Closing spread
CHI -4.5
Total
36
Model margin
+4.6est.
CHI perspective
Push chance
None
half-point line — cannot push
Win probability
- Bears
- Cardinals
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.
- -0.154EPA / play-0.100
- 39.4%Success rate38.3%
- -0.108EPA / dropback-0.156
- -0.236EPA / rush-0.016
- 7.0%Explosive rate7.4%
- 37.2%Third-down rate33.9%
- 46.3%Red-zone TD rate54.5%
- 0.93Points / drive1.44
- 3.4%Turnover rate2.6%
- +0.075EPA / play allowed-0.013
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
CHI lead 6–4 since 1999
Meetings average 45.1 points. CHI are 3-6-1 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 | ARI–CHI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ARI | Q1 15:00 | 6 | 21 | Punt | 0–0 |
| CHI | Q1 12:01 | 6 | 96 | Touchdown | 0–7 |
| ARI | Q1 8:50 | 10 | 57 | Field goal | 3–7 |
| CHI | Q1 2:37 | 8 | 36 | Missed field goal | 3–7 |
| ARI | Q2 12:50 | 3 | 8 | Punt | 3–7 |
| CHI | Q2 11:09 | 3 | 9 | Punt | 3–7 |
| ARI | Q2 10:14 | 3 | 9 | Punt | 3–7 |
| CHI | Q2 8:03 | 8 | 15 | Punt | 3–7 |
| ARI | Q2 2:48 | 3 | 8 | Punt | 3–7 |
| CHI | Q2 1:39 | 11 | 61 | End of half | 3–7 |
| CHI | Q3 15:00 | 3 | 5 | Punt | 3–7 |
| ARI | Q3 13:49 | 3 | 3 | Punt | 3–7 |
| CHI | Q3 12:19 | 9 | 44 | Turnover | 3–7 |
| ARI | Q3 7:51 | 3 | 2 | Punt | 3–7 |
| CHI | Q3 6:47 | 5 | 15 | Punt | 3–7 |
| ARI | Q3 4:31 | 5 | 12 | Punt | 3–7 |
| CHI | Q3 2:21 | 7 | 27 | Missed field goal | 3–7 |
| ARI | Q4 14:47 | 1 | 0 | Turnover | 3–7 |
| CHI | Q4 14:38 | 2 | 12 | Touchdown | 3–14 |
| ARI | Q4 13:55 | 3 | 8 | Punt | 3–14 |
| CHI | Q4 12:18 | 8 | 70 | Touchdown | 3–21 |
| ARI | Q4 7:46 | 3 | 15 | Turnover | 3–21 |
| CHI | Q4 6:28 | 6 | 34 | Touchdown | 3–28 |
| ARI | Q4 3:33 | 8 | 54 | Turnover | 3–28 |
| CHI | Q4 0:56 | 0 | 0 | End of half | 3–28 |
Box score
Individual performances
Cardinals
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jeff Blake | 20/32 | 163 | 0 | 2 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Marcel Shipp | 14 | 34 | 2.4 | 0 |
| Jeff Blake | 2 | 8 | 4.0 | 0 |
| Damien Anderson | 1 | 7 | 7.0 | 0 |
| Emmitt Smith | 1 | -3 | -3.0 | 0 |
Bears
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kordell Stewart | 22/37 | 284 | 2 | 0 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Brock Forsey | 27 | 134 | 5.0 | 1 |
| Kordell Stewart | 5 | 26 | 5.2 | 1 |
| Rabih Abdullah | 1 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 |
| Stanley Pritchett | 1 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 |
| Bobby Wade | 1 | -6 | -6.0 | 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 Bears; negative favour Cardinals.
Half-point at risk
1.97%
outcomes that flip if the line moves 0.5
Model home win
61.2%
Expected total
45.0est.
Model
Where the number comes from
Each component is additive, in points of expected margin.
- Team ratings (opponent-adjusted EPA)+2.00
- Home-field advantage+2.56
- Quarterback adjustment0.00
- Rest differential0.00
- Expected margin+4.56