Closing spread
BUF -7
Total
39.5
Model margin
+4.8est.
BUF perspective
Push chance
4.9%est.
the line sits on a key number
Win probability
- Bills
- Bears
How each play moved the game.
Matchup
Where the edges are
Season-long league percentiles for both sides, mirrored. The saturated side of a lopsided row holds the edge.
- -0.144EPA / play-0.059
- 38.4%Success rate39.9%
- -0.138EPA / dropback+0.029
- -0.156EPA / rush-0.203
- 6.1%Explosive rate8.5%
- 29.8%Third-down rate38.0%
- 35.6%Red-zone TD rate49.2%
- 0.80Points / drive1.36
- 2.7%Turnover rate1.8%
- -0.018EPA / play allowed-0.083
Bar length is league percentile, already oriented so longer is better. The saturated side of a lopsided row holds the edge; rows within ~12 points are washed as even.
The rivalry
BUF lead 4–3 since 1999
Meetings average 44.6 points. BUF are 4-2-1 ATS in the series.
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.
| Ball | Start | Plays | Yards | Result | CHI–BUF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CHI | Q1 15:00 | 3 | 3 | Punt | 0–0 |
| BUF | Q1 13:22 | 9 | 31 | Turnover on downs | 0–0 |
| CHI | Q1 8:08 | 3 | 6 | Punt | 0–0 |
| BUF | Q1 6:18 | 5 | 20 | Punt | 0–0 |
| CHI | Q1 3:41 | 3 | -1 | Punt | 0–0 |
| BUF | Q1 2:36 | 5 | 58 | — | 0–0 |
| BUF | Q2 | 0 | 0 | Field goal | 0–0 |
| BUF | Q2 15:00 | 2 | -2 | Field goal | 0–3 |
| CHI | Q2 13:36 | 5 | 12 | Punt | 0–3 |
| BUF | Q2 10:36 | 3 | -1 | Punt | 0–3 |
| CHI | Q2 9:31 | 9 | 37 | Field goal | 3–3 |
| BUF | Q2 4:56 | 7 | 54 | Field goal | 3–6 |
| CHI | Q2 1:01 | 4 | 31 | End of half | 3–6 |
| BUF | Q3 | 14 | 75 | Touchdown | 3–13 |
| CHI | Q3 6:57 | 3 | 7 | Punt | 3–13 |
| BUF | Q3 5:11 | 4 | 38 | Turnover | 3–13 |
| CHI | Q3 3:22 | 5 | 17 | Turnover | 3–13 |
| BUF | Q3 0:54 | 2 | 12 | — | 3–13 |
| BUF | Q4 | 0 | 0 | Missed field goal | 3–13 |
| BUF | Q4 15:00 | 3 | 8 | Missed field goal | 3–13 |
| CHI | Q4 12:41 | 3 | 9 | Punt | 3–13 |
| BUF | Q4 10:55 | 3 | 5 | Punt | 3–13 |
| CHI | Q4 9:50 | 6 | 41 | Turnover | 3–13 |
| BUF | Q4 7:31 | 3 | 2 | Punt | 3–13 |
| CHI | Q4 5:15 | 4 | 8 | Punt | 3–13 |
| BUF | Q4 4:22 | 3 | 3 | Punt | 3–13 |
| CHI | Q4 3:56 | 7 | 40 | Opp touchdown | 3–20 |
| BUF | Q4 2:40 | 0 | 0 | Opp touchdown | 3–20 |
| CHI | Q4 2:40 | 6 | 24 | Turnover | 3–20 |
| BUF | Q4 1:33 | 3 | -4 | End of half | 3–20 |
Box score
Individual performances
Bears
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shane Matthews | 11/24 | 106 | 0 | 3 |
| Jim Miller | 9/13 | 40 | 0 | 0 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| James Allen | 16 | 87 | 5.4 | 0 |
| Curtis Enis | 3 | 5 | 1.7 | 0 |
| Shane Matthews | 1 | 5 | 5.0 | 0 |
| Jim Miller | 1 | 2 | 2.0 | 0 |
Receiving
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Eddie Kennison | 6 | 12 | 55 | 0 |
| Marcus Robinson | 5 | 7 | 37 | 0 |
| Marty Booker | 4 | 4 | 17 | 0 |
| James Allen | 1 | 2 | 12 | 0 |
| Kaseem Sinceno | 2 | 3 | 12 | 0 |
| Macey Brooks | 1 | 4 | 9 | 0 |
| Scott Dragos | 1 | 1 | 4 | 0 |
Bills
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Doug Flutie | 16/26 | 171 | 0 | 1 |
| Rob Johnson | 2/3 | 29 | 0 | 0 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sammy Morris | 10 | 30 | 3.0 | 0 |
| Antowain Smith | 13 | 29 | 2.2 | 0 |
| Shawn Bryson | 5 | 21 | 4.2 | 0 |
| Rob Johnson | 1 | 19 | 19.0 | 0 |
| Doug Flutie | 6 | 6 | 1.0 | 1 |
Receiving
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Eric Moulds | 5 | 8 | 91 | 0 |
| Sammy Morris | 4 | 4 | 32 | 0 |
| Peerless Price | 2 | 5 | 26 | 0 |
| Jeremy McDaniel | 1 | 1 | 24 | 0 |
| Shawn Bryson | 4 | 4 | 11 | 0 |
| Antowain Smith | 1 | 2 | 9 | 0 |
| Jay Riemersma | 1 | 3 | 7 | 0 |
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.
Positive margins favour Bills; negative favour Bears.
Half-point at risk
4.93%
outcomes that flip if the line moves 0.5
Model home win
61.9%
Expected total
44.2est.
Model
Where the number comes from
Each component is additive, in points of expected margin.
- Team ratings (opponent-adjusted EPA)+2.45
- Home-field advantage+2.56
- Quarterback adjustment-0.21
- Rest differential0.00
- Expected margin+4.81



