Closing spread
OAK -3
Total
40.5
Model margin
+8.6est.
OAK perspective
Push chance
7.0%est.
the line sits on a key number
Availability
The injury report
The official league filing for this week — game designations first, then who missed or was limited in practice.
Bears
- OutJay CutlerQBright Thumb· Out (Definitely Will Not Play)
- DoubtfulD.J. MooreCBAnkle· DNP
- ProbableDevin HesterWRShin· DNP
- ProbableBrandon MeriweatherSConcussion· Full
Raiders
- OutDarren McFaddenRBFoot· DNP
- OutJacoby FordWRFoot· DNP
- OutJarvis MossDEHamstring· DNP
- OutJason CampbellQBCollarbone· DNP
- QuestionableChris JohnsonCBHamstring· Limited
- QuestionableDarrius Heyward-BeyWRNeck· Limited
- QuestionableDenarius MooreWRFoot· DNP
- QuestionableLamarr HoustonDEKnee· Limited
- QuestionableManase TongaRBKnee· Limited
- QuestionableMichael HuffSAnkle· Limited
- QuestionableMichael MitchellSAnkle· Limited
- QuestionableRichard SeymourDTKnee· Limited
- QuestionableTaiwan JonesRBHamstring· DNP
- DNPT.J. HoushmandzadehWRNot Injury Related
- ProbableSamson SateleCConcussion· Full
Win probability
- Raiders
- 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.
The rivalry
CHI lead 6–3 since 1999
CHI have won 3 straight. Meetings average 40.1 points. OAK are 2-6-1 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–OAK |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CHI | Q1 15:00 | 3 | 6 | Punt | 0–0 |
| LV | Q1 13:26 | 5 | 49 | Field goal | 0–3 |
| CHI | Q1 11:11 | 3 | 7 | Punt | 0–3 |
| LV | Q1 9:35 | 3 | 4 | Punt | 0–3 |
| CHI | Q1 8:02 | 3 | 18 | Turnover | 0–3 |
| LV | Q1 6:28 | 5 | 2 | Field goal | 0–6 |
| CHI | Q1 4:20 | 7 | 39 | Turnover | 0–6 |
| LV | Q1 1:22 | 6 | 10 | Punt | 0–6 |
| CHI | Q2 13:49 | 3 | 5 | Punt | 0–6 |
| LV | Q2 12:14 | 7 | 2 | Turnover | 0–6 |
| CHI | Q2 8:53 | 9 | 79 | Touchdown | 7–6 |
| LV | Q2 4:41 | 4 | 56 | Field goal | 7–9 |
| CHI | Q2 2:56 | 6 | 24 | Turnover | 7–9 |
| LV | Q2 0:18 | 2 | 5 | Field goal | 7–12 |
| CHI | Q2 0:02 | 0 | 0 | End of half | 7–12 |
| LV | Q3 15:00 | 10 | 71 | Field goal | 7–15 |
| CHI | Q3 11:08 | 5 | 8 | Punt | 7–15 |
| LV | Q3 8:22 | 3 | 2 | Punt | 7–15 |
| CHI | Q3 6:44 | 3 | -7 | Punt | 7–15 |
| LV | Q3 5:32 | 11 | 51 | Field goal | 7–18 |
| CHI | Q3 0:22 | 9 | 51 | Field goal | 10–18 |
| LV | Q4 10:51 | 3 | 0 | Punt | 10–18 |
| CHI | Q4 10:00 | 6 | 45 | Field goal | 13–18 |
| LV | Q4 7:17 | 8 | 84 | Touchdown | 13–25 |
| CHI | Q4 3:47 | 5 | 84 | Touchdown | 20–25 |
| LV | Q4 2:11 | 3 | 5 | Punt | 20–25 |
| CHI | Q4 1:01 | 4 | 42 | End of half | 20–25 |
Box score
Individual performances
Bears
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Caleb Hanie | 18/36 | 254 | 2 | 3 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Marion Barber | 10 | 63 | 6.3 | 0 |
| Matt Forte | 12 | 59 | 4.9 | 0 |
| Caleb Hanie | 5 | 50 | 10.0 | 0 |
Receiving
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Johnny Knox | 4 | 10 | 145 | 1 |
| Roy Williams | 3 | 5 | 37 | 0 |
| Matt Forte | 6 | 10 | 25 | 0 |
| Kellen Davis | 2 | 2 | 25 | 1 |
| Matt Spaeth | 1 | 1 | 9 | 0 |
| Sam Hurd | 1 | 1 | 8 | 0 |
| Earl Bennett | 1 | 4 | 5 | 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 Bears.
Half-point at risk
6.99%
outcomes that flip if the line moves 0.5
Model home win
71.2%
Expected total
43.1est.
Model
Where the number comes from
Each component is additive, in points of expected margin.
- Team ratings (opponent-adjusted EPA)+0.62
- Home-field advantage+2.49
- Quarterback adjustment+5.48
- Rest differential0.00
- Expected margin+8.58
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.



