Closing spread
CIN -13
Total
44
Model margin
+1.1est.
CIN perspective
Push chance
1.5%est.
Win probability
- Bengals
- Bills
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.
- -0.082EPA / play+0.102
- 39.5%Success rate48.2%
- -0.036EPA / dropback+0.159
- -0.141EPA / rush+0.023
- 7.0%Explosive rate9.1%
- 37.9%Third-down rate43.8%
- 43.1%Red-zone TD rate60.3%
- 1.44Points / drive2.30
- 2.6%Turnover rate1.9%
- +0.069EPA / play allowed+0.010
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
BUF lead 9–6 since 1999
Meetings average 48.3 points. CIN are 8-7 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 | BUF–CIN |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CIN | Q1 15:00 | 3 | 1 | Punt | 0–0 |
| BUF | Q1 13:27 | 4 | 65 | Field goal | 3–0 |
| CIN | Q1 11:44 | 5 | 23 | Turnover | 3–0 |
| BUF | Q1 9:50 | 7 | 47 | Field goal | 6–0 |
| CIN | Q1 5:37 | 0 | 0 | Turnover | 6–0 |
| BUF | Q1 5:37 | 2 | 9 | Turnover | 6–0 |
| CIN | Q1 4:49 | 13 | 69 | Touchdown | 6–7 |
| BUF | Q2 14:29 | 9 | 67 | Touchdown | 13–7 |
| CIN | Q2 9:37 | 5 | 28 | Punt | 13–7 |
| BUF | Q2 6:19 | 4 | -2 | Punt | 13–7 |
| CIN | Q2 4:12 | 7 | 91 | Touchdown | 13–14 |
| BUF | Q2 1:17 | 7 | 26 | Turnover on downs | 13–14 |
| BUF | Q3 15:00 | 5 | 21 | Missed field goal | 13–14 |
| CIN | Q3 11:36 | 12 | 49 | Field goal | 19–17 |
| BUF | Q3 4:09 | 0 | 0 | Touchdown | 20–17 |
| CIN | Q3 3:57 | 6 | 59 | Touchdown | 20–24 |
| BUF | Q3 1:36 | 10 | 56 | Touchdown | 27–24 |
| CIN | Q4 11:29 | 9 | 39 | Field goal | 27–27 |
| BUF | Q4 7:27 | 12 | 66 | Field goal | 30–27 |
| CIN | Q4 0:58 | 2 | 2 | Opp touchdown | 37–27 |
| CIN | Q4 0:35 | 3 | 13 | End of half | 37–27 |
Box score
Individual performances
Bills
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kelly Holcomb | 24/31 | 308 | 1 | 1 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Willis McGahee | 23 | 66 | 2.9 | 0 |
| Kelly Holcomb | 2 | 1 | 0.5 | 1 |
Bengals
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Carson Palmer | 25/36 | 266 | 2 | 2 |
| Jon Kitna | 2/2 | 17 | 0 | 0 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rudi Johnson | 18 | 88 | 4.9 | 0 |
| Carson Palmer | 4 | 14 | 3.5 | 0 |
| Tab Perry | 1 | 2 | 2.0 | 1 |
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 Bills.
Half-point at risk
1.48%
outcomes that flip if the line moves 0.5
Model home win
51.9%
Expected total
46.1est.
Model
Where the number comes from
Each component is additive, in points of expected margin.
- Team ratings (opponent-adjusted EPA)+1.93
- Home-field advantage+2.56
- Quarterback adjustment-3.35
- Rest differential-0.08
- Expected margin+1.06