And this is true of every team in the league:

Play some defense.

Learn clock management - not only how to save clock, but make your opponent burn clock when they can't afford to.

Stop wasting precious seconds throughout the game to celebrate minor accomplishments (like picking up a first down). Your team may need those 2 seconds to get off one more play (looking at you, Chase Claypool).

And my favorite armchair QB logic: defenses are gassed at the end of the game. If that's the case, maybe after a turnover they shouldn't run all those extra yards to the end zone to mug for the camera.

when the Pats won the coin flip, drove down, and scored a TD to beat the Chiefs in the AFC championship game. (At the time, I was more angry at the defense than at the rule. Just stop the Pats and you don't have to worry about the rule.)

As Irishrock notes elsewhere, the Chiefs tried to get the rules changed when that happened, and they were rebuffed.

Why the sudden interest in this allegedly unfair rule now?

Happened to be watching last night with my kids and thought the rule is stupid.

The problem with it was that with the way the two offenses were playing, it seemed pretty likely the coin flip was going to determine the outcome. Defenses were both a bit gassed. Not taking away anything from KC, but it is a rule that should be changed for playoff football. Hopefully before it winds up deciding a Super Bowl.

But they should simply play 15-minute periods until there’s a winner. Hockey does it. And hockey is as demanding a sport. Formally, hockey does sudden death. But given the paucity of scoring, the expectation is that teams are ready to play a full period and sometimes multiple additional periods until a winner is decided. And those games are the best the sport has to offer.

I am a neutral observer so I don't have a dog in this fight. As a fan, I did feel cheated (both times) out of not getting to see a great QB have a chance in OT.

One aspect of this, though, is that defenses are totally gassed at the end of games. While it's cool to see the offenses take over, part of that is they are going against guys on an empty tank. I'm not sure it would be fun to watch a back and forth OT where no one can stop anyone else.

Your point about the defense being tired is a good one. Just look at what a shootout the end of this game was... we'd have it every time there was OT. Plus, there would be even less of an incentive to go for 2 at the end of the game if you managed to score with a chance to tie or win.

We never got the ball against New England...I guess it was our turn this year.

How many points is that worth, it has to be worth something or it would be closer to 50%. The team that loses the opening toss should get the advantage in OT to balance things out. You could also allow the team that wins the opening toss to defer to a possible OT.

You defer the choice at least in part to be able to double up on possibly getting points at the of the first half and the start of the second half.

That’s not a consideration in OT; you want the ball.

squib kicked the ball to take time off the clock after scoring the go-ahead touchdown.

The Bills defense gave up a zillion yards at the end of regulation and overtime. They had the chance to stop the Chiefs and they couldn't.

land at about the 7 yard line.

But I agree with your point. Defense is still part of football.

it, if I were Buffalo.

dare I say it reminded me of Rocket vs Colorado punt return as both had so many would be tacklers converged on the both of them.

No flag
Hill didn't score (which sucked because all we got was a FG out of it and I told buddies that was a really bad deal as being up 5 wasn't going to help)

I'll take it...helluva win

In a game of heroic effort from his team, the coach lost it for them.

Squib kicks usually give the other team the ball around the 35-40 yard line, which is about where the Chiefs were after that first play to Hill. So it would have drained a few seconds but I'm not sure it would have materially mattered with where the Chiefs ultimately ended up.

These guys can squib it deep and make them run off 4 or 5 or so seconds to get to the 25.

Why don’t they squib kick it every time?

Look, this is not a hill (pun intended?) that I'm gonna die on, I'm just saying I don't think it is as obvious as some are making it out to be.

My guess is it was discussed but they thought the risk wasn't worth the reward. Do we want to give the Chiefs two plays from the 25, or one play from somewhere between the 30 and the 40 (with a non-zero chance of a big play on the kickoff).

In my opinion, the blunder was on the successive plays. You can either give up a quick play of no more than 15 yards, or a slower developing play of more, but not both a quick and long play.

Interestingly, I wonder if getting the two point conversion hurt the Bills. It seemed they were guarding against a TD with 13 seconds left versus if they were up by only one they may have been a bit more focused on not giving up the FG.

I understand your point, but -- having watched Hill and Hardman quite a bit -- I can understand the desire to keep it out of their hands at all costs.

It was Pringle deep

He also returned one for a TD this year that was called back for a penalty, if I recall correctly.

Not that that’s much consolation. I said that when the Chiefs won the toss that they won the game.

extra time. Both teams have plenty of chances to score in that case.

Imagine lining up two NFL QBs at the 25 and having them alternate throwing passes into the end zone to a single receiver in single coverage.

This was worse.

And the only time I’ve ever been wrong is when I thought I was wrong, but I was right.

You’re not as bright as I am.

What's the solution though, 15 full extra mins?

If both teams score and the game is tied then you go to next score wins. It adds a little drama to the coin toss winner. Do you want the ball first so that if it’s tied after both offenses get the ball you have first shot on next points win or do you want the ball second because you will know what your offense needs to do the first time with the ball and you have option to go for 2 to win game if both score TDs. I’m sure most teams would still take ball first but I’m not sure it’s as automatic.

OG OT rule was first score wins. So take the kick, drive 40 yards, kick and go home.

At least with the change you have to score a TD, forcing you to do a fully non-ST drive (and I believe we had a tie where both teams were held to FG's this season).

If you want to do "untimed, each team gets a drive, then first score wins if still tied", you're going to get some bitching from the NFLPA, as well as the networks. I think it'd probably be most equitable, but for the playoffs, I'd say do a 15 min quarter, and keep going if they're tied like the NBA or NHL.

I do like CFB OT rules, I know some hate them.

a few years back.

It was our job to stop them and keep the Pats from scoring a TD in that game. We didn't do it. Same thing happened today, just in the other direction.

I don't hate the idea.