2002 · Week 11 · Division
FinalGiants Stadium · outdoors · grass · 42°F · wind 8mph
Closing spread
NYG -3.5
Total
34.5
Model margin
+2.7est.
NYG perspective
Push chance
None
half-point line — cannot push
Win probability
- Giants
- Commanders
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.
- -0.056EPA / play+0.008
- 41.7%Success rate41.7%
- -0.037EPA / dropback+0.151
- -0.083EPA / rush-0.177
- 8.5%Explosive rate9.6%
- 39.7%Third-down rate38.8%
- 57.0%Red-zone TD rate44.5%
- 1.22Points / drive1.46
- 3.3%Turnover rate2.3%
- -0.082EPA / play allowed-0.060
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
NYG lead 32–21–2 since 1999
Meetings average 40.1 points. NYG are 29-24-2 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 | WAS–NYG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WAS | Q1 15:00 | 3 | 8 | Punt | 0–0 |
| NYG | Q1 12:56 | 16 | 64 | Field goal | 0–3 |
| WAS | Q1 6:39 | 3 | 7 | Punt | 0–3 |
| NYG | Q1 5:00 | 3 | 11 | Punt | 0–3 |
| WAS | Q1 3:24 | 11 | 43 | Touchdown | 7–3 |
| NYG | Q2 14:10 | 11 | 22 | Punt | 7–3 |
| WAS | Q2 9:55 | 5 | 13 | Punt | 7–3 |
| NYG | Q2 7:07 | 4 | 6 | Turnover | 7–3 |
| WAS | Q2 5:51 | 3 | -1 | Field goal | 10–3 |
| NYG | Q2 5:01 | 9 | 72 | Touchdown | 10–10 |
| WAS | Q2 1:47 | 5 | 31 | Punt | 10–10 |
| NYG | Q2 0:35 | 1 | -1 | End of half | 10–10 |
| NYG | Q3 15:00 | 2 | 10 | Turnover | 10–10 |
| WAS | Q3 14:14 | 3 | 5 | Punt | 10–10 |
| NYG | Q3 12:49 | 2 | 1 | Turnover | 16–10 |
| WAS | Q3 12:01 | 1 | 11 | Touchdown | 17–10 |
| NYG | Q3 11:53 | 10 | 27 | Punt | 17–10 |
| WAS | Q3 6:57 | 3 | 6 | Punt | 17–10 |
| NYG | Q3 5:12 | 7 | 15 | Field goal | 17–13 |
| WAS | Q3 2:56 | 0 | 0 | Field goal | 17–13 |
| NYG | Q3 2:49 | 4 | 22 | Field goal | 17–16 |
| WAS | Q3 1:32 | 3 | 0 | Turnover | 17–16 |
| NYG | Q3 1:07 | 9 | 30 | Field goal | 17–19 |
| WAS | Q4 11:56 | 4 | 18 | Punt | 17–19 |
| NYG | Q4 10:18 | 5 | 24 | Punt | 17–19 |
| WAS | Q4 7:38 | 12 | 32 | Missed field goal | 17–19 |
| NYG | Q4 3:11 | 3 | 0 | Punt | 17–19 |
| WAS | Q4 2:29 | 4 | -7 | Turnover on downs | 17–19 |
| NYG | Q4 1:53 | 3 | -4 | End of half | 17–19 |
Box score
Individual performances
Commanders
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shane Matthews | 15/35 | 113 | 2 | 1 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stephen Davis | 19 | 59 | 3.1 | 0 |
| Shane Matthews | 1 | 2 | 2.0 | 0 |
| Kenny Watson | 1 | -1 | -1.0 | 0 |
Receiving
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rod Gardner | 5 | 10 | 47 | 1 |
| Willie Jackson | 5 | 8 | 36 | 1 |
| Kenny Watson | 2 | 3 | 17 | 0 |
| Derrius Thompson | 1 | 7 | 8 | 0 |
| Walter Rasby | 1 | 2 | 5 | 0 |
| Stephen Davis | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Chris Doering | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Leonard Stephens | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Zeron Flemister | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
Giants
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kerry Collins | 22/46 | 211 | 1 | 2 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tiki Barber | 24 | 64 | 2.7 | 0 |
| Ron Dayne | 10 | 29 | 2.9 | 0 |
| Kerry Collins | 4 | -5 | -1.3 | 0 |
Receiving
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jeremy Shockey | 11 | 18 | 111 | 0 |
| Amani Toomer | 8 | 15 | 95 | 1 |
| Dan Campbell | 1 | 5 | 7 | 0 |
| Daryl Jones | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 |
| Tiki Barber | 2 | 4 | -2 | 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 Giants; negative favour Commanders.
Half-point at risk
2.54%
outcomes that flip if the line moves 0.5
Model home win
56.2%
Expected total
41.5est.
Model
Where the number comes from
Each component is additive, in points of expected margin.
- Team ratings (opponent-adjusted EPA)+0.09
- Home-field advantage+2.56
- Quarterback adjustment0.00
- Rest differential0.00
- Expected margin+2.66



