Did Green Bay's Tush Get Pushed Too Hard?

[PDay8810]

Keep it but allow the defense to push other defenders as well. Could be some epic collisions occasionally

 

[Iggloo]

“Oh my goodness! The Bears season is going to end on a double doink.” - Chris Collinsworth.

Now why you gotta go there on the Bears fan?

 

[trojanfan12]

If the NFL bans it I just want them to be honest about it (although they won't).

It won't be because it's the Eagles and it won't be because of "player safety" (there's no data to back that up). It will be because it's not "aesthetically pleasing".

I don't think they are going to ban it, (apparently we'll find out in about 60-90 minutes) but if they do, it would be nice if they were honest about it.

 

[fightinfunbags]

If the NFL bans it I just want them to be honest about it (although they won't).

It won't be because it's the Eagles and it won't be because of "player safety" (there's no data to back that up). It will be because it's not "aesthetically pleasing".

I don't think they are going to ban it, (apparently we'll find out in about 60-90 minutes) but if they do, it would be nice if they were honest about it.

The people voting don’t care about aesthetically pleasing or they would be voting to ban the QB sneak which is the same level of unaesthetically pleasing.

 

[trojanfan12]

The people voting don’t care about aesthetically pleasing or they would be voting to ban the QB sneak which is the same level of unaesthetically pleasing.

The NFL is in the entertainment business...of course they care about aesthetics.

They've tried a couple of different excuses..."player safety", "rugby play"...they're not going to ban it because 1 team is really good at it when all teams could do the same...that leaves "it doesn't look right" (which, it kinda doesn't) which is aesthetics.

The only thing I don't like about it is that when it's close, it's virtually impossible to get an accurate spot. But I don't think that's a reason to ban it either.

 

[justanidiot]

This is not rugby. There are also going to be injuries with 330 pound guards running top speed for them for 10 yards to push their running back with the football, again, rugby. The only one that should count is when Detroit lifted up david montgomery and carried him with the football for 15 yards.
If they keep the play, I think teams have the right to protect their players and just relinquish the first down to the marker.

 

[fightinfunbags]

This is not rugby. There are also going to be injuries with 330 pound guards running top speed for them for 10 yards to push their running back with the football, again, rugby.

There is no data to support the claim that this is an affront to player safety.

 

[fightinfunbags]

The NFL is in the entertainment business...of course they care about aesthetics.

They've tried a couple of different excuses..."player safety", "rugby play"...they're not going to ban it because 1 team is really good at it when all teams could do the same...that leaves "it doesn't look right" (which, it kinda doesn't) which is aesthetics.

The only thing I don't like about it is that when it's close, it's virtually impossible to get an accurate spot. But I don't think that's a reason to ban it either.

I agree that in a larger sense they care about aesthetics. I’m saying that if that’s the driver on this issue that would be seen in the desire to just ban the sneak play entirely as that is the same level of unaesthetically pleasing. I think in this case you’re isolating the wrong variable. The only variable that drives this is the success one team has had making the playing virtually unstoppable with a success rate over 90%. That’s the part they won’t say out loud.

 

[BigKen]

the success one team has had making the playing virtually unstoppable with a success rate over 90%.

The question then becomes, "Why can't every other team practice it and perfect it to the same level?" Once they all can do it, the league will have had enough time to find a 'legitimate' reason for banning it.

Like......."Too much bodily fluid is passed from player to player creating an unhealthy circumstance."

 

[jarntt]

NFL teams table vote to ban ‘tush push’ at annual league meeting

The play has been frequently used by the Philadelphia Eagles and quarterback Jalen Hurts in short-yardage situations.

www.nytimes.com

 

[fightinfunbags]

NFL teams table vote to ban ‘tush push’ at annual league meeting

The play has been frequently used by the Philadelphia Eagles and quarterback Jalen Hurts in short-yardage situations.

www.nytimes.com

They tabled it because they don’t have the votes. It failed the first time they wanted it reviewed. Now it has failed this time they wanted it reviewed but it’s been tabled so they can give it another attempt to ban it. There are certain owners on the competition committee (we can all guess who they are) that won’t rest until this play is banned.

 

[justanidiot]

There is no data to support the claim that this is an affront to player safety.

not yet, we gotta wait until 1500 pounds of offensive meat crushes a 290 pound defensive tackle when everyone is trying to get low.
Its just not a football play, but much better to name it after the guy that gets paralyzed.

 

[fightinfunbags]

not yet, we gotta wait until 1500 pounds of offensive meat crushes a 290 pound defensive tackle when everyone is trying to get low.
Its just not a football play, but much better to name it after the guy that gets paralyzed.

3 years worth of data at play here. There is no increased injury risk. Yet again I’m reminded that your screen name is not a funny quip. It’s a public service announcement.

 

[PDay8810]

it has to be a level playing field.
Both sides of the football should be allowed to push. Keep it but allow the defense to push and launch safeties into the scrum. One side being allowed to push is the only problem I see.


like washington not taking the warrior name, old fashion logic escapes some of the smart guys in high places.

 

[fightinfunbags]

it has to be a level playing field.
Both sides of the football should be allowed to push. Keep it but allow the defense to push and launch safeties into the scrum. One side being allowed to push is the only problem I see.


like washington not taking the warrior name, old fashion logic escapes some of the smart guys in high places.

I don’t think the defense will get the same value. It’s not difficult for the QB to take advantage of a LB/S alignment preparing to push in the A gaps. They can audible to something else. They can attack the B or C gap. This is easily exploitable.

 

[packerzrule]

Holy shit. Had no idea this would get so much traction. SMH

 

[PDay8810]

I don’t think the defense will get the same value. It’s not difficult for the QB to take advantage of a LB/S alignment preparing to push in the A gaps. They can audible to something else. They can attack the B or C gap. This is easily exploitable.

i don't think so. It' the same defensive alignment already deployed

 

[RobBase]

Holy shit. Had no idea this would get so much traction. SMH

Sounds like they are going to ban it under a wide umbrella of banning all pushing and pulling of offensive players across the board. This avoids looking like they are singling out Philly.

 

[fightinfunbags]

i don't think so. It' the same defensive alignment already deployed

I think for them to win a physics vs physics battle when the offense has the head start, the defense has to sell out with alignment to dig in. I don’t think they’ll be able to overcome the disadvantage of not knowing the snap count to be able to plug at the point of attack without having to cheat alignment. The forward progress rule also favors the offense here. The offense doesn’t need to maintain ground gained but the defense does.

 

[Rowdy]