Closing spread
HOU -3
Total
36.5
Model margin
+2.8est.
HOU perspective
Push chance
7.5%est.
the line sits on a key number
Win probability
- Texans
- 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.
- -0.089EPA / play-0.062
- 41.6%Success rate43.2%
- -0.033EPA / dropback-0.069
- -0.157EPA / rush-0.052
- 7.4%Explosive rate6.8%
- +3.28CPOE+4.14
- 30.9%Third-down rate38.7%
- 58.9%Red-zone TD rate64.6%
- 1.31Points / drive1.41
- 2.9%Turnover rate2.4%
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
HOU lead 8–6 since 1999
Meetings average 41.4 points. HOU are 7-6-1 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–HOU |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HOU | Q1 15:00 | 3 | 24 | Turnover | 0–0 |
| BUF | Q1 13:34 | 3 | 87 | Touchdown | 7–0 |
| HOU | Q1 12:21 | 7 | 43 | Punt | 7–0 |
| BUF | Q1 8:35 | 4 | 97 | Touchdown | 14–0 |
| HOU | Q1 6:35 | 7 | 80 | Touchdown | 14–7 |
| BUF | Q1 3:02 | 12 | 46 | Field goal | 17–7 |
| HOU | Q2 12:13 | 11 | 75 | Touchdown | 17–14 |
| BUF | Q2 6:01 | 3 | 8 | Punt | 17–14 |
| HOU | Q2 4:26 | 7 | 66 | Turnover | 17–14 |
| BUF | Q2 1:00 | 3 | 8 | Punt | 17–14 |
| HOU | Q2 0:12 | 2 | 1 | End of half | 17–14 |
| BUF | Q3 15:00 | 6 | 24 | Punt | 17–14 |
| HOU | Q3 11:16 | 4 | 28 | Punt | 17–14 |
| BUF | Q3 8:25 | 3 | 1 | Opp touchdown | 17–21 |
| BUF | Q3 7:02 | 7 | 32 | Punt | 17–21 |
| HOU | Q3 3:15 | 9 | 50 | Punt | 17–21 |
| BUF | Q4 13:08 | 5 | 24 | Punt | 17–21 |
| HOU | Q4 10:30 | 3 | 3 | Punt | 17–21 |
| BUF | Q4 8:31 | 6 | 15 | Punt | 17–21 |
| HOU | Q4 6:27 | 6 | 19 | Punt | 17–21 |
| BUF | Q4 3:16 | 3 | 6 | Punt | 17–21 |
| HOU | Q4 2:17 | 3 | 8 | Punt | 17–21 |
| BUF | Q4 1:44 | 6 | 55 | Touchdown | 24–21 |
| HOU | Q4 0:09 | 0 | 0 | End of half | 24–21 |
Box score
Individual performances
Bills
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| J.P. Losman | 26/38 | 340 | 3 | 1 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anthony Thomas | 19 | 56 | 2.9 | 0 |
| J.P. Losman | 2 | 14 | 7.0 | 0 |
Texans
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| David Carr | 25/30 | 223 | 0 | 1 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Samkon Gado | 10 | 69 | 6.9 | 1 |
| Wali Lundy | 8 | 61 | 7.6 | 1 |
| David Carr | 6 | 31 | 5.2 | 0 |
| Andre Johnson | 1 | 18 | 18.0 | 0 |
| Eric Moulds | 1 | 6 | 6.0 | 0 |
| Kevin Walter | 1 | 3 | 3.0 | 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 Texans; negative favour Bills.
Half-point at risk
7.52%
outcomes that flip if the line moves 0.5
Model home win
56.6%
Expected total
43.7est.
Model
Where the number comes from
Each component is additive, in points of expected margin.
- Team ratings (opponent-adjusted EPA)+0.24
- Home-field advantage+2.56
- Quarterback adjustment0.00
- Rest differential0.00
- Expected margin+2.80