Closing spread
CIN -1
Total
44
Model margin
+0.2est.
BUF perspective
Push chance
2.2%est.
Win probability
- Bills
- Bengals
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.
- +0.024EPA / play-0.125
- 46.0%Success rate38.9%
- +0.100EPA / dropback-0.137
- -0.091EPA / rush-0.112
- 7.9%Explosive rate7.6%
- +5.31CPOE-1.62
- 45.6%Third-down rate33.2%
- 51.6%Red-zone TD rate50.7%
- 1.86Points / drive1.13
- 2.6%Turnover rate2.2%
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. BUF are 7-8 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 | CIN–BUF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BUF | Q1 15:00 | 7 | 75 | Touchdown | 0–7 |
| CIN | Q1 11:44 | 6 | 84 | Touchdown | 7–7 |
| BUF | Q1 8:35 | 3 | 6 | Punt | 7–7 |
| CIN | Q1 7:21 | 3 | 9 | Punt | 7–7 |
| BUF | Q1 5:41 | 6 | 44 | Turnover | 7–7 |
| CIN | Q1 2:12 | 12 | 46 | Punt | 7–7 |
| BUF | Q2 10:42 | 14 | 80 | Field goal | 13–10 |
| CIN | Q2 1:56 | 0 | 0 | Touchdown | 14–10 |
| BUF | Q2 1:44 | 7 | 68 | Field goal | 14–13 |
| CIN | Q2 0:03 | 0 | 0 | End of half | 14–13 |
| CIN | Q3 15:00 | 3 | 5 | Punt | 14–13 |
| BUF | Q3 13:05 | 9 | 46 | Field goal | 14–16 |
| CIN | Q3 7:31 | 9 | 71 | Touchdown | 21–16 |
| BUF | Q3 3:07 | 9 | 48 | Field goal | 21–19 |
| CIN | Q4 13:54 | 3 | 2 | Punt | 21–19 |
| BUF | Q4 12:51 | 3 | 9 | Punt | 21–19 |
| CIN | Q4 11:24 | 3 | 5 | Punt | 21–19 |
| BUF | Q4 9:52 | 7 | 32 | Touchdown | 21–26 |
| CIN | Q4 5:51 | 4 | 15 | Punt | 21–26 |
| BUF | Q4 4:12 | 4 | 72 | Touchdown | 21–33 |
| CIN | Q4 2:22 | 11 | 64 | Turnover | 21–33 |
| BUF | Q4 0:11 | 0 | 0 | End of half | 21–33 |
Box score
Individual performances
Bengals
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Carson Palmer | 26/39 | 271 | 2 | 1 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kenny Watson | 4 | 11 | 2.8 | 0 |
| Rudi Johnson | 9 | 11 | 1.2 | 0 |
| Carson Palmer | 3 | 5 | 1.7 | 0 |
| Chad Johnson | 1 | 1 | 1.0 | 0 |
Bills
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| J.P. Losman | 24/34 | 295 | 1 | 1 |
| Marshawn Lynch | 1/1 | 8 | 1 | 0 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Marshawn Lynch | 29 | 153 | 5.3 | 1 |
| J.P. Losman | 4 | 21 | 5.3 | 0 |
| Dwayne Wright | 1 | 2 | 2.0 | 0 |
| Josh Reed | 1 | 0 | 0.0 | 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 Bills; negative favour Bengals.
Half-point at risk
2.15%
outcomes that flip if the line moves 0.5
Model home win
49.6%
Expected total
44.0est.
Model
Where the number comes from
Each component is additive, in points of expected margin.
- Team ratings (opponent-adjusted EPA)-2.92
- Home-field advantage+2.56
- Quarterback adjustment+0.57
- Rest differential0.00
- Expected margin+0.22