2003 · Week 14 · Division
Final
Giants Stadium · outdoors · fieldturf · 27°F · wind 15mph
Closing spread
NYG -3
Total
36
Model margin
+2.8est.
NYG perspective
Push chance
7.5%est.
the line sits on a key number
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.
- -0.061EPA / play-0.123
- 40.4%Success rate41.7%
- -0.070EPA / dropback-0.087
- -0.048EPA / rush-0.188
- 7.6%Explosive rate8.0%
- 34.4%Third-down rate32.9%
- 60.1%Red-zone TD rate39.7%
- 1.45Points / drive0.93
- 2.5%Turnover rate3.3%
- +0.048EPA / 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
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NYG | Q1 15:00 | 2 | 5 | Turnover | 0–0 |
| WAS | Q1 14:26 | 7 | 2 | Field goal | 3–0 |
| NYG | Q1 10:52 | 10 | 66 | Missed field goal | 3–0 |
| WAS | Q1 7:07 | 3 | -1 | Punt | 3–0 |
| NYG | Q1 5:33 | 7 | 35 | Touchdown | 3–7 |
| WAS | Q1 2:14 | 7 | 29 | Touchdown | 10–7 |
| NYG | Q2 14:02 | 3 | 2 | Punt | 10–7 |
| WAS | Q2 12:59 | 6 | 49 | Missed field goal | 10–7 |
| NYG | Q2 9:19 | 7 | 15 | Punt | 10–7 |
| WAS | Q2 6:02 | 9 | 15 | Punt | 10–7 |
| NYG | Q2 2:16 | 6 | 34 | Turnover | 10–7 |
| WAS | Q2 1:27 | 5 | 15 | End of half | 10–7 |
| WAS | Q3 15:00 | 9 | 80 | Touchdown | 17–7 |
| NYG | Q3 10:04 | 3 | -4 | Punt | 17–7 |
| WAS | Q3 8:04 | 6 | 22 | Punt | 17–7 |
| NYG | Q3 3:50 | 3 | -4 | Punt | 17–7 |
| WAS | Q3 2:33 | 6 | 19 | Punt | 17–7 |
| NYG | Q4 14:44 | 5 | 8 | Turnover | 17–7 |
| WAS | Q4 12:45 | 5 | 16 | Field goal | 20–7 |
| NYG | Q4 10:42 | 11 | 63 | Turnover on downs | 20–7 |
| WAS | Q4 5:53 | 8 | 44 | End of half | 20–7 |
Box score
Individual performances
Commanders
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tim Hasselbeck | 13/19 | 154 | 2 | 0 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trung Canidate | 19 | 69 | 3.6 | 0 |
| Chad Morton | 13 | 56 | 4.3 | 0 |
| Rock Cartwright | 12 | 19 | 1.6 | 0 |
| Laveranues Coles | 1 | 5 | 5.0 | 0 |
| Ladell Betts | 1 | 3 | 3.0 | 0 |
| Tim Hasselbeck | 2 | -2 | -1.0 | 0 |
Giants
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jesse Palmer | 7/11 | 83 | 0 | 0 |
| Kerry Collins | 5/14 | 62 | 0 | 1 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tiki Barber | 16 | 99 | 6.2 | 0 |
| Dorsey Levens | 7 | 21 | 3.0 | 1 |
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
7.52%
outcomes that flip if the line moves 0.5
Model home win
56.5%
Expected total
42.8est.
Model
Where the number comes from
Each component is additive, in points of expected margin.
- Team ratings (opponent-adjusted EPA)-0.70
- Home-field advantage+2.56
- Quarterback adjustment+0.90
- Rest differential0.00
- Expected margin+2.77