The NFL coaching community remains split on banning Philadelphia’s signature tush push, with most wanting it eliminated. But Tampa Bay’s Todd Bowles stands firmly in the minority camp, defending the Eagles’ dominant weapon despite his defensive background. While Philadelphia has perfected multiple variations of the controversial play, turning it into their Swiss Army knife for crucial situations, Bowles believes banning it would set a dangerous precedent for defense.

Rob Maddi captured the coach’s support: “I’m a fan of creativity.” Bowles does not want the Eagles’ Tush Push pushed out of the NFL. “If somebody crafts something and they do it well and it’s within the rules, it’s up to the other side of the ball to stop them… They have something they do very well… If everyone else could do it, everybody would be doing it. It’s a challenge for all the defensive coaches to try to stop it, and that be me included.”

His reasoning cuts through the typical rhetoric about balance and player safety. Bowles sees the Tush Push as pure football innovation that demands defensive adaptation rather than legislative intervention. This isn’t his first rodeo defending the controversial play either. Back in May 2025, Bowles had commented: “The safety of it’s always going to be a question because it’s a rugby style of play, but I have nothing against it.” That comment reveals his understanding—acknowledging safety concerns while refusing to condemn an effective strategy.

The irony runs deep within Tampa Bay’s organization. While Bowles champions the Eagles’ creativity, the Glazer family voted to ban the play when the league addressed it. That organizational split highlights the complexity surrounding this issue—coaches respect innovation, while owners worry about competitive fairness. Bowles’ confidence stems partly from Tampa Bay’s success in stopping Philadelphia’s weapons. The Bucs defended a crucial two-point conversion attempt in the 2024 playoffs, proving the play isn’t unstoppable with proper preparation and execution.

But recent enforcement issues complicate the debate. Philadelphia appeared to get away with false starts against Kansas City and Los Angeles in Weeks 2 and 3, making defensive preparation meaningless when offenses can jump the snap count illegally. Bowles’ perspective reflects old-school football philosophy—adapt or get beaten. His willingness to challenge conventional coaching wisdom while defending an opponent’s signature play demonstrates the competitive respect that separates great coaches from complainers.

Tampa Bay owners voted against Tush Push despite coach Todd Bowles’ vocal support

The NFL’s Tush Push debate created an unusual split within the Tampa Bay organization that nobody saw coming. While Green Bay’s motion to ban Philadelphia’s signature quarterback sneak fell two votes short in May, the Glazer family found themselves on the opposite side of their own coaching staff’s public stance. Adam Schefter’s Wednesday revelation exposed the organizational divide when he listed the 10 teams that voted against banning the play. Tampa Bay wasn’t among them, meaning the Glazers joined 21 other ownership groups seeking the elimination of Philadelphia’s dominant short-yardage weapon.

The vote creates an awkward dynamic, considering Todd Bowles’ passionate defense of the play at the NFL Combine earlier this year. The head coach argued that creativity should be rewarded, not legislated away. General manager Jason Licht echoed similar sentiments during his Rich Eisen Show appearance, making Tampa Bay’s front office appear unified in supporting the Eagles’ innovation. But ownership operates from a different perspective than coaches and executives. The Glazers clearly viewed the Tush Push as problematic for competitive balance, joining the majority who cited safety concerns and its “rugby-style” nature as reasons for elimination.

Tampa’s internal conflicts will be tested in Week 4 when the Eagles visit Raymond James Stadium. The Glazers will see firsthand whether their vote was justified or if their coach’s philosophy proves correct.