Closing spread
PIT -3.5
Total
41
Model margin
-1.9est.
CLE perspective
Push chance
None
half-point line — cannot push
Win probability
- Browns
- Steelers
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.
- +0.044EPA / play-0.147
- 44.9%Success rate38.6%
- +0.136EPA / dropback-0.067
- -0.028EPA / rush-0.251
- 10.4%Explosive rate7.6%
- 44.9%Third-down rate29.2%
- 56.0%Red-zone TD rate50.7%
- 1.83Points / drive1.18
- 2.1%Turnover rate3.8%
- -0.133EPA / play allowed-0.002
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
PIT lead 43–14–1 since 1999
Meetings average 39 points. CLE are 26-30-2 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 | PIT–CLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CLE | Q1 15:00 | 3 | 5 | Field goal | 0–3 |
| PIT | Q1 12:34 | 2 | 7 | Turnover | 0–3 |
| CLE | Q1 11:39 | 5 | 25 | Punt | 0–3 |
| PIT | Q1 9:03 | 14 | 88 | Touchdown | 7–3 |
| CLE | Q1 0:41 | 4 | 5 | Punt | 7–3 |
| PIT | Q2 14:12 | 3 | -5 | Punt | 7–3 |
| CLE | Q2 13:17 | 6 | 21 | Punt | 7–3 |
| PIT | Q2 10:21 | 10 | 67 | Touchdown | 14–3 |
| CLE | Q2 4:29 | 5 | 72 | Turnover | 14–3 |
| PIT | Q2 1:52 | 6 | 33 | End of half | 14–3 |
| PIT | Q3 15:00 | 5 | 9 | Punt | 14–3 |
| CLE | Q3 11:52 | 3 | -8 | Punt | 14–3 |
| PIT | Q3 10:21 | 3 | 5 | Punt | 14–3 |
| CLE | Q3 8:50 | 5 | 21 | Punt | 14–3 |
| PIT | Q3 6:13 | 8 | 29 | Punt | 14–3 |
| CLE | Q3 1:27 | 5 | 12 | Turnover | 14–3 |
| PIT | Q4 14:50 | 4 | 22 | Field goal | 17–3 |
| CLE | Q4 12:25 | 5 | 11 | Opp touchdown | 24–3 |
| CLE | Q4 9:14 | 8 | 64 | Touchdown | 24–10 |
| PIT | Q4 6:23 | 5 | 38 | Missed field goal | 24–10 |
| CLE | Q4 3:25 | 2 | 0 | Turnover | 24–10 |
| PIT | Q4 3:16 | 3 | 11 | End of half | 24–10 |
Box score
Individual performances
Steelers
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ben Roethlisberger | 10/16 | 134 | 0 | 1 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jerome Bettis | 29 | 103 | 3.6 | 2 |
| Willie Parker | 8 | 44 | 5.5 | 0 |
| Ben Roethlisberger | 7 | 38 | 5.4 | 0 |
| Dante Brown | 1 | 2 | 2.0 | 0 |
| Hines Ward | 2 | -7 | -3.5 | 0 |
Browns
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jeff Garcia | 7/16 | 110 | 0 | 1 |
| Kelly Holcomb | 5/9 | 64 | 1 | 1 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lee Suggs | 18 | 38 | 2.1 | 0 |
| Jeff Garcia | 4 | 30 | 7.5 | 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 Browns; negative favour Steelers.
Half-point at risk
7.50%
outcomes that flip if the line moves 0.5
Model home win
44.0%
Expected total
41.9est.
Model
Where the number comes from
Each component is additive, in points of expected margin.
- Team ratings (opponent-adjusted EPA)-4.45
- Home-field advantage+2.56
- Quarterback adjustment0.00
- Rest differential0.00
- Expected margin-1.88