Closing spread
OAK -3
Total
41
Model margin
+0.6est.
OAK perspective
Push chance
7.4%est.
the line sits on a key number
Win probability
- Raiders
- Texans
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.
The rivalry
HOU lead 9–5 since 1999
Meetings average 45.6 points. OAK are 7-7 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 | HOU–OAK |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LV | Q1 15:00 | 3 | 5 | Punt | 0–0 |
| HOU | Q1 13:54 | 12 | 94 | Touchdown | 7–0 |
| LV | Q1 6:46 | 11 | 46 | Turnover | 7–0 |
| HOU | Q1 0:56 | 4 | 28 | Turnover | 7–0 |
| LV | Q2 14:12 | 8 | 32 | Punt | 7–0 |
| HOU | Q2 9:24 | 8 | 25 | Punt | 7–0 |
| LV | Q2 5:00 | 1 | 0 | Turnover | 7–0 |
| HOU | Q2 4:51 | 2 | 16 | Touchdown | 14–0 |
| LV | Q2 4:02 | 7 | 28 | Missed field goal | 14–0 |
| HOU | Q2 1:10 | 4 | 24 | Field goal | 17–0 |
| LV | Q2 0:05 | 1 | 11 | End of half | 17–0 |
| HOU | Q3 15:00 | 6 | 54 | Missed field goal | 17–0 |
| LV | Q3 11:47 | 9 | 54 | Field goal | 17–3 |
| HOU | Q3 7:40 | 6 | 26 | Punt | 17–3 |
| LV | Q3 3:18 | 15 | 62 | Touchdown | 17–10 |
| HOU | Q4 11:22 | 6 | 80 | Touchdown | 24–10 |
| LV | Q4 7:50 | 9 | 36 | Turnover | 24–10 |
| HOU | Q4 4:37 | 6 | 15 | Punt | 24–10 |
| LV | Q4 1:57 | 2 | 36 | Touchdown | 24–17 |
| HOU | Q4 1:30 | 0 | 0 | End of half | 24–17 |
Box score
Individual performances
Texans
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sage Rosenfels | 11/19 | 181 | 1 | 1 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ron Dayne | 21 | 122 | 5.8 | 1 |
| Ahman Green | 8 | 28 | 3.5 | 1 |
| Sage Rosenfels | 7 | 19 | 2.7 | 0 |
| Adimchinobe Echemandu | 2 | 6 | 3.0 | 0 |
| Jameel Cook | 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 Raiders; negative favour Texans.
Half-point at risk
7.41%
outcomes that flip if the line moves 0.5
Model home win
50.6%
Expected total
45.2est.
Model
Where the number comes from
Each component is additive, in points of expected margin.
- Team ratings (opponent-adjusted EPA)+1.45
- Home-field advantage+2.56
- Quarterback adjustment-3.44
- Rest differential0.00
- Expected margin+0.58
One or both ratings are carry-over priors — no games have been played this season yet, so treat this as a starting assumption rather than a read.