Bend but don't break

M

MichiganDad3

All-American
Why are some DCs fascinated by this defense? By giving up yards you nearly guarantee poor field position, and your defense gets worn down. The bend but not break does next to nothing to help the offense. I hope this was an aberration last night.

 
But if I can play bend but not break and yield the same number of points as an attacking defense. I choose the attacking defense. My offense will have better field position, and more TOP, resulting in more points for my offense.

 
I suppose so, yeah. But the objective is to minimize points. 

I think on average this is effective. Few things are more devastating than a game spinning out of control because the other team is hitting home runs on you all the time. We've seen that happen all too much over the years, starting with CU '01. I won't try to dredge up other bad memories. 

Our offense can put up points. More importantly, they can do this in a hurry. Force the other team to take more time to score, and they'll have a hard time keeping up ... and our defense will have their opportunities to come up with big plays, too. Granted, the defense actually did a lot of "breaking", in that points were yielded. I can't tell if Arkansas State actually has a pretty gamey offense or what. It was a concern and it wasn't good. But, the philosophy is sound IMO. And that's why it's practiced so often. It's a risk-mitigating approach to defense and pairs well with a potent offense on the other side that isn't as reliant on good field position or boom/bust quick strikes.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
One of my friends texted me during the game asking about this.

My response was it appeared that we were playing the bend AND break defense.  :lol:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Offenses in today's age are extremely hard to stop.  Holding them to field goals instead of TD's and hope your offense gets the job done is easier.

 
Football Guy Bob said:
Offenses in today's age are extremely hard to stop.  Holding them to field goals instead of TD's and hope your offense gets the job done is easier.
Click to expand...
I think I remember Shawn Watson talking in 2009, and he said it is tough to score points in today's game, and that it is better to be conservative and rely on your defense.  ;)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Plus1
Reactions: ADS
MichiganDad3 said:
I think I remember Shawn Watson talking in 2009, and he said it is tough to score points in today's game, and that it is better to be conservative and rely on your defense.  ;)
Click to expand...
To be fair, Shawn wasn't the brightest crayon.

 
One thing is every 3-4 is not the same. bend and break is accomplished several ways.  Much like the excitement of Banker's quarters coverage. i.e. Narduzi as MSU (not even close to what MSU ran)prior to going to Pitt.  New England (NFL) runs the 3-4 and depend on an incredible offense to help.  Think ball control (cough cough Langs) and using the philosophy of the "best defense is a good(great) offense.  Al Groh was asked about the 3-4 and had a great Q&A.  When asked what made Bama's 3-4 different, he smiled and simply said the athletes....I look at Wisky 3-4 and the same thing comes to mind.  Thomas and Daniels might be better fits than Nick.  Also gotta have OLB who can pass rush, cover, and set the edge...Unsure if we have that yet.   

Here is a quick breakdown from footballstrategy.com

The "bend but don't break" defense is a defense (usually zones) focused on stopping any big plays from occurring while giving up short plays.

The strengths of this defense:

  • Forces your opponent to have long, sustained drives which increases their chances of turning the ball over and causes stress on the offense *2INT's
  • Forcing teams to resort to 3-5 yard gains at a time can make their players impatient and get them to make dumb errors *They were incredibly patient
  • Still gets good coverage and some of the best defensice schemes are at thrir heart "bend but dont break" (Cover 2, Cover 3, Tampa 2) *We had POOR coverage
  • Zones compress in the end zone which ultimately makes it much harder for the opposing team to score in the red zone
Weaknesses:

  • If you can't stop the run and/or the other team has an excellent short passing game your defense will be on the field for a while
  • If your team plays 'landmark zones' instead of pattern-read you could get decimated by an intelligent offense that knows how to exploit zones
  • If your defense is undisciplined you could have players getting impatient and making bad gambles.
  • The most successful bend but don't break defenses have a very solid pass rush up front, don't break d generally with just the front 4 (think of the Tampa 2 under Dungy).
  • From a viewer perspective it's kind of boring and passive
A good read below on his style when he was hired as UConns HC.  Very optimistic. After reading it,  I want this guy here........

https://www.theuconnblog.com/2013/12/12/5203896/defense-by-diaco

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I know the Patriots use this same defensive philosophy, but it only works if you don't break often.  I am hoping that Diaco can accelerate the learning curve for the players and have them read for any type of offense we might face.  I am not sure if the cameras were showing all the players on the field, but our backs were 10 yards off the line the entire first half and for a good portion of the 2nd half.  I wish that Diaco would have had our backs lined up near the line of scrimmage to tackle before the other team had 5 to 7 yards, to bat some balls down, or potentially get a pick six.  The risk you face is that you get beat on a longer ball, but I would rather have seen our young backs get beat than dealing with a demoralizing situation of non-stop first downs with no remedy to stop it.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top