Column: UFL Teams’ Offensive Display in Week Two Nothing Short of Offensive

Image via X @theufl

Offenses in spring leagues historically get off to slow starts at the outset of the season. Week two of the UFL brought that deficiency to a new low.

Here are some numbers to chew on (hide the children): Three of the four games featured the two teams combining for fewer than 10 total points at the half. Only two out of the eight teams scored multiple offensive touchdowns all game. Just two teams scored more than 20 points, the same number of teams that scored in the single digits.

It shouldn’t be a surprise then when the viewership numbers come in well below expectations. People want an exciting brand of football to watch, and “excitement” in football parlance usually goes hand-in-hand with “scoring.” If someone is tuning in midway through a game and finds that only a few points have been scored, the casual fan that doesn’t have any rooting interest in the players, teams, or league isn’t going to stick around. And the numbers say they haven’t been.

This is the second season of the UFL, and for some of these teams, the third or fourth consecutive year they’ve been in operation. While there is a natural turnover each year among coaches and players, the expectation was this continuity would help teams hit the ground running a lot quicker in terms of quality of play. The expectation was also that the level of player the league attracted had risen in the off-season as well, leading to an even higher quality of play and along with that, presumably, better offenses. Based on what we saw in week two – and week one for that matter – that hasn’t happened.

There are plenty of places in which to cast blame for the offensive offensive performances. Training camps last just three weeks, with no mini-camps or OTAs, allowing little time for players to get into a rhythm. There are no preseason games for teams to work out the kinks, only joint practices where a limited amount of scrimmaging takes place.

In-game, we’ve seen questionable play calls from coordinators and clock management from head coaches. While the ability for coaches to challenge any play has rightly been lauded, it’s also caused some big offensive plays to get called back due to penalty after review. Those and other penalties have put offenses behind the sticks, creating numerous third-and-long situations teams have been unable to dig themselves out of. Players have also struggled to adjust to a shorter UFL play clock (which circles back to the no preseason games issue).

Teams have floundered in short-yardage and goal-line situations. Offensive lines still haven’t gelled. Receivers have shown poor hands around the league, dropping a shocking number of passes, especially in week two. Quarterbacks expected to be successful in a league like the UFL, such as Anthony Brown and Kellen Mond, have not performed well at the outset. And let’s credit the defenses too, though it’s hard to tell how good they’ve been versus how poorly offenses have played.

The team most immune to these issues is the St. Louis Battlehawks. While some weren’t sure how much their week one triumph was due to their offense or Houston’s Swiss cheese defense, they reiterated their prowess in week two against San Antonio.

St. Louis is perhaps the model of consistency and continuity within the league. Their quarterback is in his third year with the team, four-fifths of their offensive line have started together for three years now, and many of their backs, receivers, and tight ends have been in this offense for multiple seasons. Even when coordinator Bruce Gradkowski moved on to join the Detroit Lions, the team kept much of his offensive system under new play-caller Phil McGeoghan.

So what can be done? Well, nothing in the short term. We’re stuck with the teams and rules that we have for 2025. In the future, the UFL could decide to adopt the one-foot-in-bounds rule for catches. They can make tweaks to pre-snap motion, introducing the CFL’s rule that allows receivers to get a running start toward the line of scrimmage before the snap. Adjusting the timing rules to increase the number of offensive snaps could provide more opportunities for touchdowns and create less confusion for offenses.

Individually, none of these rule changes are likely to move the needle, but in the aggregate, they have a chance to increase scoring output. They also don’t cross over into “gimmicky” territory, something that UFL management often talk about wanting to avoid when considering new rules for the league.

The biggest change the UFL could make, and the one that is likely to bear the most fruit, is to add off-season practices and lengthen training camp, with at least one full pre-season game. The impediment to that would be cost: You’d be paying players, coaches, and everyone else to work more for what could only be incremental gains in quality of play.

It's just not realistic for every team to have the kind of continuity the Battlehawks have experienced the last three years. If the league returns in 2026, management really needs to look at a way to jump-start the offenses out of the gate. The beginning of the season is the most likely time for new viewers to sample the product, and if every game is a defensive battle, or worse, a low-scoring affair due to inept offenses, it’s going to turn those viewers off quickly.