Closing spread
CIN -4
Total
40
Model margin
+4.3est.
CIN perspective
Push chance
2.6%est.
the line sits on a key number
Win probability
- Bengals
- Texans
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.
- -0.099EPA / play+0.049
- 38.7%Success rate43.9%
- -0.096EPA / dropback+0.126
- -0.102EPA / rush-0.053
- 9.0%Explosive rate7.6%
- 30.8%Third-down rate44.6%
- 65.8%Red-zone TD rate62.0%
- 1.15Points / drive1.83
- 2.8%Turnover rate1.9%
- +0.041EPA / play allowed+0.077
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
HOU lead 9–6 since 1999
Meetings average 38.1 points. CIN are 6-9 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 | HOU–CIN |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CIN | Q1 15:00 | 13 | 77 | Touchdown | 0–7 |
| HOU | Q1 9:03 | 4 | 17 | Field goal | 3–7 |
| CIN | Q1 6:56 | 4 | 16 | Punt | 3–7 |
| HOU | Q1 5:09 | 5 | 13 | Punt | 3–7 |
| CIN | Q1 3:20 | 5 | 19 | Punt | 3–7 |
| HOU | Q1 1:05 | 3 | 74 | Touchdown | 10–7 |
| CIN | Q2 14:49 | 14 | 74 | Touchdown | 10–14 |
| HOU | Q2 6:47 | 3 | 6 | Punt | 10–14 |
| CIN | Q2 5:14 | 4 | 27 | Field goal | 10–17 |
| HOU | Q2 2:33 | 3 | 8 | Punt | 10–17 |
| CIN | Q2 1:49 | 4 | 5 | Turnover | 10–17 |
| HOU | Q2 1:12 | 6 | 54 | Touchdown | 17–17 |
| CIN | Q2 0:19 | 0 | 0 | End of half | 17–17 |
| HOU | Q3 15:00 | 7 | 78 | Touchdown | 24–17 |
| CIN | Q3 12:31 | 9 | 73 | Touchdown | 24–24 |
| HOU | Q3 8:09 | 14 | 28 | Field goal | 27–24 |
| CIN | Q3 1:47 | 12 | 65 | Touchdown | 27–31 |
| HOU | Q4 10:56 | 3 | -9 | Punt | 27–31 |
| CIN | Q4 9:39 | 15 | 51 | Field goal | 27–34 |
| HOU | Q4 2:32 | 1 | 0 | Turnover | 27–34 |
| CIN | Q4 2:17 | 4 | 17 | End of half | 27–34 |
Box score
Individual performances
Texans
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| David Carr | 11/25 | 146 | 2 | 1 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Domanick Williams | 15 | 104 | 6.9 | 1 |
| David Carr | 2 | 21 | 10.5 | 0 |
| Andre Johnson | 1 | 11 | 11.0 | 0 |
| Tony Hollings | 1 | 4 | 4.0 | 0 |
Bengals
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jon Kitna | 18/26 | 182 | 1 | 1 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rudi Johnson | 43 | 182 | 4.2 | 2 |
| Jon Kitna | 5 | 23 | 4.6 | 0 |
| Peter Warrick | 2 | 23 | 11.5 | 0 |
| Brandon Bennett | 2 | 6 | 3.0 | 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 Bengals; negative favour Texans.
Half-point at risk
2.55%
outcomes that flip if the line moves 0.5
Model home win
60.6%
Expected total
44.9est.
Model
Where the number comes from
Each component is additive, in points of expected margin.
- Team ratings (opponent-adjusted EPA)+1.76
- Home-field advantage+2.56
- Quarterback adjustment0.00
- Rest differential0.00
- Expected margin+4.32