2005 · Week 12
Final
Raymond James Stadium · outdoors · grass · 76°F · wind 10mph
Closing spread
TB -3
Total
33
Model margin
+2.8est.
TB perspective
Push chance
7.5%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.
- -0.138EPA / play-0.066
- 37.0%Success rate39.7%
- -0.147EPA / dropback-0.064
- -0.129EPA / rush-0.068
- 8.0%Explosive rate6.8%
- 28.3%Third-down rate38.9%
- 49.7%Red-zone TD rate57.3%
- 1.08Points / drive1.36
- 2.6%Turnover rate2.2%
- -0.167EPA / play allowed-0.097
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CHI | Q1 15:00 | 3 | 2 | Punt | 0–0 |
| TB | Q1 13:21 | 3 | -6 | Turnover | 6–0 |
| CHI | Q1 11:56 | 1 | 1 | Touchdown | 7–0 |
| TB | Q1 11:50 | 4 | 13 | Punt | 7–0 |
| CHI | Q1 9:57 | 6 | 8 | Punt | 7–0 |
| TB | Q1 6:44 | 7 | 56 | Field goal | 7–3 |
| CHI | Q1 2:12 | 3 | 1 | Punt | 7–3 |
| TB | Q1 1:12 | 6 | 41 | Punt | 7–3 |
| CHI | Q2 13:14 | 9 | 35 | Punt | 7–3 |
| TB | Q2 8:09 | 5 | 27 | Punt | 7–3 |
| CHI | Q2 5:42 | 7 | 32 | Turnover | 7–3 |
| TB | Q2 1:58 | 3 | 5 | Punt | 7–3 |
| CHI | Q2 1:26 | 9 | 35 | Field goal | 10–3 |
| TB | Q2 0:17 | 0 | 0 | End of half | 10–3 |
| TB | Q3 15:00 | 3 | -3 | Punt | 10–3 |
| CHI | Q3 13:02 | 5 | 10 | Punt | 10–3 |
| TB | Q3 10:18 | 3 | 16 | Punt | 10–3 |
| CHI | Q3 9:12 | 8 | 70 | Field goal | 13–3 |
| TB | Q3 3:47 | 7 | 28 | Punt | 13–3 |
| CHI | Q4 15:00 | 3 | 7 | Punt | 13–3 |
| TB | Q4 13:28 | 11 | 50 | Touchdown | 13–10 |
| CHI | Q4 7:00 | 4 | 24 | Punt | 13–10 |
| TB | Q4 5:06 | 6 | 58 | Missed field goal | 13–10 |
| CHI | Q4 2:47 | 5 | 14 | Punt | 13–10 |
| TB | Q4 0:15 | 1 | -9 | End of half | 13–10 |
Box score
Individual performances
Bears
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kyle Orton | 14/28 | 134 | 1 | 1 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thomas Jones | 25 | 72 | 2.9 | 0 |
| Adrian Peterson | 5 | 27 | 5.4 | 0 |
| Kyle Orton | 3 | 19 | 6.3 | 0 |
Buccaneers
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chris Simms | 19/30 | 202 | 0 | 0 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cadillac Williams | 20 | 84 | 4.2 | 0 |
| Michael Pittman | 1 | 16 | 16.0 | 0 |
| Chris Simms | 1 | -1 | -1.0 | 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
7.52%
outcomes that flip if the line moves 0.5
Model home win
56.7%
Expected total
41.3est.
Model
Where the number comes from
Each component is additive, in points of expected margin.
- Team ratings (opponent-adjusted EPA)+0.27
- Home-field advantage+2.56
- Quarterback adjustment0.00
- Rest differential0.00
- Expected margin+2.84