We saw earlier today that the Packers‘ proposal to ban the Eagles‘ notorious tush push play fell two votes short of the necessary 24 votes to pass. As the day continued, we saw some minor reports following the failed proposal.
For instance, Dianna Russini tells us that four high-ranking front-office officials were under the impression that the league used Green Bay to push the proposed rule change due to their lack of a principal owner. The thought being that, by using Green Bay, other team owners would be able to put their support behind the proposal without any singular owner being targeted by those who oppose it.
Eagles owner Jeffrey Lurie seemed to agree with this sentiment, believing that the league was attempting to influence the vote. He particularly criticized NFL commissioner Roger Goodell and executive vice president of football operations Troy Vincent for advocating for the ban, per ESPN’s Seth Wickersham.
Here are a few other notes from the initial fallout of the failed proposal:
- Lurie’s speech attempting to keep the proposal from passing was reportedly described as both extremely emotional and passionate and fact- and data-based. According to Zach Berman of The Philadelphia Inquirer, the impassioned intensity of the speech was due to an internal feeling within the franchise that the Eagles faced an uphill battle and believed the proposal would indeed be passed.
- We had mentioned briefly in recent weeks that the Packers were resubmitting the proposal with broader language in an attempt to gain more supportive votes, going beyond the QB sneak terminology to include any offensive player “pushing, pulling, lifting, or assisting the runner except by individually blocking opponents for him.” According to Russini, multiple sources believe the new phrasing alienated some teams and ended up actually hurting the odds of the proposal being passed.
- In his impassioned speech, Lurie made some questionable assertions, per Russini, the most notable of which being that the tush push is “the safest play in the history of the game” and claiming that “whoever votes to ban this play is taking liability for putting risk on (the league’s) quarterbacks.” He doubled down on this in his attacks on Goodell and Vincent, citing that he had spoken to NFL chief medical officer Allen Sills about the play extensively, according to Wickersham.