The UFL announced several new rules for the 2026 season intended, as the league says, to revolutionize the game and make it more exciting for fans. As always, some of the rules will prove to be controversial to those who are used to seeing the game played a certain way. I'll take a look at the major changes here, offer some pros and cons, and give a final verdict on each.
Rule Change: Four-point field goal on kicks over 60 yards
Pros: In the video posted on social media and the league's website, UFL Head of Officiating Dean Blandino argued that as players get bigger, stronger and faster, the rules need to keep up with those changes. The logic is that as longer kicks become more commonplace, teams should be rewarded as the degree of difficulty increases. Those kicks beyond 60 yards are still rare, so this likely will affect only a handful of plays on the season. To this American fan, it's no more unusual than the CFL's longstanding rule that a field goal attempt that clears the end zone is worth one point (known as the "Rouge.").
Cons: To some fans, changing the scoring on a play that has been scored the same for our lifetimes feels gimmicky, regardless of the range. While most of the rule changes encourage coaches to be aggressive on offense, this one does the opposite, as some may settle for a long field goal attempt rather than try to get in position for a touchdown late in the game.
Verdict: I'm mostly okay with this; I think it will come into play so sparingly that it won't be that big of a deal. I also like the idea of rewarding kickers who make kicks that were once not even attempted because no one had the leg for it.
Rule Change: One foot needed in bounds for a legal catch
Pros: Spring football leagues are always looking for ways to increase offense, and this should do just that. It should also be easier to officiate with less time taken to review to see if players get both feet on the turf. Spring football leagues have utilized this rule before dating back to the XFL in 2001 and its revival in 2020.
Cons: If the idea is that the UFL should be preparing players for the NFL, which has the two feet in bounds rule, then maybe the UFL should follow suit. While college also requires only one foot in for a catch, some see the two feet in as more of a “pro football” rule and should be used across the board at that level.
Verdict: I’ve always been a proponent of spring leagues using the one foot in rule. It’s an easy way to increase offensive output, if only slightly, without completely changing or gimmicking the rulebook.
Rule Change: Elimination of the Tush Push
Pros: The NFL came close to making this a rule last off-season, and the debate rages on. It won’t change in the NFL for 2026, but the UFL is a Petri dish for potential rule changes in the NFL, so why not try it here? It’ll force teams to get more creative in short-yardage situations. The play became problematic to officiate as missed false starts and offsides, as well as errant spots became the norm in the NFL. Sometimes, simple is better.
Cons: It’s unnecessary – according to United Football Media on X/Twitter, there hasn’t been a Tush Push even attempted in spring football. So it eliminates a problem that doesn’t exist. Also, the idea of legislating out of the game a play that is too difficult for the defense to stop (but not impossible!) just doesn’t sit right.
Verdict: This rule change is likely to grab a lot of headlines because of the controversy surrounding the play in the NFL. The reality is that controversy never trickled down to the UFL. I’m not a fan of the rule but I understand why they wanted to at least try to get rid of the play.
Rule Change: No punting inside the 50-yard line
Pros: More and more NFL head coaches are paying attention to the analytics, which rarely advise punting inside the opponents' 50-yard line. This UFL rule enumerates those analytics in the rulebook. It's another rule designed, in part, to increase offense, if not because the offense converts a 4th down, then because the opposing offense will take over with great field position if the other team fails on their 4th down attempt. A 4th down try is always going to be more exciting than an unreturned punt, and excitement is what the league is going for with these changes.
Cons: It takes key decision-making out of the hands of the head coach, for one. How many coaches struggle with whether to go for it - and given the UFL's on-field access, those tough calls and the drama that go along with it will now go unseen by the viewers at home. For all the lip service about spring football being a haven for kickers, that apparently doesn't extend to punters, whose ability to down a punt deep in the opponents' territory on a short field won't be showcased this season. There are also the unintended consequences such as penalties and sacks that can back a team up into a 4th-and-20 situation on the OTHER side of the 50 if they had already crossed it before those mistakes. It's like penalizing that team twice as in that situation, they'd still have to go for it.
Verdict: Probably my least favorite rule change this year. This crosses the line into "gimmicky" for me and you can't even say this is a rule the NFL might adopt in the future. The negatives - and they are significant - outweigh whatever positives would come with it.
Rule Change: One-point PAT kick added; two-point conversion from the two-yard line, three-point conversion from the eight-yard line
Pros: The big change is the kick, which the USFL had but the XFL did not. It gives the kickers an extra opportunity to show that they can kick extra points on a consistent basis (the length is the same as an NFL extra point), giving them more tape for NFL scouts. It should increase scoring as coaches that go for one should get it more often than when going for one in previous seasons. The two-point conversion was moved up three yards and the three-pointer was moved up two yards to encourage coaches to go for those more often (and to hopefully see them converted more often). Keeping the three-tiered PAT options allows spring football to continue to differentiate itself from other leagues.
Cons: Taking away a play from scrimmage to add an extra point kick, one that is mostly automatic, doesn't add excitement, which is what these rules generally are supposed to do. I don't buy the argument that kickers making extra points will somehow endear them to NFL scouts and coaches in any significant way.
Verdict: Looking at the data and adjusting based on the results is what a good spring football league should do, and the UFL did that by changing the yard-line for the two-and-three-point tries. I like that. The extra point kick I'm not a fan of so it all evens out for me.
Rule Change: Continued tweaks to the kickoff rule
Pros: In what should not be a surprise, the kickoff rules will likely encourage more - and longer - kick returns in 2026. The kickoff remains at the 30, but the kicking team will line up at the 45 rather than the 40, theoretically allowing five extra yards for the returner before coverage gets to him. Also, balls kicked in the end zone for touchbacks end up at the 40 instead of the 35, further disincentivizing touchbacks. The UFL didn't have the number of exciting kickoff returns expected last season, so this should nudge the league further in that direction.
Cons: If you're already not a fan of the dynamic kickoff - like President Trump - this probably won't get you over the hump. Starting field position will be closer and closer to midfield, artificially giving return teams and offenses an advantage. At some point we have to ask, how much is too much in giving a boost to offenses?
Verdict: Over the years, spring football leadership has shown a willingness to continue to find the right formula on kickoff returns, so much so that the NFL adopted the kickoff first created by Sam Schwartzstein for XFL 2020. The good news is there are a lot of dials that can be turned on the kickoff rules to help even things out if need be. I'm tentatively okay with this, but if the data shows that many teams have starting field position too close to midfield, I'm hoping the league won't be afraid to dial it back a little next year.
Final Thoughts: I'm a big believer in the idea that spring football should be a place where the bounds are tested, where on-field innovation should be embraced and where leagues aren't scared to try new things. Those kinds of changes can make people tune in to watch the product, but also make football fans question longstanding beliefs about how the game should be played. Best-case scenario, the NFL begins to adopt some rules and spring football is publicly credited for those adoptions, making it seem to the public like they're on the cutting edge of the game. Your mileage may vary on the workability of these rules - everybody's line for what crosses over into "gimmickry" is different - but I applaud the UFL for making big swings and getting people talking.