The changing risk profile of the tush push

CINCINNATI, OHIO - NOVEMBER 23: Drake Maye #10 of the New England Patriots attempts a quarterback sneak during the second half against the Cincinnati Bengals at Paycor Stadium on November 23, 2025 in Cincinnati, Ohio. (Photo by Dylan Buell/Getty Images) | Getty Images Last offseason, the NFL considered banning a play made famous by the Super Bowl champions: the Tush Push. The measure was hotly debated both by team owners and in the press, and banning the play gained support among owners despite loud opposition from fans.

Twenty-two owners voted to ban the play, enough for a majority but two votes shy of the threshold needed for adoption. The play stayed. One year later, after a season filled with controversial instances of the play, the proposal to ban it was nowhere to be found in the league’s rule change discussions.

A change in the balance between risk and reward may be behind the shift. Last offseason, NFL owners stated that injury risk was their motivation to ban the play. This confused fans, largely because owners could provide no proof of an increased risk.

I think it is worth exploring why owners may have been concerned about an injury risk despite the data. To do so, we must look at three aspects of the play: the force of the players involved, the value of the players involved, and the chance for the play to be successful. Let’s start with the force.