Idk what the statistics show in regards to the coin flips in the current OT setup*, but nobody ever chooses to kickoff in OT so that says quite a bit right there. You always choose the option that guarantees you get at least the same number of possessions as the other team. And this rings even more true in the playoffs where both teams likely have an elite QB. Giving Tom Brady, Matt Ryan, Aaron Rodgers, etc. 1 possession to 0, 2 possessions to 1, 3 possessions to 2 is not fair. At least let them have the opportunity to use clock management to try to even the scales somewhat. Also, why in the world would fairness not be important because regulation ended in a tie? Neither team could finish the other one off in regulation. Why give one an advantage over the other? I would even prefer something like each team receives a kick off with 2:30 on the clock and 1 timeout. If you reach a punting situation then the other team gets to try to score during the remainder of your 2:30. If it's still tied after each team receives a kickoff then do it again. Similar to college but timed and not starting them at the 35. You're basically playing two 2:30 minute halves. In my opinion this would be more fair AND more exciting than the current setup. * So I looked it up. http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2015/12/29/10682736/nfl-overtime-rules-bill-belichick-patriots-jets-decision-wind-kick-receive So the models and actual results both are at about 7-9% difference in winning probability/winning percentage for the team that gets the first possession.