Football Zebras
2017 rule changesRules proposal scorecard: Which new NFL rules were passed for 2017?

Rules proposal scorecard: Which new NFL rules were passed for 2017?

Below are the proposals under consideration by the owners at the 2017 Owners Meeting, shown with the team that introduced each (or CC for a Competition Committee proposal) and the disposition of each proposal. Items that are tabled are deemed to not be passed, unless it is specifically tabled for consideration at the May spring meeting.

Playing rules

  1. Protect the long snapper from contact for 1 second (PHI) — WITHDRAWN
  2. Abolish line leaping on field-goal and extra-point kicks (PHI) — PASSED with language changes, see below
  3. Expand crown-hit rule for indirect forcible contact (PHI) — WITHDRAWN
  4. Challenge any call (with exceptions); 3rd challenge if 1 successful (PHI) — WITHDRAWN
  5. 3rd challenge if 1 successful, unlimited for subsequent successful (WAS) — WITHDRAWN
  6. Kickoffs through uprights would be touchback to 20, otherwise 25 (WAS) — FAILED, 11-21
  7. Challenge any call at any time of game, except turnover/score (BUF-SEA) — FAILED
  8. Make 2016 automatic disqualification rule for 2 UNS fouls permanent (CC) — PASSED
  9. Kickoff touchback to the 25, extend to 2017 only (CC) — PASSED
  10. Regular-season overtime to 10 minutes (CC) — TABLED for consideration at spring meeting
  11. Receiver running a route has defenseless player protections (CC) — PASSED
  12. Extend illegal crackback to player who was in motion (CC) — PASSED
  13. Centralized replay & referee participates via tablet (CC) — PASSED, unanimously
  14. Reset on multiple fouls to drain the clock (CC) — PASSED
  15. Revised 10-second runoffs to apply at 2:00 warning instead of 1:00/half (CC) — PASSED

Bylaws proposals

  1. Eliminate the first roster cut to 75 active players (WAS) — TABLED for consideration at spring meeting
  2. Concussion Exempt designation with practice squad call-up (WAS) — TABLED for consideration at spring meeting
  3. Opt out of “garish” Color Rush uniforms (WAS) 
  4. Expand hosting rules for draft-eligible workouts (CC) — PASSED
  5. Injured reserve return rules apply to NFI and PUP reserve players (CC) — PASSED
  6. Preseason personnel notices issued on Sundays (CC) — PASSED

Policy proposals

  1. Allow alternate helmet color (new equipment) (PHI) — WITHDRAWN
  2. Head coach candidates can negotiate contracts in principle while active in postseason (CC) — TABLED for consideration at spring meeting
  3. Non-football employees not restricted from being hired by another team midseason (CC) — PASSED


  1. Relocation of Raiders to Las Vegas, as early as 2019 season (OAK) — PASSED, 31-1 (no: MIA)
  2. Point of emphasis that “egregious” hits to head are an automatic disqualification (CC) — no vote required


2 thoughts on “Rules proposal scorecard: Which new NFL rules were passed for 2017?

  1. > Point of emphasis that “egregious” hits to head are an automatic disqualification

    Since this is a “point of emphasis”, I assume it only applies to egregious hits that are already illegal and subject to automatic disqualification under the current rules? In other words, this “point of emphasis” does not change the rules and make an otherwise legal hit result in disqualification because it is egregious? What do the rules currently say about hits that result in automatic disqualification, i.e., what rule is being emphasized?

  2. The “point of emphasis” means that the wording is already present in the rulebook, and it is a matter of interpretation. Through use of video examples, the league wants to adjust that interpretation. In this case, it is not because officials were not calling the rule properly (generally, although there are some examples where ejections should have been called). The league is finding that the 15 yards and a progressive fine at the end of the week are not yielding the results they are looking for. By putting a first-offense ejection and/or suspension in the players’ minds, they are hoping to see changes.

    Specifically, “flagrant” actions are ejectable, and the degree to what is considered flagrant will be expressed to the officials.

Comments are closed.