1999 · Week 4

Final

Rams

St. Louis

QB Kurt Warner

38·10

Bengals

Cincinnati

QB Jeff Blake

Cinergy Field · outdoors · astroturf · 62°F · wind 0mph

Closing spread

STL -3.5

Total

44

Model margin

+1.4est.

CIN perspective

Push chance

None

half-point line — cannot push

Win probability

  • Bengals
  • Rams

How each play moved the game.

Bengals winsRams wins

Matchup

Where the edges are

Season-long league percentiles for both sides, mirrored. The saturated side of a lopsided row holds the edge.

The rivalry

All square 4–4 since 1999

Meetings average 37.1 points. CIN are 2-4-2 ATS in the series.

Previous meetings
SeasonMatchupScoreWinner
2023 · W3LA @ CIN16–19CIN
2021 · playoffsLA @ CIN23–20RAMS
2019 · W8CIN @ LA10–24RAMS
2015 · W12STL @ CIN7–31CIN
2011 · W15CIN @ STL20–13CIN
2007 · W14STL @ CIN10–19CIN
2003 · W16CIN @ STL10–27RAMS

Possession by possession

How it unfolded

Every drive: who had the ball, how far it went, how it ended, and the score as it settled.

Drive-by-drive log
BallStartPlaysYardsResultSTL–CIN
LAQ1 15:0030Punt0–0
CINQ1 13:541255Field goal0–3
LAQ1 8:05676Touchdown7–3
CINQ1 5:3538Punt7–3
LAQ1 3:1410Turnover7–3
CINQ1 3:0830Punt7–3
LAQ1 1:37991Touchdown14–3
CINQ2 11:3848Punt14–3
LAQ2 9:14534Turnover14–3
CINQ2 6:48735Punt14–3
LAQ2 4:26361Touchdown21–3
CINQ2 3:05843Missed field goal21–3
LAQ2 0:301-7End of half21–3
CINQ3 15:003-7Opp touchdown28–3
LAQ3 12:5900Opp touchdown28–3
CINQ3 12:5935Punt28–3
LAQ3 11:45618Punt28–3
CINQ3 8:30730Turnover28–3
LAQ3 5:48567Touchdown35–3
CINQ3 2:3236Punt35–3
LAQ3 0:56846Field goal38–3
CINQ4 10:4232Punt38–3
LAQ4 9:3437Punt38–3
CINQ4 7:171370Touchdown38–10
LAQ4 2:2646Punt38–10
CINQ4 0:1912End of half38–10

Box score

Individual performances

Bengals

Passing

PlayerC/AttYdsTDINT
Jeff Blake12/2311400
Akili Smith7/187701

Rushing

PlayerCarYdsAvgTD
Corey Dillon15392.60
Michael Basnight6274.50
Jeff Blake2147.00
Akili Smith3124.01

Where this game is likely to land

  • Model
  • Smooth (normal)
  • Betting line

Probability of each final margin. Football scoring clusters — the spikes at 3 and 7 are real, and a smooth model misses them.

line -3.54.2%2.8%7.2%7.5%3.0%4.6%2.9%

Positive margins favour Bengals; negative favour Rams.

Half-point at risk

7.16%

outcomes that flip if the line moves 0.5

Model home win

52.9%

Expected total

45.0est.

Model

Where the number comes from

Each component is additive, in points of expected margin.

  • Team ratings (opponent-adjusted EPA)-1.13
  • Home-field advantage+2.56
  • Quarterback adjustment0.00
  • Rest differential0.00
  • Expected margin+1.43

One or both ratings are carry-over priors — no games have been played this season yet, so treat this as a starting assumption rather than a read.