Closing spread
CHI -3.5
Total
45.5
Model margin
-2.1est.
DET perspective
Push chance
None
half-point line — cannot push
Win probability
- Lions
- Bears
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.
- -0.095EPA / play-0.162
- 39.3%Success rate36.3%
- -0.083EPA / dropback-0.203
- -0.111EPA / rush-0.092
- 7.2%Explosive rate8.2%
- -3.00CPOE-3.61
- 35.1%Third-down rate28.7%
- 59.3%Red-zone TD rate72.0%
- 1.70Points / drive1.21
- 2.3%Turnover rate2.9%
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
CHI lead 28–26 since 1999
DET have won 4 straight. Meetings average 43.4 points. DET are 27-24-3 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 | CHI–DET |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DET | Q1 15:00 | 3 | -13 | Punt | 0–0 |
| CHI | Q1 13:25 | 10 | 39 | Field goal | 3–0 |
| DET | Q1 6:48 | 3 | 8 | Punt | 3–0 |
| CHI | Q1 5:09 | 4 | 56 | Punt | 3–0 |
| DET | Q1 3:12 | 3 | 1 | Punt | 3–0 |
| CHI | Q1 2:22 | 7 | 27 | Punt | 3–0 |
| DET | Q2 13:34 | 3 | 14 | Turnover | 3–0 |
| CHI | Q2 12:08 | 4 | 9 | Turnover on downs | 3–0 |
| DET | Q2 10:56 | 3 | 6 | Punt | 3–0 |
| CHI | Q2 9:23 | 8 | 32 | Touchdown | 10–0 |
| DET | Q2 5:27 | 5 | 27 | Punt | 10–0 |
| CHI | Q2 3:54 | 6 | 85 | Touchdown | 17–0 |
| DET | Q2 1:56 | 6 | 24 | Punt | 17–0 |
| CHI | Q2 0:32 | 1 | 3 | End of half | 17–0 |
| CHI | Q3 15:00 | 9 | 71 | Touchdown | 24–0 |
| DET | Q3 11:17 | 3 | 7 | Opp touchdown | 31–0 |
| DET | Q3 10:10 | 3 | 8 | Punt | 31–0 |
| DET | Q3 8:31 | 3 | 22 | Touchdown | 31–7 |
| CHI | Q3 7:08 | 8 | 31 | Punt | 31–7 |
| DET | Q3 2:18 | 5 | 5 | Punt | 31–7 |
| CHI | Q3 0:30 | 6 | 42 | Field goal | 34–7 |
| DET | Q4 11:58 | 7 | 37 | Turnover on downs | 34–7 |
| CHI | Q4 9:31 | 6 | 31 | Punt | 34–7 |
| DET | Q4 5:44 | 10 | 37 | Turnover on downs | 34–7 |
| CHI | Q4 2:45 | 3 | -1 | Punt | 34–7 |
| DET | Q4 0:22 | 1 | 2 | End of half | 34–7 |
Box score
Individual performances
Bears
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kyle Orton | 24/34 | 334 | 2 | 0 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kevin Jones | 10 | 36 | 3.6 | 0 |
| Matt Forte | 15 | 36 | 2.4 | 1 |
| Garrett Wolfe | 8 | 15 | 1.9 | 0 |
| Kyle Orton | 1 | 10 | 10.0 | 0 |
Lions
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dan Orlovsky | 13/23 | 97 | 0 | 1 |
| Jon Kitna | 8/16 | 74 | 0 | 0 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kevin Smith | 8 | 31 | 3.9 | 1 |
| Rudi Johnson | 5 | 23 | 4.6 | 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 Lions; negative favour Bears.
Half-point at risk
7.51%
outcomes that flip if the line moves 0.5
Model home win
43.3%
Expected total
44.8est.
Model
Where the number comes from
Each component is additive, in points of expected margin.
- Team ratings (opponent-adjusted EPA)-3.42
- Home-field advantage+2.49
- Quarterback adjustment-1.77
- Rest differential+0.56
- Expected margin-2.15