2004 · Week 7
Final
Raymond James Stadium · outdoors · grass · 80°F · wind 7mph
Closing spread
TB -7
Total
32
Model margin
+4.9est.
TB perspective
Push chance
4.9%est.
the line sits on a key number
Win probability
- Buccaneers
- Bears
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.
- -0.240EPA / play-0.072
- 35.2%Success rate42.6%
- -0.283EPA / dropback+0.008
- -0.177EPA / rush-0.203
- 6.8%Explosive rate8.5%
- 25.7%Third-down rate37.9%
- 43.9%Red-zone TD rate58.7%
- 0.78Points / drive1.25
- 3.4%Turnover rate3.6%
- -0.102EPA / play allowed-0.089
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
All square 10–10 since 1999
TB have won 2 straight. Meetings average 37.4 points. TB are 10-10 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 | CHI–TB |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TB | Q1 15:00 | 3 | 2 | Punt | 0–0 |
| CHI | Q1 13:01 | 4 | 6 | Punt | 0–0 |
| TB | Q1 10:53 | 5 | 29 | Punt | 0–0 |
| CHI | Q1 8:44 | 8 | 35 | Punt | 0–0 |
| TB | Q1 3:46 | 9 | 78 | Field goal | 0–3 |
| CHI | Q2 13:25 | 6 | 22 | Punt | 0–3 |
| TB | Q2 8:43 | 17 | 103 | Touchdown | 0–10 |
| CHI | Q2 0:48 | 3 | 0 | Punt | 0–10 |
| TB | Q2 0:14 | 1 | -1 | End of half | 0–10 |
| CHI | Q3 15:00 | 0 | 0 | Field goal | 0–10 |
| TB | Q3 14:51 | 5 | 40 | Field goal | 0–13 |
| CHI | Q3 12:23 | 6 | 31 | Punt | 0–13 |
| TB | Q3 7:45 | 2 | 5 | Turnover | 0–13 |
| CHI | Q3 7:02 | 6 | 31 | Touchdown | 7–13 |
| TB | Q3 3:45 | 2 | -3 | Turnover | 7–13 |
| CHI | Q3 2:45 | 4 | -5 | Punt | 7–13 |
| TB | Q3 1:13 | 9 | 27 | Punt | 7–13 |
| CHI | Q4 11:19 | 2 | 4 | Turnover | 7–13 |
| TB | Q4 10:26 | 3 | 11 | Touchdown | 7–19 |
| CHI | Q4 8:52 | 3 | -9 | Punt | 7–19 |
| TB | Q4 7:08 | 3 | 3 | Punt | 7–19 |
| CHI | Q4 4:51 | 10 | 46 | Turnover on downs | 7–19 |
| TB | Q4 2:06 | 3 | 0 | Punt | 7–19 |
| CHI | Q4 1:34 | 4 | 6 | Turnover on downs | 7–19 |
| TB | Q4 1:05 | 0 | 0 | End of half | 7–19 |
Box score
Individual performances
Bears
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Craig Krenzel | 9/19 | 69 | 0 | 1 |
| Jonathan Quinn | 5/9 | 47 | 0 | 0 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thomas Jones | 13 | 52 | 4.0 | 1 |
| Anthony Thomas | 5 | 17 | 3.4 | 0 |
| Craig Krenzel | 1 | 4 | 4.0 | 0 |
| Jonathan Quinn | 1 | 3 | 3.0 | 0 |
Buccaneers
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Brian Griese | 15/23 | 163 | 1 | 0 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Michael Pittman | 23 | 109 | 4.7 | 1 |
| Jamel White | 4 | 5 | 1.3 | 0 |
| Brian Griese | 2 | -1 | -0.5 | 0 |
| Michael Clayton | 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 Buccaneers; negative favour Bears.
Half-point at risk
4.93%
outcomes that flip if the line moves 0.5
Model home win
62.1%
Expected total
42.4est.
Model
Where the number comes from
Each component is additive, in points of expected margin.
- Team ratings (opponent-adjusted EPA)+2.15
- Home-field advantage+2.56
- Quarterback adjustment+0.26
- Rest differential-0.08
- Expected margin+4.89