(Tush) Push On: NFL Owners Reject Ban on Controversial Play

In a stunning reversal, the Tush Push has survived a seemingly certain ban by NFL team owners.

After a formal proposal from the Packers was previously passed by two separate committees, NFL owners voted to keep the oft-debated play. Multiple reports and sources said there were 10 votes against the ban, with the 22 votes for it coming in two below the needed 75% threshold for it to be enacted. That suggests the subject will likely be revisited in the months to come. 

Still, the vote is a surprising rebuke of commissioner Roger Goodell, who was said to have favored a ban, though he denied that Wednesday. Despite no specific incidents of player injury last year from Tush Push plays, advocates of a ban have repeatedly cited health and safety concerns, as well as aesthetic ones in which the play has been likened to rugby. 

A vote to outlaw the accentuated quarterback sneak was previously tabled in early April at the league’s annual meeting. The Packers then presented the proposal again for this week’s spring meeting in Minnesota with slightly adjusted language.

A key swing in sentiment, however, could have emerged Wednesday morning from both Eagles owner Jeffrey Lurie and former center Jason Kelce, who each spoke passionately before the other team owners in defense of keeping the play legal. The pair made arguments regarding the safety concerns, as well as making a point as to how seldom the play occurs over the course of all NFL games, with it happening less than 0.3% of the time.  

The Eagles then made their views known publicly within minutes of the vote, releasing a social media post reading simply, “Push On.” The team followed that up by posting a 26-minute video reel of Tush Push plays on YouTube.

Coincidentally, the 22–10 vote for the ban was also the same score by which the Eagles defeated the Packers in last year’s playoffs. 

“We took all the necessary vote counts and realized this was not a rule that was ready to be passed,” said NFL competition committee chairman Rich McKay. “Twenty-four [votes] is a high bar, and it should be.”

Playoff Withdrawal

Goodell’s influence, meanwhile, also faltered somewhat regarding a proposed change to playoff seeding. Another previously tabled proposal, issued by the Lions, would have eliminated guaranteed home games for division champions and instead seeded conference playoff participants strictly on win-loss records.

The impetus behind this potential change was to bring more importance to late-season games, and keep teams from resting starters in the final weeks of the regular season—in turn aiding television viewership. Ultimately, though, the Lions withdrew the proposal as team support remained far short of the necessary 75% threshold, and it, too, could be revisited later.

Among the issues likely to still be sorted out is whether this change will require a companion one to the NFL’s current and carefully calibrated method of determining the schedule each year.