Closing spread
GB -7
Total
44
Model margin
+5.1est.
GB perspective
Push chance
4.9%est.
the line sits on a key number
Win probability
- Packers
- Giants
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.
- -0.028EPA / play+0.110
- 43.5%Success rate46.2%
- -0.017EPA / dropback+0.241
- -0.044EPA / rush-0.085
- 8.2%Explosive rate9.4%
- 29.5%Third-down rate46.7%
- 53.1%Red-zone TD rate66.5%
- 1.65Points / drive2.02
- 2.2%Turnover rate2.6%
- +0.008EPA / play allowed+0.082
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
GB lead 8–7 since 1999
Meetings average 48.5 points. GB are 5-9-1 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 | NYG–GB |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NYG | Q1 15:00 | 6 | 33 | Punt | 0–0 |
| GB | Q1 11:33 | 6 | 11 | Punt | 0–0 |
| NYG | Q1 8:24 | 13 | 66 | Turnover | 0–0 |
| GB | Q1 0:28 | 2 | 30 | Turnover | 0–0 |
| NYG | Q2 14:52 | 5 | 17 | Missed field goal | 0–0 |
| GB | Q2 11:40 | 3 | 8 | Punt | 0–0 |
| NYG | Q2 9:40 | 7 | 36 | Punt | 0–0 |
| GB | Q2 5:44 | 3 | 7 | Punt | 0–0 |
| NYG | Q2 4:20 | 3 | 7 | Punt | 0–0 |
| GB | Q2 2:33 | 9 | 42 | Turnover | 0–0 |
| NYG | Q2 0:21 | 1 | -12 | End of half | 0–0 |
| GB | Q3 15:00 | 11 | 60 | Touchdown | 0–7 |
| NYG | Q3 10:03 | 2 | 61 | Touchdown | 7–7 |
| GB | Q3 9:13 | 10 | 43 | Punt | 7–7 |
| NYG | Q3 5:11 | 3 | 0 | Punt | 7–7 |
| GB | Q3 4:13 | 6 | 32 | Punt | 7–7 |
| NYG | Q3 1:28 | 10 | 103 | Touchdown | 14–7 |
| GB | Q4 12:07 | 4 | 9 | Punt | 14–7 |
| NYG | Q4 10:52 | 11 | 66 | Missed field goal | 14–7 |
| GB | Q4 3:47 | 5 | 15 | Turnover | 14–7 |
| NYG | Q4 2:25 | 6 | 26 | Missed field goal | 14–7 |
| GB | Q4 0:25 | 3 | 44 | End of half | 14–7 |
Box score
Individual performances
Giants
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kurt Warner | 20/26 | 187 | 1 | 1 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tiki Barber | 23 | 182 | 7.9 | 1 |
| Ron Dayne | 9 | 26 | 2.9 | 0 |
| Kurt Warner | 2 | 22 | 11.0 | 0 |
| Tim Carter | 1 | 15 | 15.0 | 0 |
Packers
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Brett Favre | 12/18 | 110 | 1 | 1 |
| Doug Pederson | 7/17 | 86 | 0 | 1 |
| Craig Nall | 1/1 | 24 | 0 | 0 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ahman Green | 15 | 58 | 3.9 | 0 |
| Doug Pederson | 2 | 15 | 7.5 | 0 |
| Nicolas Luchey | 1 | 4 | 4.0 | 0 |
| Antonio Chatman | 1 | 4 | 4.0 | 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 Packers; negative favour Giants.
Half-point at risk
4.94%
outcomes that flip if the line moves 0.5
Model home win
62.5%
Expected total
46.0est.
Model
Where the number comes from
Each component is additive, in points of expected margin.
- Team ratings (opponent-adjusted EPA)+2.49
- Home-field advantage+2.56
- Quarterback adjustment0.00
- Rest differential0.00
- Expected margin+5.06