2004 · Week 9
Final
Ford Field · dome · fieldturf
Closing spread
DET -3.5
Total
37
Model margin
+5.2est.
DET perspective
Push chance
None
half-point line — cannot push
Win probability
- Lions
- 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.
- -0.121EPA / play-0.071
- 38.9%Success rate39.8%
- -0.102EPA / dropback-0.086
- -0.145EPA / rush-0.046
- 6.6%Explosive rate9.0%
- 31.9%Third-down rate32.3%
- 56.8%Red-zone TD rate51.0%
- 1.03Points / drive1.23
- 2.5%Turnover rate1.9%
- -0.104EPA / 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
DET lead 9–6 since 1999
Meetings average 46.5 points. DET are 9-6 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–DET |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DET | Q1 15:00 | 6 | 18 | Punt | 0–0 |
| WAS | Q1 12:26 | 5 | 30 | Punt | 0–0 |
| DET | Q1 10:18 | 8 | 26 | Punt | 0–0 |
| WAS | Q1 6:00 | 8 | 27 | Punt | 0–0 |
| DET | Q1 2:18 | 9 | 24 | Punt | 0–0 |
| WAS | Q2 13:58 | 3 | 2 | Punt | 0–0 |
| DET | Q2 13:07 | 6 | 11 | Punt | 0–0 |
| WAS | Q2 10:45 | 10 | 41 | Field goal | 3–0 |
| DET | Q2 4:35 | 3 | -2 | Punt | 3–0 |
| WAS | Q2 2:46 | 3 | 9 | Punt | 3–0 |
| DET | Q2 1:44 | 3 | -2 | Punt | 3–0 |
| WAS | Q2 1:20 | 4 | 11 | Punt | 3–0 |
| DET | Q2 0:43 | 6 | 45 | Field goal | 3–3 |
| WAS | Q2 0:03 | 0 | 0 | End of half | 3–3 |
| WAS | Q3 15:00 | 7 | 66 | Touchdown | 10–3 |
| DET | Q3 10:25 | 3 | 5 | Punt | 10–3 |
| WAS | Q3 8:37 | 3 | 10 | Punt | 10–3 |
| DET | Q3 6:13 | 3 | 8 | Opp touchdown | 17–3 |
| DET | Q3 4:32 | 3 | 3 | Punt | 17–3 |
| WAS | Q3 3:16 | 5 | 19 | Missed field goal | 17–3 |
| DET | Q3 0:18 | 3 | 6 | Punt | 17–3 |
| WAS | Q4 14:44 | 5 | 10 | Punt | 17–3 |
| DET | Q4 11:03 | 10 | 36 | Turnover | 17–3 |
| WAS | Q4 6:25 | 3 | 5 | Punt | 17–3 |
| DET | Q4 4:37 | 8 | 66 | Touchdown | 17–10 |
| WAS | Q4 2:08 | 3 | -1 | Punt | 17–10 |
| DET | Q4 1:36 | 8 | 78 | End of half | 17–10 |
Box score
Individual performances
Commanders
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mark Brunell | 6/17 | 58 | 0 | 0 |
| Clinton Portis | 1/1 | 15 | 1 | 0 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clinton Portis | 34 | 147 | 4.3 | 0 |
| Ladell Betts | 5 | 19 | 3.8 | 0 |
| Rod Gardner | 1 | -10 | -10.0 | 0 |
Lions
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Joey Harrington | 26/52 | 269 | 1 | 1 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shawn Bryson | 6 | 21 | 3.5 | 0 |
| Kevin Jones | 12 | 20 | 1.7 | 0 |
| Joey Harrington | 2 | 14 | 7.0 | 0 |
| Artose Pinner | 2 | 7 | 3.5 | 0 |
| Az-Zahir Hakim | 1 | 0 | 0.0 | 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 Lions; negative favour Commanders.
Half-point at risk
2.54%
outcomes that flip if the line moves 0.5
Model home win
62.8%
Expected total
44.3est.
Model
Where the number comes from
Each component is additive, in points of expected margin.
- Team ratings (opponent-adjusted EPA)-1.09
- Home-field advantage+2.56
- Quarterback adjustment+3.70
- Rest differential0.00
- Expected margin+5.17