Closing spread
CHI -3.5
Total
37.5
Model margin
+3.7est.
CHI perspective
Push chance
None
half-point line — cannot push
Win probability
- Bears
- Seahawks
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.
- -0.075EPA / play-0.046
- 40.2%Success rate40.3%
- -0.031EPA / dropback-0.039
- -0.130EPA / rush-0.054
- 8.2%Explosive rate9.4%
- -1.93CPOE-3.50
- 37.5%Third-down rate37.7%
- 55.0%Red-zone TD rate50.6%
- 1.49Points / drive1.80
- 3.2%Turnover rate3.0%
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
SEA lead 8–6 since 1999
Meetings average 41.3 points. CHI are 8-6 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 | SEA–CHI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CHI | Q1 15:00 | 12 | 80 | Touchdown | 0–7 |
| SEA | Q1 8:35 | 3 | 9 | Punt | 0–7 |
| CHI | Q1 7:03 | 6 | 22 | Punt | 0–7 |
| SEA | Q1 3:48 | 9 | 71 | Touchdown | 7–7 |
| CHI | Q2 14:54 | 1 | 68 | Touchdown | 7–14 |
| SEA | Q2 14:36 | 3 | 3 | Punt | 7–14 |
| CHI | Q2 12:59 | 4 | 14 | Punt | 7–14 |
| SEA | Q2 11:29 | 4 | 15 | Punt | 7–14 |
| CHI | Q2 9:15 | 5 | 17 | Punt | 7–14 |
| SEA | Q2 7:08 | 3 | 8 | Punt | 7–14 |
| CHI | Q2 5:42 | 3 | -16 | Turnover | 7–14 |
| SEA | Q2 4:19 | 5 | 26 | Touchdown | 14–14 |
| CHI | Q2 2:29 | 7 | 57 | Touchdown | 14–21 |
| SEA | Q2 0:48 | 2 | 5 | End of half | 14–21 |
| SEA | Q3 15:00 | 8 | 49 | Field goal | 17–21 |
| CHI | Q3 9:56 | 5 | -9 | Punt | 17–21 |
| SEA | Q3 7:22 | 7 | 56 | Touchdown | 24–21 |
| CHI | Q3 4:57 | 11 | 52 | Turnover | 24–21 |
| SEA | Q4 13:31 | 1 | 0 | Turnover | 24–21 |
| CHI | Q4 13:19 | 3 | 1 | Punt | 24–21 |
| SEA | Q4 12:26 | 3 | 3 | Punt | 24–21 |
| CHI | Q4 10:15 | 11 | 48 | Field goal | 24–24 |
| SEA | Q4 4:24 | 5 | 17 | Turnover on downs | 24–24 |
| CHI | Q4 1:59 | 3 | 3 | Punt | 24–24 |
| SEA | Q4 1:38 | 9 | 26 | Turnover on downs | 24–24 |
| SEA | OT | 4 | 18 | Punt | 24–24 |
| CHI | OT | 6 | 34 | Field goal | 24–27 |
Box score
Individual performances
Seahawks
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Matt Hasselbeck | 18/33 | 195 | 1 | 1 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shaun Alexander | 26 | 108 | 4.2 | 2 |
| Maurice Morris | 4 | 11 | 2.8 | 0 |
| Matt Hasselbeck | 1 | 8 | 8.0 | 0 |
Bears
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rex Grossman | 21/38 | 282 | 1 | 1 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thomas Jones | 21 | 66 | 3.1 | 2 |
| Cedric Benson | 12 | 45 | 3.8 | 0 |
| Rashied Davis | 1 | 9 | 9.0 | 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 Bears; negative favour Seahawks.
Half-point at risk
2.55%
outcomes that flip if the line moves 0.5
Model home win
58.9%
Expected total
41.9est.
Model
Where the number comes from
Each component is additive, in points of expected margin.
- Team ratings (opponent-adjusted EPA)+0.65
- Home-field advantage+2.56
- Quarterback adjustment0.00
- Rest differential+0.48
- Expected margin+3.69