As NFL owners meet this week to discuss potential changes to the upcoming football year, the tush push remains one of the hottest subjects in the sport.
After the Green Bay Packers proposed a rule change that would ban the play, coaches and executives from across the league have come out for and against making the change.
One of the most vocal advocates for banning the play has been Buffalo Bills head coach Sean McDermott, who has cited player safety as the reason he believes the tush push should be removed from the sport.
On Monday morning, McDermott doubled down on his stance, admitting that while the data might not suggest a correlation between the tush push and player injury currently, he believed it would still be in the best interest of the sport to get rid of the play.
“It’s two things. It’s added force, number one,” McDermott said, per Eliot Shorr-Parks of 94WIP. “And then the posture of the players being asked to execute that type of play. That’s where my concern comes in.”
Sean McDermott is still anti-Tush Push
— Eliot Shorr-Parks (@EliotShorrParks) March 31, 2025
Says he still has injury concern even though the data suggests there is no injury risk pic.twitter.com/oi0he4Ny21
While monitoring the injury risk of a particular play is worth the investment, current data has not identified the tush push as an overtly dangerous play compared to the sport as a whole. Last season, no players were injured during a tush push. That might be a small sample size, but it’s the sample right now.
Across the league, there are mixed takes on what the future should hold for the tush push. While some coaches have supported the ban, others have said it is simply up to defenses to figure out how to stop it, and that attempting to remove the play through legal means rather than on the field “reeks of jealousy.”
The potential ban is set to go to an owners’ vote on Tuesday.
More NFL on Sports Illustrated
This article was originally published on www.si.com as Sean McDermott Doubles Down on Injury Concerns Over Tush Push Despite Lack of Data.
