Packers Push to Ban the Tush Push

[Schultz]

I fixed that fer ya. I personally think the net nanny is a little overboard on certain sports related terms. If it's used here outside of a sports reference as in a pretty girls fanny reference I'll put it back. Also I can reference one of my favorite songs now.

Testing.
1. Take a load off Fanny.
2. Lord take me downtown, I'm just lookin for some Tush.

 

[melvin dangerr]

It's been well documented that the Packers introduced a proposal to ban the **** push, citing player safety concerns and pace of play. I've got somewhat mixed feelings on the play.
1) The player safety issue is not really an issue, it is theoretical. There is no evidence that it has led to any significant injuries.
2) The pace of play seems to almost specifically refer to the playoff game versus Washington, where it took six **** push attempts to score due to all of the Washington penalties. That sequence wasn't pretty but it was an isolated incident and could be legislated differently without banning the play.
3) The Packers enjoyed the same kind of monopoly on the Lombardi Sweep. It wasn't the play necessarily that was unstoppable, but the personnel that Lombardi groomed were excellent executioners of the play. The same seems to apply to the **** Push. Any team can run it but you need the right players to execute it flawlessly to make it nearly unstoppable.
4) Fairness - defensive players aren't allowed to push from behind, so a LB can not push a DL from behind to stop the **** push. However, an offensive player can push the QB from behind.
4a) The NFL pendulum has swung WAY over towards the offense in recent decades. There are many things that the offense can do that the defense can not, such as hands to the face. This is no different.

I think that banning the play itself is a bit of an overstep. My solutions would be:
* Either allow the defense the same opportunity to push from behind, potentially leading to more injuries, or remove the ability for any player to push from behind to aid penetration. I would think that more pushing from behind would lead to more injuries, but since offensively it hasn't led to more injuries I would be inclined to allow the defense to do it for a season and then analyze the data the next offseason. This gives defenses a fair chance of stopping the play. Pushing from behind on kicking attempts would likely still be prohibited, but since FGs and XPs are such gimmes I would be tempted to allow it in all instances to see how things change. Wouldn't it be great if on the final drive of a close game, it's not a foregone conclusion that a team attempting a game-winning FG from the 20yd line will score?
* Change the rules to increase the penalty for committing the same or similar fouls on the same down. This would obviously require a lot of discussion to get correct. Essentially this would address the Washington/Philadelphia scenario from the playoffs. The Commanders committed 1 offsides and 3 encroachment penalties on that down. There could be a penalty escalation after the second penalty was committed.

How do you all feel?

Well you made some interesting points, regarding the Packers sweep, it was not in anyway the same as the Philly sausage push, the O’linemen were basically pulling and blocking on a sweep they did not have players piled in the front of them, I agree the NFL has gone all in pro offense because the league felt higher scoring was better for revenues, it will be a time when they will consider banning the Philly sausage, when defenses counter their move with their own version, knowing the the Eagles run this play mostly to get a first down, when the penalty for offside is 5 yards, this could take a turn for the worse when the D’s will not care about the penalty but more of giving them a taste of what it’s like to be crunched, or in playground terms pile on the rabbit,if player is more important than revenues the rules committee powers that be will have to make a decision, is this worth the entertainment factor I don’t want to see any players hurt regardless of the team

 

[Pkrjones]

PFT just posted an article about Goodell. In it they mention: $60mil/yr salary, & that Tush Push & Playoff Re-seeding were HIS pet projects which he coerced GB & Detroit into sponsoring.

I'm guessing Goodell didn't attempt to jam them thru the Owners' meeting vote because it might affect his next contract? He should have no fear of blowback, as there's nobody (of note) waiting in the wings to be Commissioner.

Succession plan hovers over Roger Goodell's contract situation

When making more than $60 million per year, it's hard for anyone to have a bad week.

www.nbcsports.com

 

[OldSchool101]

PFT just posted an article about Goodell. In it they mention: $60mil/yr salary, & that Tush Push & Playoff Re-seeding were HIS pet projects which he coerced GB & Detroit into sponsoring.

I'm guessing Goodell didn't attempt to jam them thru the Owners' meeting vote because it might affect his next contract? He should have no fear of blowback, as there's nobody (of note) waiting in the wings to be Commissioner.

Succession plan hovers over Roger Goodell's contract situation

When making more than $60 million per year, it's hard for anyone to have a bad week.

www.nbcsports.com

That’s similar to what I heard. Probably a bribe for the Draft hosting!
#Hush the Tush Push $$

 

[pacmaniac]

That’s similar to what I heard. Probably a bribe for the Draft hosting!

GB and Detroit were the last 2 teams to host the draft.

 

[DoURant]

PFT just posted an article about Goodell. In it they mention: $60mil/yr salary, & that Tush Push & Playoff Re-seeding were HIS pet projects which he coerced GB & Detroit into sponsoring.

I'm guessing Goodell didn't attempt to jam them thru the Owners' meeting vote because it might affect his next contract? He should have no fear of blowback, as there's nobody (of note) waiting in the wings to be Commissioner.

Succession plan hovers over Roger Goodell's contract situation

When making more than $60 million per year, it's hard for anyone to have a bad week.

www.nbcsports.com

That’s similar to what I heard. Probably a bribe for the Draft hosting!
#Hush the Tush Push $$

GB and Detroit were the last 2 teams to host the draft.

If Pittsburgh is the next team to propose a rule change, then this theory has significant traction.