No Safety/No Overtime Superbowl bets out. Wizard what will you do?
Quote: ThatDonGuyI have seen teams take a knee after scoring a touchdown with no time on the clock and the team ahead by 1 or 2.
This happens often. Central Florida's hail mary win against East Carolina this year.
Quote:
However, you did say that there would be one or two seconds left, and while I have never seen it happen, there is a case where this would be a smart move; when the team is ahead by 9 or 10. The other team is not going to score two touchdowns in one or two seconds, barring a freak series of penalties that extends the game with untimed downs, and by taking a knee, you don't risk the opponents scoring and then being behind by only 7 or 8, and your team kicking off.
With a 1-point lead and seconds remaining, you almost certainly go for 2, since a 2-point lead is no better than a 1-point lead. Taking a knee, or even going for 1, opens the door for a kicking-team penalty (e.g. clipping) on the return that puts the other team in field goal range with one play added to the end of the game.
Here's the one I see every couple of weeks that I don't understand. Team is down one point on defense, no timeouts left, ball in red zone, less than 2 minutes. The offense gets a first down and then the defense TACKLES the guy. Now the offense can run out the clock and you lose by 1. If I was a DC, the first thing I'd tell my guys when down one point: "If they get that first down under 2 minutes, you LET THEM SCORE!" They'll only go up 8, and we'll have the ball with a chance to tie. Stopping them is a 0% of a win, letting them score is probably a 5% chance at a win.
This blunder happened at the end of the Jets/Pats game in Week 16. Check out the list of plays and you'll see what I mean. If the Jets didn't make that tackle at 1:55, Brady couldn't have taken 3 kneel-downs and won the game. (Likely they would have lost by 8 anyway, but who knows, maybe Geno of Week 17 would have come early...)
Quote: cclub79
Here's the one I see every couple of weeks that I don't understand. Team is down one point on defense, no timeouts left, ball in red zone, less than 2 minutes. The offense gets a first down and then the defense TACKLES the guy. Now the offense can run out the clock and you lose by 1. If I was a DC, the first thing I'd tell my guys when down one point: "If they get that first down under 2 minutes, you LET THEM SCORE!" They'll only go up 8, and we'll have the ball with a chance to tie. Stopping them is a 0% of a win, letting them score is probably a 5% chance at a win.
1.) Tackling is instinctive.
2.) The tackle could force a fumble, and a recovery could enable the team to WIN if they score.
3.) If you do not allow the TD and get the ball back, a Field Goal WINS the game rather than needing a TD + 2PT Conversion to tie.
4.) An offensive player on his toes would know NOT to score, and would kneel, slide or run out of bounds.
5.) An offensive player REALLY playing on his toes and cognizant of what the defense was doing would just parade around more-or-less laterally and burn clock.
Quote:This blunder happened at the end of the Jets/Pats game in Week 16. Check out the list of plays and you'll see what I mean. If the Jets didn't make that tackle at 1:55, Brady couldn't have taken 3 kneel-downs and won the game. (Likely they would have lost by 8 anyway, but who knows, maybe Geno of Week 17 would have come early...)
Bolden should be smart enough to step out on his own, even without being pushed. Might have done it inside the five.
Quote: Mission146
Do you think they'll have a Line as to whether or not Katy Perry will have a, "Wardrobe Malfunction?" Granted, that's only happened once, but there have only been a handful of Super Bowls which have featured a performer for which such a malfunction was a reasonable possibility.
I'd pay for that so I don't know if that's a good bet....
Quote: djatcI'd pay for that so I don't know if that's a good bet....
I was originally going to add:
Quote:I'd be pulling for the, 'Yes.' side to come in. Wouldn't have any money on it, though.
Quote: tringlomaneI don't think being up by nine+ and automatically letting the other team score with time expiring has ever happened.
I have seen it happen. In fact, I have seen it happen where, while the result of the game itself did not change, the result against the point spread did.
Quote: Dalex64I agree with Mission's point #4 and have seen that happen.
I have also seen #5 happen.
Quote: Mission146Do you think they'll have a Line as to whether or not Katy Perry will have a, "Wardrobe Malfunction?"
The problem with this is, they would have to define what "wardrobe malfunction" was. If it's "up to our interpretation," then there's plenty of room for shenanigans.
Quote: ThatDonGuy
The problem with this is, they would have to define what "wardrobe malfunction" was. If it's "up to our interpretation," then there's plenty of room for shenanigans.
I don't know if there's a politically correct enough way for the sportsbooks to do that. I would say that either a nipple or an orifice we wouldn't normally see would have to make an appearance.
Quote: Mission146I would say that either a nipple or an orifice we wouldn't normally see would have to make an appearance.
Approves:
Quote: cclub79This happens often. Central Florida's hail mary win against East Carolina this year.
Here's the one I see every couple of weeks that I don't understand. Team is down one point on defense, no timeouts left, ball in red zone, less than 2 minutes. The offense gets a first down and then the defense TACKLES the guy. Now the offense can run out the clock and you lose by 1. If I was a DC, the first thing I'd tell my guys when down one point: "If they get that first down under 2 minutes, you LET THEM SCORE!" They'll only go up 8, and we'll have the ball with a chance to tie. Stopping them is a 0% of a win, letting them score is probably a 5% chance at a win.
One of the Eagles RBs has done that before... gave himself up at the one yard line to run the clock out. No need to dodge around, get the 1st down, give yourself up in bounds, and the clock keeps running. You'll see defenders do it as well when they take INTs in the final seconds. Go to ground, and not be a hero.
You'll see punters do this on intentional safeties, dance around to burn off valuable seconds. I -think- in the past one QB at the opponents 20 has taken the snap and sprinted backwards to midfield, to burn up time and give his line space to block for long as possible, with the added benefit that from a broken play like that he might see an oppurtunity to get the ball to his outlet running back, who can then burn more time before giving himself up.
Quote: thecesspitOne of the Eagles RBs has done that before... gave himself up at the one yard line to run the clock out. No need to dodge around, get the 1st down, give yourself up in bounds, and the clock keeps running. You'll see defenders do it as well when they take INTs in the final seconds. Go to ground, and not be a hero.
The 49ers learned this lesson the hard way a few years ago - late in a game (I want to say against the Steelers, but I'm not sure), a 49ers player intercepted a pass, and all he had to do was to take a knee and they could have run out the clock and won, but he thought he could make it into the end zone, ended up having the ball stripped and going back to the other team, which eventually won the game. I remember a game before that where a Raiders player was in the same situation, except that he scored his Pick Six, and while the other team came right back and scored, they couldn't recover an onside kick and the Raiders ended up winning anyway.
Quote: thecesspitI -think- in the past one QB at the opponents 20 has taken the snap and sprinted backwards to midfield, to burn up time and give his line space to block for long as possible, with the added benefit that from a broken play like that he might see an oppurtunity to get the ball to his outlet running back, who can then burn more time before giving himself up.
Pardon me for stretching this thread tangent out slightly further, but there was a high school state tournament game a few years back where a heavy underdog led by 7 with (I think) about 5 seconds remaining and fourth down near midfield; the QB took the snap, ran into his own end zone - and, thinking that it was a safety and his team had won, tossed the ball into the air, where an opponent caught it for a touchdown; the favorites ended up winning in OT.
Quote: Mission146I don't know if there's a politically correct enough way for the sportsbooks to do that. I would say that either a nipple or an orifice we wouldn't normally see would have to make an appearance.
In Dave chappelles voice "Come on titty!"
Quote: Mission1461.) Tackling is instinctive.
2.) The tackle could force a fumble, and a recovery could enable the team to WIN if they score.
3.) If you do not allow the TD and get the ball back, a Field Goal WINS the game rather than needing a TD + 2PT Conversion to tie.
4.) An offensive player on his toes would know NOT to score, and would kneel, slide or run out of bounds.
5.) An offensive player REALLY playing on his toes and cognizant of what the defense was doing would just parade around more-or-less laterally and burn clock.
Bolden should be smart enough to step out on his own, even without being pushed. Might have done it inside the five.
1. So is running into the End Zone.
2. This is the only possible legitimate argument, but I would say the odds of scoring 8 to tie vs. the odds of stripping the ball favors letting them score. It's also possible to go all in for the strip without tackling.
3. You WILL NOT get the ball back with no timeouts and less than 2 minutes. Every coach since the Herm Edwards play in '78 will instruct the offense to take a knee 3x. (As Brady did in the most recent example)
4. The Eagles did this, but again, scoring is instinctive unless they were coached to take a knee after the 1st. I have seen "my way" work enough to know they are not coached to take a knee in the middle of the play usually.
5. Again, the offensive player wants that TD. Unless coached to do otherwise, he won't dance around. And again, then you can go all in for the strip without tackling.
Quote: ThatDonGuy
Pardon me for stretching this thread tangent out slightly further, but there was a high school state tournament game a few years back where a heavy underdog led by 7 with (I think) about 5 seconds remaining and fourth down near midfield; the QB took the snap, ran into his own end zone - and, thinking that it was a safety and his team had won, tossed the ball into the air, where an opponent caught it for a touchdown; the favorites ended up winning in OT.
Too bad that didn't happen in a super bowl game.
Quote: sc15Too bad that didn't happen in a super bowl game.
If that happened in ANY NFL game, let alone the Super Bowl, that player would be the biggest laughingstock in the country.
Quote: cclub791. So is running into the End Zone.
True.
Quote:2. This is the only possible legitimate argument, but I would say the odds of scoring 8 to tie vs. the odds of stripping the ball favors letting them score. It's also possible to go all in for the strip without tackling.
It's not the only legitimate argument given proper coaching on #'s 4 & 5. I would think the offensive players would be coached in such a way, we covered it in High School ball...can't say that every player on our team would have remembered...but we got a reminder during the post-practice speech every practice after a close game, whether the situation had actually come up or not.
I agree that the best play is to try to strip it without tackling, at least until the guy goes down, but you originally said, "YOU LET THEM SCORE," without qualification, which is not what you want to do.
Quote:3. You WILL NOT get the ball back with no timeouts and less than 2 minutes. Every coach since the Herm Edwards play in '78 will instruct the offense to take a knee 3x. (As Brady did in the most recent example)
I didn't say you would, I meant getting the ball back via fumble, then you'd only need a FG to win. That's why it's better than letting them score.
Quote:4. The Eagles did this, but again, scoring is instinctive unless they were coached to take a knee after the 1st. I have seen "my way" work enough to know they are not coached to take a knee in the middle of the play usually.
5. Again, the offensive player wants that TD. Unless coached to do otherwise, he won't dance around. And again, then you can go all in for the strip without tackling.
They should be coached to do either that or run out of bounds if there are less than two on the clock and the opponent has no time outs. There are a great many things that separate a professional athlete from an amateur, and awareness needs to be one of them.
Quote: DeucekiesThis reminds me of the one-point safety rule in College Football. If the kicking team, for whatever reason, retreats 90 yards in the wrong direction and then downs the ball in their own end zone, it's 1 point for the defense. It's the only way a score of "1" can be achieved.
A one-point safety is also possible in the NFL. Source: In Praise of the One-Point Safety -- WSJ.
Quote: WizardA one-point safety is also possible in the NFL. Source: In Praise of the One-Point Safety -- WSJ.
Yes, scored against the team defending the 'Try'. The defence can never score on a Try (see http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/image/rulebook/pdfs/14_2013_Scoring.pdf).
Try = Conversion after a touchdown. Confusingly, a Try in rugby is when you touch down the ball at the end of the field...
Quote: WizardA one-point safety is also possible in the NFL. Source: In Praise of the One-Point Safety -- WSJ.
Interesting, but since it is only possible on an extra point attempt after a touchdown, A final score could never be 1-0. Would this count as a "safety" for the purposes of the traditional wager?
Quote: AyecarumbaInteresting, but since it is only possible on an extra point attempt after a touchdown, A final score could never be 1-0. Would this count as a "safety" for the purposes of the traditional wager?
In college, it can - a forfeited game is "officially" 1-0 unless the forfeiting team was behind at the time. (In the NFL, it is 2-0, although the rules say that the points are not included for point-based tiebreakers when determining postseason positions.)
As for safety/no-safety wagers, just because the game ended 2-0 doesn't mean that there was a safety involved, any more than a 6-0 game means that two field goals were kicked. Besides - if the game is forfeited, wouldn't the casinos declare "no action" on all bets on that game?
I remember one season where the TV announcers were discussing whether or not one team would forfeit the game, because a 1-0 loss (which was the rule in the NFL at the time) would get them into the playoffs whereas losing by a certain margin would keep them out because of a point differential tiebreaker. IIRC, they played the game and did end up in the postseason anyway.
Quote: AyecarumbaInteresting, but since it is only possible on an extra point attempt after a touchdown, A final score could never be 1-0. Would this count as a "safety" for the purposes of the traditional wager?
I think for purposes of the "will there be a safety?" bet, it would count. As you noted, the one-point safety could not be possible for a prop on the first score of the game, which is a common one.
Quote: WizardI think for purposes of the "will there be a safety?" bet, it would count. As you noted, the one-point safety could not be possible for a prop on the first score of the game, which is a common one.
A one point safety is impossible in the nfl. The article you linked was talking about college football. It also shows the most common way to get a one point safety apparently, awarded to the kicking team.
Ironically the referee calling the one point safety in the Oregon game was Ron Cherry, better known for this call.
Quote: tringlomaneA one point safety is impossible in the nfl.
Nope, it is possible to get a 1 point safety in the NFL, awarded to the kicking team:
(d) If there is no kick, and the Try results in what would ordinarily be a safety against the defense, one point is awarded
to the offensive team.
Example
A.R. 11.4 During a Try, placekick holder A1 fumbles. B1 kicks, bats, or muffs the loose ball (new impetus) on his two-yard line and it
goes out of bounds behind the goal line.
Ruling: Ordinarily a safety (11-5-1). Award one point.
My example
... the place holder fumbles (so no kick has been attempted, as soon as a kick is attempted and has failed the play is over, hence you can't score of a batted down PAT)... during the fumble recovery a defender fumbles and kicks the ball out of bounds in the endzone. That would be a safety:
"when an impetus by a team sends the ball behind its own goal line, and the ball is dead in the end zone in its possession or the ball is out of bounds behind the goal line. "
The defence should try to recover a fumbled snap, as if the ball IS advanced into the endzone (or recovered there by the offence) it would be a 2 point Try. If the defence falls on the ball in the endzone the play is over (as the defence has gained possession) as a touchback.
I will not be betting on a one point safety in the superbowl.
Quote:when an impetus by a team sends the ball behind its own goal line, and the ball is dead in the end zone in its
possession or the ball is out of bounds behind the goal line.
The article IS talking about the NFL and gives the example I give above, and I referenced the rule book in a previous post.
Quote:
So the only scenario that could result in a one-point safety in the NFL involves a defensive player batting the ball out of the end zone without having taken possession.
Quote: tringlomaneThe article you linked was talking about college football.
Did you read the last paragraph of the article?
Quote: thecesspit... I will not be betting on a one point safety in the superbowl.
What if you could bet against it occuring, but had to put up 9999 to win 1? The fair line on this occuring has got to be in "struck by lightning" territory...
Quote: AyecarumbaWhat if you could bet against it occuring, but had to put up 9999 to win 1? The fair line on this occuring has got to be in "struck by lightning" territory...
Which is why it wouldn't be worthwhile to the player, nor the house, to have that line... and thus they don't :p.
So Mike, did you say earlier you're planning to take action on both the no safety and no overtime? I'm planning on taking action on NO OT. Do you think that would also come down from -900 as it comes closer to game day?
Quote: RomesWhich is why it wouldn't be worthwhile to the player, nor the house, to have that line... and thus they don't :p.
Hehe, I wonder what is the fair line on this event, that hasn't occured (yet) in the NFL?
Quote: AyecarumbaHehe, I wonder what is the fair line on this event, that hasn't occured (yet) in the NFL?
Are they using INT's or DOUBLE's in their back end server code? lol (I promise that's funny if you know programming...)
Quote: RomesAre they using INT's or DOUBLE's in their back end server code? lol (I promise that's funny if you know programming...)
I know programming. I also know English, and that makes it not quite as funny. (There shouldn't be apostrophes in "INTs or DOUBLEs".)
Quote: WizardI think for purposes of the "will there be a safety?" bet, it would count. As you noted, the one-point safety could not be possible for a prop on the first score of the game, which is a common one.
I was about to agree with you, but then, would a successful 2-point conversion count as a touchdown, or a 1-point kick as a field goal? Going by a strict reading of the rules, point-scoring plays on a PAT are considered field goals, touchdowns, and safeties.
Then again, don't most props involving FGs/TDs include conditions saying that PATs don't count for those? If so, then, since there is almost certainly no such condition on the safety/no safety one, I would think that it would count anyway.
Quote: AyecarumbaWhat if you could bet against it occuring, but had to put up 9999 to win 1? The fair line on this occuring has got to be in "struck by lightning" territory...
Nope, not doing that either.... not worth it... I can increase my bankroll better by leaving the money in the bank... :)
Quote: WizardDid you read the last paragraph of the article?
Apparently not. I did read most of it...lol
Quote: ThatDonGuyI know programming. I also know English, and that makes it not quite as funny. (There shouldn't be apostrophes in "INTs or DOUBLEs".)
Oh go review my 479 posts, I'll take action that anything not posted from a phone (vegas trip report) is 99% literate and grammatically correct. This should buy me a pass. Now laugh at my joke...
Quote: ThatDonGuyThen again, don't most props involving FGs/TDs include conditions saying that PATs don't count for those? If so, then, since there is almost certainly no such condition on the safety/no safety one, I would think that it would count anyway.
Yes, they do. I think if there were a safety as a result of a botched extra point, then it would be considered as an independent score.
Quote: WizardYes, they do. I think if there were a safety as a result of a botched extra point, then it would be considered as an independent score.
How can there be a safety as a result of a botched extra point? It would have to involve a loss of like 97 or 98 yards on the play? Is that what you are talking about.
A blocked extra point returned 90-some yards would be 2 points for the blocking/returning team, but that is not called a safety. I suppose there is an unlikely scenario where a team blocks an extra point returns it 90 some yards and then fumbled just before they get to the endzone with the ball going into the endzone and recovered by the original kicking team. But that would involve change of possession and not be a safety either.
I feel like I am probably missing something obvious that you were referring to. Can you enlighten me.
Defensive players always want to record a safety. But doing so in a superbowl, where they know there is that unusual interest, would be something really extraordinary. I guess I am suggesting they may try a little harder in such a circumstance. I know some will argue that.
Then there is the coaches. There are times in many football games, where taking a safety would actually be a beneficial move and yet it is rarely done. The obvious type scenario is one team leading by 6 points, and backed up, 4 down at there own 1 or 2 yard line. You are at risk of a punt block immediately changing the game, or less severely, a quick short punt (because of lack of punting room) resulting in extremely positive field position for the other team. taking a safety and moving out to the 20 yard line for a free kick, is extremely beneficial as far as likely field position at almost no cost, 6 point lead reduced to 4 point lead, meaning it will still take a TD to beat you.
Now all teams know this, but you just rarely see a coach make that decision. But in a superbowl, I just feel like he is more likely to consider that option.
Quote: kewljHow can there be a safety as a result of a botched extra point? It would have to involve a loss of like 97 or 98 yards on the play? Is that what you are talking about.
A blocked extra point returned 90-some yards would be 2 points for the blocking/returning team, but that is not called a safety. I suppose there is an unlikely scenario where a team blocks an extra point returns it 90 some yards and then fumbled just before they get to the endzone with the ball going into the endzone and recovered by the original kicking team. But that would involve change of possession and not be a safety either.
I feel like I am probably missing something obvious that you were referring to. Can you enlighten me.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/sports/20556-no-safety-no-overtime-superbowl-bets-out-wizard-what-will-you-do/8/#post422780
The defense is forbidden to score in the NFL on a conversion, but the offense can gain a one-point safety if they tackle the defense in their own endzone. I didn't think this was an NFL rule either until corrected today.
Quote: tringlomanehttps://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/sports/20556-no-safety-no-overtime-superbowl-bets-out-wizard-what-will-you-do/8/#post422780
The defense is forbidden to score in the NFL on a conversion, but the offense can gain a one-point safety if they tackle the defense in their own endzone. I didn't think this was an NFL rule either until corrected today.
Thank you, Tringlomane. I thought the defense could score on a conversion. I stand corrected.
Now, this brings up an interesting issue. If there is such a thing as a 1 point safety and apparently there is, I wonder if there is any kind of stipulation by the sportsbooks (small print) regarding this when it comes to the "safety wager". It wouldn't surprise me.
Quote: kewljHow can there be a safety as a result of a botched extra point? It would have to involve a loss of like 97 or 98 yards on the play? Is that what you are talking about.
In the NFL (and high school, except in Texas and Massachusetts), it can only happen as a result of a technicality. If the ball ends up in, or going out of, the defense's end zone and the defense was responsible for the ball entering the end zone after it was loose, it is a safety against the defense. For example, the ball is knocked out of an offensive player's hand at the 1/2-yard line and it's knocked away from the end zone, but a defender tries to recover it (to prevent the offense from picking it up and scoring) and knocks the ball back toward the end zone, where another defender falls on it. Since the loose ball wasn't headed toward the end zone until a defensive player changed its direction, the defense is considered "responsible" for the ball being in the end zone, and it would be ruled a safety.
Quote: tringlomanehttps://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/sports/20556-no-safety-no-overtime-superbowl-bets-out-wizard-what-will-you-do/8/#post422780
The defense is forbidden to score in the NFL on a conversion, but the offense can gain a one-point safety if they tackle the defense in their own endzone. I didn't think this was an NFL rule either until corrected today.
Not correct... the offence can get a 1 point safety ONLY if the defence bats the ball out of their own endzone. A PAT (or Try as it is the rule book) is over as soon as the defence gains possession.
EDIT : Sorry, ThatDonGuy also points out a recovered fumble and subsequent tackle in the endzone might be a 1 point safety as well, depending on the impetus given before entry into the endzone.
Though I am not sure how you down a defensive player in the end zone for a safety in this instance as the play is over as soon as they recover the ball... so as the ball is dead as soon as they recover, the offence can't down the player for the safety.
Quote: WizardI only caught the very end of the Ravens/Patriots game on the radio and could find it only on a Spanish channel. I didn't understand the commentary very well but they kept mentioning an intentional safety. Obviously, there wasn't a safety, but was there a situation towards the end of the game where one was a viable option?
Yes, Patriots had a 4th down and long on their own 20 or so with 14 seconds left on the clock leading by 4. They could have the punter run around and burn clock and take the safety. A free kick would most likely result in a worse field position for Ravens with only time for one play.
Quote: DRichYes, Patriots had a 4th down and long on their own 20 or so with 14 seconds left on the clock leading by 4. They could have the punter run around and burn clock and take the safety. A free kick would most likely result in a worse field position for Ravens with only time for one play.
Thanks. The Spanish commentators I think agreed with you. The way you frame it, I'm surprised they didn't do that.
Quote: WizardThanks. The Spanish commentators I think agreed with you. The way you frame it, I'm surprised they didn't do that.
They are saving their safety for the Super Bowl ;)
Quote: DRichYes, Patriots had a 4th down and long on their own 20 or so with 14 seconds left on the clock leading by 4. They could have the punter run around and burn clock and take the safety. A free kick would most likely result in a worse field position for Ravens with only time for one play.
I agree. The intentional safety may have avoided a blocked punt or "hail mary" opportunity after the punt, but would have made the lead only 2 points. This would have left the opportunity for a Ravens field goal to win (longshot obviously), but they decided to punt it away.
Quote: KeeneoneI agree. The intentional safety may have avoided a blocked punt or "hail mary" opportunity after the punt, but would have made the lead only 2 points. This would have left the opportunity for a Ravens field goal to win (longshot obviously), but they decided to punt it away.
I couldn't figure out why you don't run the ball and try to get a first down to seal the deal, they took three knees unable to run out the clock!
I don't think there's FG potential, in any case. The intentional safety would have burned at least eight seconds, then you have the Free Kick (unless fair caught) and BAL with no time outs. No matter the scenario, BAL was only getting one play.
(I also offer my condolences to Wizard, Baltimore played a Hell of a good game)
Quote: JohnzimboThey are saving their safety for the Super Bowl ;)
Ouch!
I am halfway considering booking your safety bet for this Super Bowl! :)Quote: WizardOuch!
Quote: Mission146I couldn't figure out why you don't run the ball and try to get a first down to seal the deal, they took three knees unable to run out the clock!
Chance of fumble during handoff/run is >>> chance of fumble in victory formation. Hard to quantify since no victory formation in NFL has ever resulted in a fumble.
Quote: sabreChance of fumble during handoff/run is >>> chance of fumble in victory formation. Hard to quantify since no victory formation in NFL has ever resulted in a fumble.
Is the chance of a fumble during a handoff run > than the chance of a deep pass resulting in a TD (or Pass Interference call which leads to a much shorter play for a potential TD?)
