Closing spread
TEN -1
Total
37
Model margin
+0.1est.
CHI perspective
Push chance
2.2%est.
Win probability
- Bears
- Titans
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.
- -0.003EPA / play-0.095
- 41.7%Success rate39.3%
- +0.037EPA / dropback-0.083
- -0.044EPA / rush-0.111
- 9.0%Explosive rate7.2%
- -2.44CPOE-3.00
- 36.7%Third-down rate35.1%
- 64.5%Red-zone TD rate59.3%
- 1.83Points / drive1.70
- 1.7%Turnover rate2.3%
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
All square 3–3 since 1999
Meetings average 45.3 points. CHI are 4-2 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 | TEN–CHI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TEN | Q1 15:00 | 3 | 5 | Punt | 0–0 |
| CHI | Q1 13:26 | 14 | 75 | Touchdown | 0–7 |
| TEN | Q1 7:06 | 6 | 23 | Punt | 0–7 |
| CHI | Q1 3:46 | 2 | 0 | Turnover | 0–7 |
| TEN | Q1 3:29 | 7 | 33 | Turnover | 0–7 |
| CHI | Q1 0:44 | 3 | 7 | Punt | 0–7 |
| TEN | Q2 14:16 | 6 | 11 | Punt | 0–7 |
| CHI | Q2 11:46 | 3 | 0 | Punt | 0–7 |
| TEN | Q2 10:20 | 4 | 25 | Touchdown | 7–7 |
| CHI | Q2 8:39 | 5 | 26 | Punt | 7–7 |
| TEN | Q2 5:51 | 8 | 55 | Punt | 7–7 |
| CHI | Q2 1:52 | 3 | 13 | Punt | 7–7 |
| TEN | Q2 0:58 | 3 | 23 | Missed field goal | 7–7 |
| CHI | Q3 15:00 | 3 | 6 | Punt | 7–7 |
| TEN | Q3 14:22 | 6 | 56 | Touchdown | 14–7 |
| CHI | Q3 11:28 | 3 | -7 | Punt | 14–7 |
| TEN | Q3 9:52 | 3 | 8 | Punt | 14–7 |
| CHI | Q3 8:15 | 7 | 25 | Punt | 14–7 |
| TEN | Q3 5:09 | 3 | -2 | Punt | 14–7 |
| CHI | Q3 4:07 | 4 | -6 | Punt | 14–7 |
| TEN | Q3 2:26 | 11 | 52 | Touchdown | 21–7 |
| CHI | Q4 12:06 | 6 | 30 | Missed field goal | 21–7 |
| TEN | Q4 9:40 | 3 | 5 | Punt | 21–7 |
| CHI | Q4 8:12 | 7 | 68 | Touchdown | 21–14 |
| TEN | Q4 4:55 | 3 | -4 | Punt | 21–14 |
| CHI | Q4 3:12 | 4 | 6 | Turnover on downs | 21–14 |
| TEN | Q4 2:25 | 3 | 15 | End of half | 21–14 |
Box score
Individual performances
Titans
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kerry Collins | 30/41 | 289 | 2 | 0 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LenDale White | 10 | 14 | 1.4 | 1 |
| Chris Johnson | 14 | 8 | 0.6 | 0 |
| Kerry Collins | 4 | -1 | -0.3 | 0 |
Bears
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rex Grossman | 20/37 | 173 | 1 | 1 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Matt Forte | 20 | 72 | 3.6 | 0 |
| Jason McKie | 2 | 5 | 2.5 | 0 |
| Rex Grossman | 1 | 1 | 1.0 | 1 |
| Kevin Jones | 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 Bears; negative favour Titans.
Half-point at risk
2.15%
outcomes that flip if the line moves 0.5
Model home win
49.3%
Expected total
43.1est.
Model
Where the number comes from
Each component is additive, in points of expected margin.
- Team ratings (opponent-adjusted EPA)-2.09
- Home-field advantage+2.49
- Quarterback adjustment-0.32
- Rest differential0.00
- Expected margin+0.09