I'm not changing anything, lol. Go back and read my original post, it's been there all along:
I guess it was wrong of me to assume people would understand I was talking about Playoff OT under the current format, given that discussing previous playoff OT games (for which the format has already previously been changed) would make absolutely no sense and have no bearing whatsoever on this discussion, but my mistake for assuming...
Note the "on the whole," which - again, perhaps my fault for assuming - but I thought it was pretty clear that I'm referring to *all* OT games under the current format. You know, "on the whole," and all. But, again, I guess next time I will clarify that I was talking about the current ruleset for OT, not OT rules that have already been previously changed and are wholly obsolete in this discussion/context, just to be clear.
I am well aware of the stats for playoff OT under the current format and am equally well aware that the rule change is for OT in the playoffs only; I'm saying that I don't think 12 games is a particularly meaningful sample size when you consider that games under that same exact format outside of the playoffs confer next to no meaningful advantage to the winner of the coin-toss. Also, the team that wins the coin toss has won 54 percent of overtime games in the past five seasons since the regular-season overtime period was shortened from 15 to 10 minutes.
Just don't really see how anyone could say with any consistency that there is some sort of inherent problem with the current OT format (based on viewing a sample of 12 out of ~160 OT games in said format) while choosing to only change the format for the playoffs and not the regular season. If the format is inherently flawed, then naturally the format should be changed across the board, not just for the ~7% of games in which it skews harder one direction. And if the format is not inherently flawed (Can we determine that it is from those ~7% of games?) then I'm not sure it makes much sense to change either.