From a neutral perspective, the conclusion to yesterday's AFC Divisional Round matchup between the Kansas City Chiefs and the Buffalo Bills was equal parts enthralling and equal parts disappointing.

The former is obvious as to why that was the case. It was the greatest back-and-forth contest I have ever witnessed and one of the greatest postseason games ever played (still not ready to put it #1 because of the magnitude of 28-3).

The disappointing part was quite simple - the game ended without Josh Allen and the Bills getting a chance to answer. I could have watched those teams play another 60 minutes of football without batting an eye.

But this is the current overtime format in the NFL. I for one certainly was not crying for the rules to be changed when, in the 2018 AFC Championship Game at Arrowhead, the Patriots won the coin toss in OT and promptly marched down the field to punch their ticket to the Super Bowl.

Following that game, however, the Chiefs attempted to get the league to amend its rules for the overtime period(s).

Here's what Kansas City wanted to see put in place:

"Amend Rule 16 to (1) allow both teams the opportunity to possess the ball at least one time in overtime, even if the first team to possess the ball in overtime scores a touchdown; (2) eliminate overtime for preseason; and (3) eliminate overtime coin toss so that winner of an initial coin toss to begin game may choose whether to kick or receive or which goal to defend."

It's one of those things that if it works in favor of your team, you have no problem with it. If it goes against your team, you think it's B.S. Or as was the case yesterday with the neutral audience, you just didn't want it to end.

What do you think the rules should be for OT, specifically in regards to the postseason?

More From 92.9 The Ticket