posting.

I suppose a single route in isolation is meaningless, since it's combo routes that effectively attack a specific player or coverage. It makes sense to name combo routes rather than individual routes.

The Pats' EP system truly seems to be an evolution of the game, so once again Patriots' offensive coaches are going to be poached to install it for other teams.

This is the bit that I found most interesting:

The theory here is that no matter the formation, there is an outside receiver, an inside receiver, and a middle receiver, and each will be responsible for running his designated route.

So simple in the concept and yet so versatile in implementation. You can see how this plays right in to the hands of someone like Vereen.

 

[Mack Herron]

With the speed at which New England operates, the message for defenses has become clear: fix your terminology or perish.

Would explain why adjusting to the no-huddle is easier said than done. The Texans could not adjust several weeks after living the nightmare. Let's see if Baltimore can.

 

[PP2]

Chris Brown is the man, always has been. Not surprised at the quality of this article. It should be made a sticky somewhere in this forum.

 

[Welkerstache]

Would explain why adjusting to the no-huddle is easier said than done. The Texans could not adjust several weeks after living the nightmare. Let's see if Baltimore can.

Even the almighty 49ers defense began to struggle when the Pats cranked up the pace.

 

[ewg_gestalt]

I don't think the Patriots have been using this system throughout the BB-Brady Era. Back during the SB era, I remember one of Vrabel's touchdowns being described with the "XYZ" terminology of one of the other systems. So this has to be a more recent adjustment—perhaps post-2006?

What I didn't get from that article, though, is how do they know where to line up on any given play? "Ghost/tosser," for example, tells them what routes—but there were four different patterns they should, with differing groupings of who is on which side of the QB. How does Brady direct that part of the system?

 

[Welkerstache]

I don't think the Patriots have been using this system throughout the BB-Brady Era. Back during the SB era, I remember one of Vrabel's touchdowns being described with the "XYZ" terminology of one of the other systems. So this has to be a more recent adjustment—perhaps post-2006?

What I didn't get from that article, though, is how do they know where to line up on any given play? "Ghost/tosser," for example, tells them what routes—but there were four different patterns they should, with differing groupings of who is on which side of the QB. How does Brady direct that part of the system?

There can still a formation part of the call, but yes, the article sort of glossed over that aspect. Once they're in a formation, the play can be one or two words to convey the concepts for each side, such as "Ghost/Tosser" in the article.

 

[JDot]

Great read. Chris brown has been pumping out a lot of great stuff lately...

 

[Blackluck]

Excellent article.
Raises the question though why we have a hard time developing receivers if this system is easier to learn.

 

[PP2]

I don't think the Patriots have been using this system throughout the BB-Brady Era. Back during the SB era, I remember one of Vrabel's touchdowns being described with the "XYZ" terminology of one of the other systems. So this has to be a more recent adjustment—perhaps post-2006?

What I didn't get from that article, though, is how do they know where to line up on any given play? "Ghost/tosser," for example, tells them what routes—but there were four different patterns they should, with differing groupings of who is on which side of the QB. How does Brady direct that part of the system?

Not sure what you are remembering but the offense under BB was never anything else than the EP system. The XYZ designations were used, but not the numbers (route tree) which is a staple of the WC offense.

And there is a formation terminology (2004 playbook had: slot, flood, heavy, flip, dolphin, and gun) to go with the concepts terminology, but Brown is looking at the hurry-up as a specific example (although he doesn't make that clear) in which case the formation would remain the same or simply be inverted, and so the need for formation terminology is eliminated and Brady can just use the one/two word terminology.

Also what Brown doesn't mention is that Brady has the ability to tweak one or two things on each down, based on the coverage or alignment he sees on the other side, and more often than not, this happens.

Whenever he uses the one word designation is more often than not when he feels he can catch the defense unprepared, or when there are too many men on the field. At least that is what I think I see.

 

[PlainOldEd]

Excellent article.
Raises the question though why we have a hard time developing receivers if this system is easier to learn.

My thoughts exactly.

 

[patfanken]

A great part of football amount to a battle of semantics. For every football coach, from HS to the NFL, the great challenge is to constantly get 11 guys to execute one play together, or one defense together. To get that group of 11 individuals to act as one unit. A key element is semantics.

The ability to exchange the maximum amount of information with the least amount of verbiage, can be a huge advantage. Thanks to this article, we now know that a very under reported element to the Pat offensive success has been the evolution of their LANGUAGE.

I know its called Erhardt-Perkins, but believe me its probably grown and evolved a great deal from its roots back in the late 70's, just as our language constantly evolves and changes. If Ray Perkins where to come back now I doubt he would understand a lot of what was going on. There would be some basic concepts he'd understand and would be familiar with, but for the most part he'd be like a white guy from the suburbs trying to communicate with some speaking mostly from the "urban dictionary". A lot of the same words, but many different meanings.

One the the author of that article failed to address was the "read" elements of the Pats system. Where receivers have to change their original routes based on what the defense is showing both pre and post snap. So while the article makes it seem that it would be easy to install this system, there is a lot more that goes into it. He just gave us the "**** and Jane" version.

Great find Max - Thank you. This is why I come here. I learn stuff about my favorite team that I won't get anywhere else. Because we all know that this won't be a topic of discussion on Mutt and Merloni, and Tony Mazz would only look at the pictures.

 

[Mike the Brit]

Excellent article.
Raises the question though why we have a hard time developing receivers if this system is easier to learn.

If I understood this excellent article correctly, it isn't that it's easier for receivers to learn but that it's easier for the quarterback. In a sense a more complex terminology spells things out for the receiver in more detail (like having a full address and a street directory).

 

[Mike the Brit]

Great find Max - Thank you. This is why I come here. I learn stuff about my favorite team that I won't get anywhere else. Because we all know that this won't be a topic of discussion on Mutt and Merloni, and Tony Mazz would only look at the pictures.

:yeahthat::yeahthat::yeahthat: Thanks from me too.

 

[Bobs My Uncle]

It's a real shame that we are inundated with all the crap football articles when stuff like this exists out there.

Many thanks for pointing this article out.

 

[patsfan13]

Great find thanks for the article.