Closing spread
CIN -6.5
Total
46.5
Model margin
+7.9est.
CIN perspective
Push chance
None
half-point line — cannot push
Win probability
- Bengals
- 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-0.059
- 43.5%Success rate43.2%
- -0.017EPA / dropback-0.020
- -0.044EPA / rush-0.114
- 8.2%Explosive rate8.8%
- 29.5%Third-down rate40.8%
- 53.1%Red-zone TD rate53.2%
- 1.65Points / drive1.40
- 2.2%Turnover rate3.1%
- +0.008EPA / play allowed-0.048
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 3–3 since 1999
Meetings average 39.8 points. CIN are 4-2 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 | NYG–CIN |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NYG | Q1 15:00 | 6 | 22 | Punt | 0–0 |
| CIN | Q1 11:42 | 3 | 9 | Punt | 0–0 |
| NYG | Q1 9:48 | 3 | 4 | Punt | 0–0 |
| CIN | Q1 8:54 | 7 | 46 | Touchdown | 0–7 |
| NYG | Q1 5:26 | 4 | 13 | Punt | 0–7 |
| CIN | Q1 4:07 | 3 | -1 | Punt | 0–7 |
| NYG | Q1 2:40 | 11 | 57 | Touchdown | 7–7 |
| CIN | Q2 12:49 | 6 | 31 | Field goal | 7–10 |
| NYG | Q2 9:46 | 8 | 59 | Field goal | 10–10 |
| CIN | Q2 5:22 | 7 | 3 | Turnover | 10–10 |
| NYG | Q2 3:13 | 9 | 49 | Field goal | 13–10 |
| CIN | Q3 15:00 | 8 | 16 | Turnover on downs | 13–10 |
| NYG | Q3 11:21 | 7 | 34 | Field goal | 16–10 |
| CIN | Q3 7:36 | 10 | 58 | Touchdown | 16–17 |
| NYG | Q3 1:21 | 8 | 49 | Field goal | 19–17 |
| CIN | Q4 12:38 | 8 | 42 | Turnover | 19–17 |
| NYG | Q4 8:20 | 5 | 23 | Field goal | 22–17 |
| CIN | Q4 5:15 | 3 | 6 | Punt | 22–17 |
| NYG | Q4 4:03 | 5 | 16 | Punt | 22–17 |
| CIN | Q4 2:05 | 6 | 24 | Touchdown | 22–23 |
| NYG | Q4 0:44 | 1 | 0 | Turnover | 22–23 |
| CIN | Q4 0:28 | 0 | 0 | End of half | 22–23 |
Box score
Individual performances
Giants
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Eli Manning | 19/37 | 201 | 0 | 1 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tiki Barber | 22 | 109 | 5.0 | 1 |
| Ron Dayne | 6 | 33 | 5.5 | 0 |
Bengals
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jon Kitna | 20/32 | 186 | 2 | 1 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rudi Johnson | 19 | 31 | 1.6 | 1 |
| Jon Kitna | 2 | 14 | 7.0 | 0 |
| Kenny Watson | 2 | 7 | 3.5 | 0 |
| T.J. Houshmandzadeh | 1 | 7 | 7.0 | 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 Bengals; negative favour Giants.
Half-point at risk
4.98%
outcomes that flip if the line moves 0.5
Model home win
69.6%
Expected total
43.4est.
Model
Where the number comes from
Each component is additive, in points of expected margin.
- Team ratings (opponent-adjusted EPA)+1.04
- Home-field advantage+2.56
- Quarterback adjustment+4.39
- Rest differential-0.08
- Expected margin+7.91