Closing spread
NYG -3
Total
48
Model margin
+1.3est.
ARI perspective
Push chance
7.2%est.
the line sits on a key number
Win probability
- Cardinals
- Giants
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.
- +0.093EPA / play+0.052
- 47.3%Success rate45.0%
- +0.129EPA / dropback+0.144
- +0.050EPA / rush-0.140
- 10.1%Explosive rate8.6%
- +0.84CPOE+5.02
- 43.7%Third-down rate43.3%
- 51.8%Red-zone TD rate58.6%
- 2.09Points / drive2.12
- 1.2%Turnover rate2.8%
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 9–9 since 1999
NYG have won 2 straight. Meetings average 41.9 points. ARI are 12-6 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 | NYG–ARI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NYG | Q1 15:00 | 4 | 3 | Punt | 0–0 |
| ARI | Q1 13:15 | 12 | 63 | Field goal | 0–3 |
| NYG | Q1 6:18 | 4 | 17 | Punt | 0–3 |
| ARI | Q1 3:54 | 4 | -3 | Punt | 0–3 |
| NYG | Q1 2:46 | 11 | 62 | Touchdown | 7–3 |
| ARI | Q2 11:38 | 7 | 42 | Touchdown | 7–9 |
| NYG | Q2 7:51 | 3 | 2 | Field goal | 10–9 |
| ARI | Q2 6:51 | 5 | 49 | Field goal | 10–12 |
| NYG | Q2 3:49 | 6 | 32 | Touchdown | 17–12 |
| ARI | Q2 1:08 | 3 | 9 | Punt | 17–12 |
| NYG | Q2 0:24 | 2 | 6 | Punt | 17–12 |
| ARI | Q2 0:05 | 0 | 0 | Missed field goal | 17–12 |
| ARI | Q3 15:00 | 6 | 16 | Turnover | 17–12 |
| NYG | Q3 12:39 | 4 | 40 | Touchdown | 24–12 |
| ARI | Q3 10:35 | 5 | 34 | Punt | 24–12 |
| NYG | Q3 8:20 | 5 | 16 | Punt | 24–12 |
| ARI | Q3 5:29 | 14 | 63 | Touchdown | 24–19 |
| NYG | Q3 0:49 | 10 | 80 | Touchdown | 31–19 |
| ARI | Q4 11:15 | 2 | 3 | Turnover | 31–19 |
| NYG | Q4 10:30 | 7 | 30 | Field goal | 34–19 |
| ARI | Q4 6:17 | 6 | 52 | Touchdown | 34–26 |
| NYG | Q4 4:02 | 5 | 35 | Field goal | 37–26 |
| ARI | Q4 1:55 | 5 | 43 | Field goal | 37–29 |
| NYG | Q4 0:31 | 0 | 0 | End of half | 37–29 |
Box score
Individual performances
Giants
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Eli Manning | 26/33 | 240 | 3 | 0 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Derrick Ward | 20 | 69 | 3.5 | 1 |
| Domenik Hixon | 1 | 11 | 11.0 | 0 |
| Ahmad Bradshaw | 4 | 9 | 2.3 | 0 |
| Eli Manning | 2 | -2 | -1.0 | 0 |
Cardinals
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kurt Warner | 32/52 | 351 | 1 | 1 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tim Hightower | 11 | 21 | 1.9 | 2 |
| Steve Breaston | 1 | 4 | 4.0 | 0 |
| Kurt Warner | 1 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 |
| Edgerrin James | 1 | -1 | -1.0 | 0 |
| Anquan Boldin | 1 | -1 | -1.0 | 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 Cardinals; negative favour Giants.
Half-point at risk
7.19%
outcomes that flip if the line moves 0.5
Model home win
52.4%
Expected total
44.2est.
Model
Where the number comes from
Each component is additive, in points of expected margin.
- Team ratings (opponent-adjusted EPA)-1.24
- Home-field advantage+2.49
- Quarterback adjustment0.00
- Rest differential0.00
- Expected margin+1.25