Packers Push to Ban the **** Push

El Guapo

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 7, 2011
Messages
6,653
Reaction score
2,020
Location
Land 'O Lakes
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?
 

mradtke66

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
1,743
Reaction score
589
Location
Madison, WI
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.
I think defenders are allowed to push from behind, the exclusion only relates to kicking plays and protecting the long snapper. On standard scrimmage plays, go nuts.

I would personally like to bring back the "assisting the runner" penalties, though I doubt it impacts the Eagles all that much. This is just a QB sneak with extra bits.
 

gopkrs

Cheesehead
Joined
May 12, 2014
Messages
6,071
Reaction score
1,644
I would like to get rid of the push. And also the push in the middle of the field. It looks moe like rugby than football
 

Magooch

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 15, 2021
Messages
1,244
Reaction score
1,220
I can kind of see some for both directions.

I do think *something* needs to be changed there, but I'm not exactly sure what.

Practically speaking, simply eliminating the play entirely might be the simplest and easiest course of action. I have a hunch that any efforts to legislate and/or regulate specific aspects of the play would cause more issues than they'd solve. I feel like you'd end up having 5 minutes of referee-conferencing on every single QB sneak (and perhaps unintentionally on other similar plays/situations) to determine if there was or wasn't any sort of infraction. Imagine the discussions... Did he push that guy? Well, how MUCH push is allowed? Maybe he just had a hand on his back, but didn't "push". And so on, ad infinitum...

(You may recall a similar hair-splitting analysis with regards to the "aid" on the Bears' blocked kick against us)
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
15,996
Reaction score
6,117
IF on the defensive side you cannot do this or on special teams you cannot assist another in jumping or pushing the pile for a block you shouldn't be allowed to do it offensively - PERIOD. Make it all legal or none of it.
 

PackerDNA

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 8, 2014
Messages
7,124
Reaction score
2,007
So our biggest accomplishments this off season will be pushing to get rid of one of our best players and banning the **** push. Great.Super Bowl !!!
 

Firethorn1001

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 20, 2015
Messages
2,052
Reaction score
1,572
Everyone cites no injuries until one day a premier player will have their leg blown out and then all hell will break loose (like how the home plate rule was changed after Buster Posey had his leg broken).

It will take a catastrophic injury to happen 1st before they revert to any previous rule where you can't push the runner. I'm just surprised no one has blown out a knee yet in these scrums that break out pushing the pile.

And thought I read that they aren't trying to ban the push in totally, but rather legislate how fast a player can be pushed. But overall agree. Either ban across the board or allow it across the board.

Personally, as a fan watching for entertainment value, I find the play mind numbingly boring and the entertainment value of randomly inserting a 30 second commercial into the middle of a drive.
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
El Guapo

El Guapo

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 7, 2011
Messages
6,653
Reaction score
2,020
Location
Land 'O Lakes
Citing potential injuries as a justification in a sport that features violent high-speed collisions is a bit disingenuous by the Packers. If their goal was to lower injuries, they should ban hitting and tackling.

It's an add-on to make their proposal carry more weight. Pace of play is a somewhat legitimate argument but only because of the playoff snafu. Otherwise the pace is very close to a QB sneak.

The proposal is to ban the play because it seems generally unstoppable. My response would be not to let the Eagles get close to the 1st down marker.
 

Magooch

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 15, 2021
Messages
1,244
Reaction score
1,220
I do think to some extent it's using the NFL's same language and/or precedent against them, too. The league loves to cite "player safety" as a driving factor in all sorts of rule changes (and that *is* often a future justification - wherein someone *could* get injured - rather than pointing to a definitive existing increase in injuries in a given situation) and in the same way the league has outlawed "leverage" situations on defense under the guise of "player safety". You're probably right that it's more or less just an add-on argument and not really the "heart" of it but at the same time I feel like the league has kind of invited these arguments with their inconsistent approach/application of rules
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
15,996
Reaction score
6,117
Honestly for me there is no difference between assisting the runner by leveraging against them to advance it then at the snap you have a motioning TE get set on all fours or hands ready to launch a smaller running back into the air too high for anyone to stop them on goal line plays - pretty sure this is illegal already, if not MLF type to get Hardman ready for the canon play.

I just think it is BS to push the runner, yet not allow defensive side of the ball to do this as well to explode the line or attack the ball on kicks...
 

Members online

No members online now.

Latest posts

Top