In recent days, the Green Bay Packers submitted a proposal to the NFL to ban the Tush Push. Now, Los Angeles Rams head coach Sean McVay has openly criticized the NFC North team for their attempt to eliminate the play.
The Philadelphia Eagles have drawn significant attention in recent seasons for their innovative use of the Tush Push—a variation of the quarterback sneak. Developed under head coach Nick Sirianni, the play involves quarterback Jalen Hurts being pushed from behind by teammates to gain extra momentum and power through defensive lines.
Due to its high success rate, the Tush Push has become controversial across the league. While some see it as a strategic evolution of a classic play, others argue it gives the offense an unfair advantage. The Packers recently sought to outlaw the play, but their proposal was voted down during the initial review.
Rams HC Sean McVay responds to Packers’ attempt to ban the Tush Push
The quarterback sneak is typically used when an offense needs just one yard—often on third or fourth down, or at the goal line. While effective, it isn’t foolproof. That’s where the Eagles found an edge.
see also
Matthew Stafford accepts harsh truth about his career that Aaron Rodgers continues to deny
In the Tush Push, Hurts lines up for a standard quarterback sneak, but two players line up behind him to physically push him forward. This adds extra force to the play, making it much more difficult for defenses to stop.
In essence, the play transforms a solo effort into a coordinated push by three players. That’s why several teams argue it should be considered illegal. However, the Rams, and particularly Sean McVay, see it differently.
McVay, who also serves on the NFL’s Competition Committee, doesn’t support banning the play. He acknowledged that many teams have tried to replicate the Tush Push without success—something he believes is the real reason behind the push to ban it.
Jalen Hurts #1 of the Philadelphia Eagles scores a touchdown with the Tush Push play against the New York Giants during their game at MetLife Stadium on October 20, 2024 in East Rutherford, New Jersey. (Photo by Al Bello/Getty Images)
“I think one of the things that I would talk about is it was really allowing that play to get in the first place,” McVay told reporters on Wednesday. “I will acknowledge that I don’t believe in being a hater because the Eagles and the Bills do it better than we were capable of. If we executed it at that kind of level, we would probably be doing it as well. I think what it revolves around is saying we’re not in the game or in the business of pushing other people or assisting or helping the runner. We’ve allowed that into the game. When you go back a handful of years, there are some issues and conversations around the field goal block play.
“Everything revolves around health and safety, but also making sure that there’s clarity for the refs to be able to officiate this and then us to ultimately get it communicated to our players in regard to what our expectations are, how it’s being viewed, and what is going to be deemed legal and illegal. It was more the optics of the play that I had a problem with while also acknowledging that if we did it as well as the Eagles, we would probably be activating it a little bit more as well. I’m not afraid to admit that.”
Will the NFL ban the Tush Push?
In the initial vote, the Packers’ proposal to ban the Tush Push failed to gain sufficient support from other teams. As a result, the topic is expected to be revisited during league meetings in May.
see also
NFL News: Rams star Puka Nacua delivers unexpected take on rival Brock Purdy’s next 49ers contract
Despite continued pressure from some franchises, it appears the Tush Push may remain in the game. Several head coaches, including McVay, argue that instead of banning a legal and well-executed play, defenses should adapt and find ways to stop it. As of now, the Eagles’ innovation remains a legal and effective part of their offensive strategy.
SurveyShould the Tush Push be considered illegal?
Should the Tush Push be considered illegal?
already voted 0 people
