2025 NFL Rule Changes

[LacertineForest]

I'd rather have 18 weeks of football than 17. They can trade out a preseason game for starters, then maybe move to two bye weeks and I'd also be happy to give up Thursday night games. If they do all that it would seem fair to the players IMO.

I would be on board with this, as well, but I'm pretty sure the league would never want to give up Thursday night games. They really should have two bye weeks considering how much attrition there is an how long the schedule has gotten. If they go to 18 games (I know it wouldn't happen this year), do existing contracts get compensated proportionally for the extra game?

I do agree with @HisRoyalSweetness that 17 games makes more sense from a home/away/international split, but it seems like the league has been targeting 18 games for awhile. You have to wonder if they will ever try to push even more games at some point - it seems like there has to be a limit, and I kinda feel like 16 was already enough.

[HisRoyalSweetness]

I would be on board with this, as well, but I'm pretty sure the league would never want to give up Thursday night games.

Nope.

[Grizzled]

New OT format: 10 minute period save and excepting it ends in a tie (which will be broken in playoff but not regular season games), each team gets a possesion;

Expanded use of the Replay Assistant: hits on a defenseless player, grabbing the facemask, performing a horse-collar tackle, tripping, and running into or roughing the kicker" can be reviewed if a flag has been thrown on the play;

Teams starting at the 35 yard line for touchbacks ;

Teams are now allowed to talk to free agents and have them in for visits during the negotiaing window;

Tush push has been tabled;

A proposal to eliminate automatic first downs on defensive holding and illegal contact penalties failed;

A proposal to alter playoff seeding was also tabled. The proposal was for wild-card teams with better records than teams that won their division would be seeded higher in the postseason

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/nfl/articl ... 21161.html

[Grizzled]

The NFL has announced that it is going to use Sony Hawk-Eye virtual measurement technology to replace the ol' chain gang in determining first downs. Six 8K cameras will track the position of the ball on the field; the chain gang will be used in a secondary (?) capacity. However, mistakes can still occur if the ball can't be seen by the cameras; placement by refs will still be the critical factor. The new technology will slightly speed up these determinations:

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/nfl/articl ... 25834.html

[HisRoyalSweetness]

[HisRoyalSweetness]

[Atkins&Rebel]

I'm not anti Tush Push as much as I am for not allowing any push or pull act to help the ball carrier.
The first time I saw a lineman pushing the pile down field an extra 5 yards, I hated it.

[LacertineForest]

Yeah, I'd be fine reverting to the old rules of not being able to aid by pushing or pulling ballcarriers - it's the specific aim of banning the Tush Push itself that bothers me. Philly and Buffalo will still have a great QB sneak regardless.

[HisRoyalSweetness]

I'm not anti Tush Push as much as I am for not allowing any push or pull act to help the ball carrier.
The first time I saw a lineman pushing the pile down field an extra 5 yards, I hated it.

The Bears were one of the 16 teams that voted for banning the Tush Push. George McCaskey spoke about it today (see the 2025 Pressers & Interviews thread) and addressed this very issue.

When asked why they voted as they did he said:

"Health and safety. I know they say that we don’t have sufficient injury data on it, but to us it appears to be an inherently unsafe play.

I had the opportunity during committee meetings here earlier in the month to sit in the back of the room for the Health and Safety Committee meeting and both Dr Alan Stills and Dr John York expressed concerns about the safety of everybody involved in that play.

And you know for decades there was a rule on the books making it illegal to push the runner and it went away in 2004. I always wondered why that happened and Rich McKay, the chairman of the Competition Committee, explained to us yesterday that the officials said that it was too difficult when there was like a moving scrum down the field to determine whether an offensive lineman was blocking or pushing the runner. So they took it out, which led to the push play.

From what I understand yesterday the discussion about the push play is going to lead to a broader examination of whether that general rule should be brought back and again we think it'll be an enhancement to the game, to make it safer for the players.”

Asked whether he got an opportunity to express his persona l view he replied:

"Yeah, they had an open mic situation and we spoke in support of banning the play in support of the Green Bay Packers. I asked the membership to not let that get out, that I had supported a proposal of Team Voldemort.”

[dplank]

IMO I like the fact that players can push their teammates forward. Why shouldn't they? We allow defenders to gang tackle and push a guy backwards (I know, forward progress counts, but this is an offensive league). I just don't understand the "it's not a football play it's a rugby play" complaint at all. Are people unaware the American Football comes from Rugby? Rugby is a great sport, really fun to watch IMO, and in some ways better than the NFL. Seeing these huge guys trying to push the pile is a bit of a gladiator vibe that to me fits in just fine with american football, it rewards hustle and effort and grit in an era where the game has become so 7 on 7 focused.

[wab]

IMO I like the fact that players can push their teammates forward. Why shouldn't they? We allow defenders to gang tackle and push a guy backwards (I know, forward progress counts, but this is an offensive league). I just don't understand the "it's not a football play it's a rugby play" complaint at all. Are people unaware the American Football comes from Rugby? Rugby is a great sport, really fun to watch IMO, and in some ways better than the NFL. Seeing these huge guys trying to push the pile is a bit of a gladiator vibe that to me fits in just fine with american football, it rewards hustle and effort and grit in an era where the game has become so 7 on 7 focused.

The only issue I take with it, is that 99% of the time guys are running into the pile to push it down the field, it's "technically" a block in the back. This really only applies in the open field, not the tush push.

[dplank]

IMO I like the fact that players can push their teammates forward. Why shouldn't they? We allow defenders to gang tackle and push a guy backwards (I know, forward progress counts, but this is an offensive league). I just don't understand the "it's not a football play it's a rugby play" complaint at all. Are people unaware the American Football comes from Rugby? Rugby is a great sport, really fun to watch IMO, and in some ways better than the NFL. Seeing these huge guys trying to push the pile is a bit of a gladiator vibe that to me fits in just fine with american football, it rewards hustle and effort and grit in an era where the game has become so 7 on 7 focused.

The only issue I take with it, is that 99% of the time guys are running into the pile to push it down the field, it's "technically" a block in the back. This really only applies in the open field, not the tush push.

That's a good point actually, hadn't thought of that. You can block your own guy in the back I assume, but yea if you push an opponent then that should be illegal and that might be a really tough thing for refs to call in live action.

[Atkins&Rebel]

Yeah when a RB runs into the olinei and a pile occurs at the line of scrimmage and everyone works to move the pile I have no problem.

I hate when the RB breaks through the line gets stood up but and an o lineman comes running up and slams into them to try and get a few extra yards. Just as guys might be giving themselves up on the play and they get slammed into.

And to counter where two or more guys can tackle a guy… 2 or more blockers can still block a guy in tandem as long as it’s not a high low situation

[LacertineForest]

Yeah when a RB runs into the olinei and a pile occurs at the line of scrimmage and everyone works to move the pile I have no problem.

I hate when the RB breaks through the line gets stood up but and an o lineman comes running up and slams into them to try and get a few extra yards. Just as guys might be giving themselves up on the play and they get slammed into.

And to counter where two or more guys can tackle a guy… 2 or more blockers can still block a guy in tandem as long as it’s not a high low situation

I agree with this, 100%.

[LacertineForest]

ProFootballTalk: Report: New Packers tush push proposal will ban all pushing

Mark Maske of the Washington Post reports that, when the owners meet in Minneapolis on May 20 and 21, they are "expected to consider a revised proposal that would prohibit a teammate from pushing or pulling a ballcarrier anywhere on the field."

I think this will pass, if they actually submit the revision that way. The Eagles will still be highly effective on QB sneaks.

[dplank]

ProFootballTalk: Report: New Packers tush push proposal will ban all pushing

Mark Maske of the Washington Post reports that, when the owners meet in Minneapolis on May 20 and 21, they are "expected to consider a revised proposal that would prohibit a teammate from pushing or pulling a ballcarrier anywhere on the field."

I think this will pass, if they actually submit the revision that way. The Eagles will still be highly effective on QB sneaks.

I don't like it. When at the goal line and a RB gets hit by the first guy, the defense is allowed to create a pile and push him back - why can't the offense do the same?

[wab]

I think pushing at the LOS is fine, but when you are pushing a ball carrier 15 yards past the LOS it gets a little bit grey for me because of the blocking in the back aspect that you see a lot but gets ignored. I don't think you should be able to pull/drag a dude along with you in any instance.

Also, if the RB gets pushed back, he doesn't lose yards, he's down at forward progress.

[dplank]

I got to do this one time when I played, just once, and it was the play I still remember to this day. Our RB got stood up at the 1 or so and I happened to be running right behind him (he should have let me block but he got impatient and ran in front of me), and it was just perfect timing for me to smash them both into the end zone. So much fun!

[RichH55]

IMO I like the fact that players can push their teammates forward. Why shouldn't they? We allow defenders to gang tackle and push a guy backwards (I know, forward progress counts, but this is an offensive league). I just don't understand the "it's not a football play it's a rugby play" complaint at all. Are people unaware the American Football comes from Rugby? Rugby is a great sport, really fun to watch IMO, and in some ways better than the NFL. Seeing these huge guys trying to push the pile is a bit of a gladiator vibe that to me fits in just fine with american football, it rewards hustle and effort and grit in an era where the game has become so 7 on 7 focused.

Gladiator vibe doesn't really scream "HEALTH"!

[dplank]

I've never seen a player injured on one of those plays. The biggest health issue for most players IMO is the insane size and speed that they are asked to play at, 110% all the time, that just over stresses the human body. These injuries are happening without any contact at all in many cases.

[malk]

I'd rather have 18 weeks of football than 17. They can trade out a preseason game for starters, then maybe move to two bye weeks and I'd also be happy to give up Thursday night games. If they do all that it would seem fair to the players IMO.

I understand that injuries are a huge concern but an extra game brings extra revenue which will pretty directly filter down to players via the cap. Doesn't seem like the worst thing for them?

[Moriarty]

I'd rather have 18 weeks of football than 17. They can trade out a preseason game for starters, then maybe move to two bye weeks and I'd also be happy to give up Thursday night games. If they do all that it would seem fair to the players IMO.

I understand that injuries are a huge concern but an extra game brings extra revenue which will pretty directly filter down to players via the cap. Doesn't seem like the worst thing for them?

Well, yes.
But what do players need more of right now?

More money?
More career longevity?
Better quality of health/life after leaving football?

[malk]

I understand that injuries are a huge concern but an extra game brings extra revenue which will pretty directly filter down to players via the cap. Doesn't seem like the worst thing for them?

Well, yes.
But what do players need more of right now?

More money?
More career longevity?
Better quality of health/life after leaving football?

Depends on the player. But I take the point, especially as any increase will go mostly to the high end salaries. What I'd really like to see is a much higher minimum salary in the league...

[malk]

I've never seen a player injured on one of those plays. The biggest health issue for most players IMO is the insane size and speed that they are asked to play at, 110% all the time, that just over stresses the human body. These injuries are happening without any contact at all in many cases.

I hate them myself but perhaps that's because I have been injured in a maul (the kind of rugby equivalent). I also don't recall seeing injuries from it which does strike me as strange.

But other than injuries, I still don't love those plays as the amount of time the refs give before blowing the play dead is really variable and spotting the ball is often guesswork. Doesn't sit well with me.

[Moriarty]

Well, yes.
But what do players need more of right now?

More money?
More career longevity?
Better quality of health/life after leaving football?

Depends on the player. But I take the point, especially as any increase will go mostly to the high end salaries. What I'd really like to see is a much higher minimum salary in the league...

No question they are overdue for a huge hike on the bottom end

[RichH55]

I've never seen a player injured on one of those plays. The biggest health issue for most players IMO is the insane size and speed that they are asked to play at, 110% all the time, that just over stresses the human body. These injuries are happening without any contact at all in many cases.

This doesn't particularly jive with reality overall though........As the older guys, who typically played at much lesser sizes are all sorts of messed up, though speed is up a ton. Football is just a violent sport overall. A lot of the CTE stuff.....the stuff they really don't want to talk about is just the normal day to day stuff....not even the concussions and coming back too fast (though that was a BIG thing too....but at least they can do something about that).

Just ask yourself how often in your normal day to day life do you do a thing that is anything like a normal football plan in terms of head trauma (even minor)....part of the reason it shows up in things like headers in Soccer IMHO

For games played.....Adding an additional regular season game will absolutely be a problem for the health long term of players

The Tush push? Less so. That does seem to be more sour grapes than anything, though it does seem stressful on the interior DL specifically

[HisRoyalSweetness]

Lions withdraw playoff reseeding proposal at Spring League Meeting
...

The Lions withdrew their playoff reseeding proposal on Wednesday, NFL Network Senior National Columnist Judy Battista reported.

Detroit's proposal was to amend the current playoff seeding format to allow wild-card teams to be seeded higher than division champions if the wild-card team has a better regular-season record. Under that format, the division champion with the best record would be seeded No. 1 and thereafter the remaining six seeds would be determined strictly by record, regardless of division finish.

Following the withdraw, there was an extended discussion during Wednesday's meeting among owners about the idea of the proposal. There is some support for the Lions' proposal and the NFL will study possible reseeding scenarios for potential changes in 2026, NFL Network Insider Tom Pelissero and Battista reported.
...

The competition committee's proposal to tweak the onside kick was passed by NFL owners on Wednesday. The rule allows teams to declare an onside kick at any time while trailing -- not just in the fourth quarter -- and line up one yard closer to opponent. Pelissero added that the hope is to modestly increase success rates from 6% last year.
...

Full article: https://www.nfl.com/news/lions-withdraw ... ue-meeting

NFL owners vote against banning tush push play at Spring League Meeting
...

NFL owners on Wednesday voted against banning the tush push play, popularized in recent years by the Philadelphia Eagles, NFL Network's Tom Pelissero and Judy Battista reported.

The proposal, submitted by the Green Bay Packers, was revised from one submitted for the league's Annual League Meeting earlier this spring and would have eliminated pushing or pulling a runner "in any direction at any time," while lifting the player to his feet also would have been banned.

Green Bay's proposal fell two votes shy of the necessary 24-vote threshold for ratification with 10 teams voting against the ban, NFL Network Insider Ian Rapoport reported.
...

Full article: https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-owners-vot ... ue-meeting

[LacertineForest]

FTP.

Regarding the onside kick thing - I can't figure out why the rule only allows an onside kick when trailing. Few teams would do it while ahead if they didn't have the element of surprise on their side, anyway, but there are situations where it can be useful. For example, if time is running low and you don't trust your defense to stop a high-powered team: if you try the onside kick and recover, you can run out the clock, and if the other team scores with enough time on the clock, you can try and score again.

[Arkansasbear]

FTP.

Regarding the onside kick thing - I can't figure out why the rule only allows an onside kick when trailing. Few teams would do it while ahead if they didn't have the element of surprise on their side, anyway, but there are situations where it can be useful. For example, if time is running low and you don't trust your defense to stop a high-powered team: if you try the onside kick and recover, you can run out the clock, and if the other team scores with enough time on the clock, you can try and score again.

Another good time to catch a team off guard - opening kickoff in the second half of a Super Bowl.

[LacertineForest]

Is it a penalty under the current rules if you declare you're doing an onside kick and then kick it deep? I think it would be. The worst part about the new kickoff format is that element of surprise is completely removed.