The NFL's New Overtime Policy Is a Step in the Right Direction

Last night in a 28-4 vote, the NFL owners decided to make the first rule change in regards to overtime since "The Greatest Game Ever Played."

The rule change states that if the first team to possess the ball in overtime scores a touchdown, the game is over.  However, if said team only kicks a field goal, the defending team will get the ball also.

That means that Garrett Hartley's kick against the Vikings in this season's NFC Championship game wouldn't have ended the game.

While the change is a monumental step towards a positive change in overtime rules, I don't think that step is large enough yet.

For starters, why should this rule pertain to only playoff overtime games?

The majority of overtime games are played in the regular season and can have a great impact on the postseason. 

Also, what is the point of having a separate rule just because it's a playoff game? 

I understand multiple overtimes should only occur during the playoffs, but other than that, why not make this rule used in every football game?  What if having instant replay was only used or roughing the passer was only called in the postseason?

Many were confused on why the Vikings, who lost on Hartley's kick, voted against this rule.  Their owner, Zygi Wilf, wanted the rule to include the regular season or none at all.  I agree with Wilf in this instance.

In addition to applying to both the regular season and the postseason, the rule should be changed to give each team a possession regardless of the outcome of the first drive.  This way, a game can't end on a kickoff return touchdown or a deep bomb to end the game on the first play from scrimmage.

To me, this is the fairest way to end a game then goes into overtime, plus it incorporates all three phases of the game as they were intended to be.