Tush Push - Do the rules apply for this play or not? Doesn't seem like it (3 Viewers)

[Cowboysfan8]

Never happened

Also, you’re a liar

 

[Deamon]

Never happened

Also, you’re a liar

nope, but keep spiraling.

 

[Deamon]

The hate is real.

Everyone hating the poor eagles :(

Its not that bad but you must see how bad it iz to ban a football play for no damn reason

I think it’sa dumb play, but I couldn’t care less if they ban it or not
The incident against Washington is something to think about. I mean, the defense has to sell out to try to stop it especially at the goal line. Idk

No. They didn't. KC had 0 problems stopping the Bills multiple times in the AFC championship game without going off sides multiple times and trying to fly over the line. And the refs said as much when they announced if Washington did it again, they were just going to award the Eagles a TD.

Really a bad argument, not just in this situation, but in general. A legal act does not bear the responsibility of eliciting an illegal response. It's basically the some logical process as "I had to beat my wife because she burned my dinner". Not an Eagles fan and IDC if it's banned or not either, but at least make an intellectually congruent argument if you're going to make one at all.

Good luck trying to get that.

 

[Mitchie]

The hate is real.

Everyone hating the poor eagles :(

Its not that bad but you must see how bad it iz to ban a football play for no damn reason

I think it’sa dumb play, but I couldn’t care less if they ban it or not
The incident against Washington is something to think about. I mean, the defense has to sell out to try to stop it especially at the goal line. Idk

No. They didn't. KC had 0 problems stopping the Bills multiple times in the AFC championship game without going off sides multiple times and trying to fly over the line. And the refs said as much when they announced if Washington did it again, they were just going to award the Eagles a TD.

Really a bad argument, not just in this situation, but in general. A legal act does not bear the responsibility of eliciting an illegal response. It's basically the some logical process as "I had to beat my wife because she burned my dinner". Not an Eagles fan and IDC if it's banned or not either, but at least make an intellectually congruent argument if you're going to make one at all.

I’m not arguing and I posted that I couldn’t care less if it’s banned or not. Calm down lol

I like how you said "couldn't care less". There are too many people out there using that phrase the wrong way by saying, "I could care less".

Is it 'could' or 'couldn't care less'?

Can you care fewer?

www.merriam-webster.com

 

[oldmanhawkins]

It took me awhile to realize that I got no beef with Cowboys fan, I was just triggered by the username/avatar combo.

Can’t we all just agree that the Yankees suck or something?

 

[unckeyherb]

The hate is real.

Everyone hating the poor eagles :(

Its not that bad but you must see how bad it iz to ban a football play for no damn reason

I think it’sa dumb play, but I couldn’t care less if they ban it or not
The incident against Washington is something to think about. I mean, the defense has to sell out to try to stop it especially at the goal line. Idk

No. They didn't. KC had 0 problems stopping the Bills multiple times in the AFC championship game without going off sides multiple times and trying to fly over the line. And the refs said as much when they announced if Washington did it again, they were just going to award the Eagles a TD.

Really a bad argument, not just in this situation, but in general. A legal act does not bear the responsibility of eliciting an illegal response. It's basically the some logical process as "I had to beat my wife because she burned my dinner". Not an Eagles fan and IDC if it's banned or not either, but at least make an intellectually congruent argument if you're going to make one at all.

I’m not arguing and I posted that I couldn’t care less if it’s banned or not. Calm down lol

I'm perfectly calm. Sorry if you got offended by me pointing out your statement insinuating it's the play's fault that opposing teams commit penalties to stop it was ignorant. I even gave a corollary example of why. Responding to a genuine, thought out criticism with something like "calm down" is pretty much text book gaslighting; something typically employed by narcissists and trolls. I'd like to imagine you're neither, but it's hard when that's how you respond to posts.

I’m sorry my post that was responding to a poster quoting me and asking me a question wasn’t intellectually congruent enough for you. I thought I did a decent job in a few short sentences of saying that I don’t know the answer to his question. Alot of people don’t think it may be banned for no damn reason. Not really sure what you want from me here

Thanks; and all I wanted was just a reply like that to be honest. Didn't even expect a reply, but I also didn't want to devolve into some kind of "I know what you are, but what am I!" Pee-wee Herman level exchange either.

I know you and other divisional fans can catch a lot of flak in the Eagles thread or Eagles related topics, and sometimes I'd imagine it's unwarrented. But I wanted to let you know I wasn't trying to come at you, just that I disagree with the notion that a legal play provokes an illegal response. It wasn't that first time it's been brought up in the thread, and it wasn't just brought up by you. Just looking to counter that notion and not be met with an ad-hom/deflection/whataboutism/etc. I appreciate your genuine reply.

rarely.

 

[trader jake]

Did the rule change go through? I didn't know if it had even been voted on yet.

"Don’t be surprised when the Tush Push gets banned today or tomorrow…it’s probably going to happen."

Threads Link

 

[need2know]

Booooooo this man

 

[jon007]

I do agree that a player should not push or pull a ball carrier. However the amended rule changes that Green Bay proposed are interesting. Looks like they left much to be interpreted by officials. I don't think we needed this many rule adjustments when all we needed to do is go back to the rule when you could not push or pull a ball carrier.

Proposed Rule Changes.

https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Fxgnrcpptpq1f1.jpeg

This rule change will be pushed through because Goodell wants it but I think the wording is horrible.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

IMO....the real problem lies in the fact as it stands now...that the defense cannot do behind the nose tackle what the offense can do behind the center....

 

[Pickle Rody]

Player safety; pace of play

.....are the reasons listed for the proposed change......per Green Bays proposal (as posted on reddit per @jon007 link above.)

I do not find either of them to be actually valid. Alas, what do I know?

 

[Terpman22]

IMO....the real problem lies in the fact as it stands now...that the defense cannot do behind the nose tackle what the offense can do behind the center....

IMO there is no problem at all.

 

[BladeRunner]

Player safety; pace of play

.....are the reasons listed for the proposed change......per Green Bays proposal (as posted on reddit per @jon007 link above.)

I do not find either of them to be actually valid. Alas, what do I know?

You don't find the reason to ban a cheaters play as valid?

Let's be real here and I think I speak for most everyone when I say that if you need assistance getting over the goal line you are, indeed, cheating. If the DEF was able to do the same thing you might have a case.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

Player safety; pace of play

.....are the reasons listed for the proposed change......per Green Bays proposal (as posted on reddit per @jon007 link above.)

I do not find either of them to be actually valid. Alas, what do I know?

You don't find the reason to ban a cheaters play as valid?

Let's be real here and I think I speak for most everyone when I say that if you need assistance getting over the goal line you are, indeed, cheating. If the DEF was able to do the same thing you might have a case.

bolded....this....let the defense do it and play on.....if it's safe for the offense....why not the defense....nobody will answer that one cause we don't want to talk about that....we'd rather say "it's because one team is good at it and everybody hates us and the play cause we are so good"....it's not about that...get over yourselves...

let the defense do it too and let's see how good you are at it....offense still have a slight advantage with the snap count, but at least both sides will be operating under the same rules...

the counter to this is they don't want defenses to do it on special teams plays when the snapper is at risk....but to me that is easy to officiate....if the offense lines up in a kicking formation....either punt or FG....then the defense can't do it....there are special rules already about what can happen depending on how far back the punter/pk holder/pk are....it wouldn't be that difficult to officiate that part....

 

[Stinkin Ref]

IMO....the real problem lies in the fact as it stands now...that the defense cannot do behind the nose tackle what the offense can do behind the center....

IMO there is no problem at all.

many many disagree....that's why there is a debate....

 

[oldmanhawkins]

Ban it already. I'm tired of talking about it. Mostly because every conversation goes the same and I feel like everyone is missing the brilliance behind the play.

 

[BladeRunner]

Ban it already. I'm tired of talking about it. Mostly because every conversation goes the same and I feel like everyone is missing the brilliance behind the play.

Regale us with how you think a cheater's move is "brilliance"?

 

[Terpman22]

Ban it already. I'm tired of talking about it. Mostly because every conversation goes the same and I feel like everyone is missing the brilliance behind the play.

I'm kinda with this too. I'm just stunned that instead of just reverting back to what it was they are going to try to do "something new" which might lead to other unintended consequences. I've already seen a few nice video theads on Twitter where they are awesome, broke a gang tackle type running play that would now be banned. Which is kind of silly if thats what is coming down the pipeline.

 

[TLEF316]

I do agree that a player should not push or pull a ball carrier. However the amended rule changes that Green Bay proposed are interesting. Looks like they left much to be interpreted by officials. I don't think we needed this many rule adjustments when all we needed to do is go back to the rule when you could not push or pull a ball carrier.

Proposed Rule Changes.

https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Fxgnrcpptpq1f1.jpeg

This rule change will be pushed through because Goodell wants it but I think the wording is horrible.

Yeah...that wording is just atrocious.

It's impossible to "immediately" push the qb after the snap as SOME time (Even if it's 1/100th of a second) is always going to pass as long as the RB isn't touching the Qb before he has the ball.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

I do agree that a player should not push or pull a ball carrier. However the amended rule changes that Green Bay proposed are interesting. Looks like they left much to be interpreted by officials. I don't think we needed this many rule adjustments when all we needed to do is go back to the rule when you could not push or pull a ball carrier.

Proposed Rule Changes.

https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Fxgnrcpptpq1f1.jpeg

This rule change will be pushed through because Goodell wants it but I think the wording is horrible.

Yeah...that wording is just atrocious.

It's impossible to "immediately" push the qb after the snap as SOME time (Even if it's 1/100th of a second) is always going to pass as long as the RB isn't touching the Qb before he has the ball.

bolded....it 100% is possible to push the QB immediately "after" the snap....the word after defines that....did you mean "coinciding" ...?

 

[unckeyherb]

Tush push survives!

 

[TLEF316]

I do agree that a player should not push or pull a ball carrier. However the amended rule changes that Green Bay proposed are interesting. Looks like they left much to be interpreted by officials. I don't think we needed this many rule adjustments when all we needed to do is go back to the rule when you could not push or pull a ball carrier.

Proposed Rule Changes.

https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Fxgnrcpptpq1f1.jpeg

This rule change will be pushed through because Goodell wants it but I think the wording is horrible.

Yeah...that wording is just atrocious.

It's impossible to "immediately" push the qb after the snap as SOME time (Even if it's 1/100th of a second) is always going to pass as long as the RB isn't touching the Qb before he has the ball.

bolded....it 100% is possible to push the QB immediately "after" the snap....the word after defines that....did you mean "coinciding" ...?

Sorry...the rule says "At the snap" not "after the snap". My bad.

Irrelevant now though.

 

[Bigboy10182000]

Tush push survives!

The final vote for the #Packers resolution to ban the Tush Push: 22-10. Philly hangs on.

Final score of the #Eagles win over the #Packers in the playoffs: 22-10. Philly hangs on.

 

[Lehigh98]

Let the wailing and gnashing of teeth begin!
Go Birds!

 

[need2know]

finally some common sense

 

[unckeyherb]

Someone do a wellness check on BR.

 

[Terpman22]

Someone do a wellness check on BR.

Lotta folks need some checking in on. Way too much energy and time spent on fake facts and fake arguments to just fail.

 

[need2know]

Someone do a wellness check on BR.

nah leave him wherever he is

 

[Cowboysfan8]

What on earth are the toughest fans in the country going to cry about now? :(

 

[Bigboy10182000]

10 teams….pathetic

 

[trader jake]

Tush push survives!

The final vote for the #Packers resolution to ban the Tush Push: 22-10. Philly hangs on.

Final score of the #Eagles win over the #Packers in the playoffs: 22-10. Philly hangs on.

Green Bay has a retiring President (Mark Murphy, the closest Green Bay comes to an owner) and most suspect the organization is carrying water for the league office to officially be the team to propose this.

The Packers successfully ran the Tush Push last season (with their TE) and did as well as a team can defending it. That said, hate away on the Cheeseheads all you want.

Greese the light poles!!!!

 

[ProstheticRGK]

suck it, haters

 

[Bigboy10182000]

That said, hate away on the Cheeseheads all you want.

Them and the 9 other teams deserve the hate they get. It’s pathetic.

Also I read a stat that said more people have been hurt doing the Lambeau leap than the tush push. Maybe it should be banned?

 

[ffmail4me]

The best case against this was given by Mark Schlereth of ESPN. They banned a defense from doing this in 2013, so why should the offense be able to do it? I think he's 100% correct. Either let both sides do it, or neither side should be able to do it.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

Love that even with the ban voted down, Eagles fans are still triggered. Truly amazing.

 

[Terpman22]

10 teams….pathetic

I give credit to the Lions not voting for the ban. They want all the smoke and zero excuses. Respect.

 

[Terpman22]

Love that even with the ban voted down, Eagles fans are still triggered. Truly amazing.

I'll admit, I think most Eagles fans are triggered by weakness, whether it be our team or other teams

 

[Bigboy10182000]

Love that even with the ban voted down, Eagles fans are still triggered. Truly amazing.

I'll admit, I think most Eagles fans are triggered by weakness, whether it be our team or other teams

It’s 2025. Weakness is cool, bro.

Or… maybe Alex needs to read the replies with a smile instead of rage?

 

[unckeyherb]

Love that even with the ban voted down, Eagles fans are still triggered. Truly amazing.

Right. I do wonder if the ban actually went through, whether the pro- ban-it guys here would have logged in to crow. Probably not. I’m sure this thread would have remained on page two.

 

[Snotbubbles]

That said, hate away on the Cheeseheads all you want.

Them and the 9 other teams deserve the hate they get. It’s pathetic.

Also I read a stat that said more people have been hurt doing the Lambeau leap than the tush push. Maybe it should be banned?

Did 10 teams vote to ban it or did 22 teams vote to ban it?

 

[Alex P Keaton]

Love that even with the ban voted down, Eagles fans are still triggered. Truly amazing.

I'll admit, I think most Eagles fans are triggered by weakness, whether it be our team or other teams

It’s 2025. Weakness is cool, bro.

Or… maybe Alex needs to read the replies with a smile instead of rage?

Oh, I’m feeling all the love. It’s all good here.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

Love that even with the ban voted down, Eagles fans are still triggered. Truly amazing.

Right. I do wonder if the ban actually went through, whether the pro- ban-it guys here would have logged in to crow. Probably not. I’m sure this thread would have remained on page two.

We’ll see what happens too when the Lambeau Leap gets banned.

 

[Terpman22]

That said, hate away on the Cheeseheads all you want.

Them and the 9 other teams deserve the hate they get. It’s pathetic.

Also I read a stat that said more people have been hurt doing the Lambeau leap than the tush push. Maybe it should be banned?

Did 10 teams vote to ban it or did 22 teams vote to ban it?

10 teams voted to "save it" if you will.

 

[Snotbubbles]

Interesting video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUHhB1C-5ZY

 

[trader jake]

That said, hate away on the Cheeseheads all you want.

Them and the 9 other teams deserve the hate they get. It’s pathetic.

Also I read a stat that said more people have been hurt doing the Lambeau leap than the tush push. Maybe it should be banned?

Did 10 teams vote to ban it or did 22 teams vote to ban it?

10 teams voted to "save it" if you will.

Correct, 22 teams voted to ban it

10 voted to maintain the pushing of tushes: Eagles, Ravens, Browns, Lions, Jaguars, Dolphins, Patriots, Saints, Jets, Titans

For those Eagles fans feeling petty (despite Green Bay obviously bringing this to the table on behalf of the League Office), the Eagles defeated the Packers by that same margin in the playoffs: 22-10

 

[FreeBaGeL]

That said, hate away on the Cheeseheads all you want.

Them and the 9 other teams deserve the hate they get. It’s pathetic.

Also I read a stat that said more people have been hurt doing the Lambeau leap than the tush push. Maybe it should be banned?

Did 10 teams vote to ban it or did 22 teams vote to ban it?

10 teams voted to "save it" if you will.

Correct, 22 teams voted to ban it

10 voted to maintain the pushing of tushes: Eagles, Ravens, Browns, Lions, Jaguars, Dolphins, Patriots, Saints, Jets, Titans

For those Eagles fans feeling petty (despite Green Bay obviously bringing this to the table on behalf of the League Office), the Eagles defeated the Packers by that same margin in the playoffs: 22-10

Glad to see my Dolphins aren't whiney babies.

 

[unckeyherb]

A bunch of teams tried to run this last year-Buffalo for instance. Sean McDermott came out publicly stating that this was a player safety issue, first and foremost. While I disagree with this take, I do wonder, can/will Buffalo try to run it again next year? I mean, all these coaches and teams that were pounding their fists on the table about player safety can't possibly run it out again next year, right? What a bad look that would be. The first time that happens, we'll know definitively this had nothing to do with safety and everything to do with removing a successful play from the Eagles' arsenal.

 

[Zeppelin]

Some comments from Dan Campbell in March:

“I'm of the school of − look, we don't run that,” Campbell said in March. “Jared Goff, we're not going to. It doesn't mean we don’t quarterback sneak, but we don't do that.

"But I am of the school of, 'Hey, they found something and it's for up to everybody else to stop it.' So I'm a hard yes (of keeping it in the rulebook).”

The Lions play the Eagles this fall in a showdown of two of NFC’s top Super Bowl contenders.

Campbell said in March he expects the Eagles to run the play this fall and it will be up to the Lions to stop it.

“Philly obviously is known for this because they're the ones who've really kind of perfected it and done it and do it over and over and I'm like, ‘Good for them,’” Campbell said. “And if you got something, we got to stop it.

"So like to me, leave it in and we play them this year, we got to find a way to stop it. And I like that.”

 

[oldmanhawkins]

A bunch of teams tried to run this last year-Buffalo for instance. Sean McDermott came out publicly stating that this was a player safety issue, first and foremost. While I disagree with this take, I do wonder, can/will Buffalo try to run it again next year? I mean, all these coaches and teams that were pounding their fists on the table about player safety can't possibly run it out again next year, right? What a bad look that would be. The first time that happens, we'll know definitively this had nothing to do with safety and everything to do with removing a successful play from the Eagles' arsenal.

It’s already a bad look. They had a vote but didn’t like the outcome so tabled the vote to give Roger time to do some politicking. Who are the 6? Teams he was able to bribe? Big ups to the teams like Detroit that voted on principles.

 

[Terpman22]

Every team that runs a tush push this year and voted against it should be asked after each game why they vote for a play they think puts their own players' safety at risk.