Closing spread
SF -1
Total
36.5
Model margin
-0.7est.
SF perspective
Push chance
2.1%est.
Win probability
- 49ers
- 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.
- -0.097EPA / play-0.155
- 38.1%Success rate37.7%
- -0.074EPA / dropback-0.120
- -0.128EPA / rush-0.212
- 7.0%Explosive rate5.6%
- 34.7%Third-down rate33.2%
- 58.0%Red-zone TD rate48.7%
- 1.19Points / drive1.10
- 2.5%Turnover rate3.8%
- -0.081EPA / play allowed+0.068
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
SF lead 29–22 since 1999
SF have won 3 straight. Meetings average 45.3 points. SF are 26-24-1 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–SF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ARI | Q1 15:00 | 10 | 15 | Punt | 0–0 |
| SF | Q1 10:22 | 5 | 28 | Punt | 0–0 |
| ARI | Q1 8:03 | 3 | 7 | Punt | 0–0 |
| SF | Q1 6:43 | 5 | 19 | Punt | 0–0 |
| ARI | Q1 3:21 | 8 | 70 | Touchdown | 7–0 |
| SF | Q2 14:54 | 12 | 65 | Field goal | 7–3 |
| ARI | Q2 8:57 | 5 | 0 | Punt | 7–3 |
| SF | Q2 7:20 | 3 | 0 | Punt | 7–3 |
| ARI | Q2 6:33 | 3 | 4 | Punt | 7–3 |
| SF | Q2 4:59 | 1 | -9 | Turnover | 7–3 |
| ARI | Q2 4:51 | 7 | 52 | Touchdown | 14–3 |
| SF | Q2 1:56 | 9 | 58 | Field goal | 14–6 |
| ARI | Q2 0:16 | 0 | 0 | End of half | 14–6 |
| SF | Q3 15:00 | 4 | 25 | Punt | 14–6 |
| ARI | Q3 12:42 | 3 | 1 | Opp touchdown | 14–12 |
| ARI | Q3 11:32 | 6 | 15 | Punt | 14–12 |
| SF | Q3 8:29 | 6 | 29 | Punt | 14–12 |
| ARI | Q3 5:18 | 5 | 13 | Turnover | 14–12 |
| SF | Q3 2:35 | 6 | 41 | Turnover | 14–12 |
| ARI | Q3 0:04 | 7 | 91 | Touchdown | 21–12 |
| SF | Q4 11:47 | 3 | 4 | Punt | 21–12 |
| ARI | Q4 10:30 | 4 | 44 | Touchdown | 28–12 |
| SF | Q4 8:19 | 15 | 80 | Touchdown | 28–20 |
| ARI | Q4 4:35 | 3 | 9 | Punt | 28–20 |
| SF | Q4 2:48 | 8 | 67 | Touchdown | 28–28 |
| ARI | Q4 1:07 | 3 | 1 | Punt | 28–28 |
| SF | Q4 0:16 | 0 | 0 | End of half | 28–28 |
| SF | OT | 8 | 42 | Field goal | 28–31 |
Box score
Individual performances
Cardinals
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Josh McCown | 19/34 | 231 | 3 | 1 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Emmitt Smith | 16 | 63 | 3.9 | 1 |
| Troy Hambrick | 10 | 29 | 2.9 | 0 |
| Josh McCown | 3 | 11 | 3.7 | 0 |
49ers
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tim Rattay | 38/57 | 417 | 2 | 0 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kevan Barlow | 14 | 34 | 2.4 | 0 |
| Tim Rattay | 3 | 14 | 4.7 | 0 |
| Jamal Robertson | 2 | 9 | 4.5 | 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 49ers; negative favour Cardinals.
Half-point at risk
2.14%
outcomes that flip if the line moves 0.5
Model home win
47.1%
Expected total
41.8est.
Model
Where the number comes from
Each component is additive, in points of expected margin.
- Team ratings (opponent-adjusted EPA)-3.28
- Home-field advantage+2.56
- Quarterback adjustment0.00
- Rest differential0.00
- Expected margin-0.72