2024 · Week 8

Final

Bears

Chicago

QB Caleb Williams

15·18

Commanders

Washington

QB Jayden Daniels

FedExField · outdoors · grass · 58°F · wind 2mph

Closing spread

WAS -1.5

Total

46.5

Model margin

+4.2est.

WAS perspective

Push chance

None

half-point line — cannot push

Availability

The injury report

The official league filing for this week — game designations first, then who missed or was limited in practice.

Bears

Commanders

Win probability

  • Commanders
  • Bears

How each play moved the game.

Commanders winsBears wins

Matchup

Where the edges are

Season-long league percentiles for both sides, mirrored. The saturated side of a lopsided row holds the edge.

Bearsedge mapCommanders
  • -0.072EPA / play+0.138
  • 40.1%Success rate48.1%
  • -0.036EPA / dropback+0.211
  • -0.142EPA / rush+0.027
  • 5.9%Explosive rate8.5%
  • -0.22CPOE+4.57
  • 33.1%Third-down rate45.9%
  • 61.1%Red-zone TD rate67.2%
  • 1.65Points / drive2.78
  • 1.3%Turnover rate1.2%

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

WAS lead 10–5 since 1999

Meetings average 44.4 points. WAS are 10-5 ATS in the series.

Previous meetings
SeasonMatchupScoreWinner
2025 · W6CHI @ WAS25–24CHI
2023 · W5CHI @ WAS40–20CHI
2022 · W6WAS @ CHI12–7WAS
2019 · W3CHI @ WAS31–15CHI
2016 · W16WAS @ CHI41–21WAS
2015 · W14WAS @ CHI24–21WAS
2013 · W7CHI @ WAS41–45WAS
2010 · W7WAS @ CHI17–14WAS

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.

Drive-by-drive log
BallStartPlaysYardsResultCHI–WAS
CHIQ1 15:003-5Punt0–0
WASQ1 13:03856Field goal0–3
CHIQ1 8:51635Punt0–3
WASQ1 6:031184Field goal0–6
CHIQ1 1:0439Punt0–6
WASQ2 14:01424Punt0–6
CHIQ2 11:56620Turnover on downs0–6
WASQ2 8:25731Field goal0–9
CHIQ2 5:241031Punt0–9
WASQ2 0:55672End of half0–9
WASQ3 15:00831Punt0–9
CHIQ3 10:1833Punt0–9
WASQ3 9:38716Field goal0–12
CHIQ3 5:48620Punt0–12
WASQ3 2:4437Punt0–12
CHIQ3 1:29259Touchdown7–12
WASQ3 0:43533Missed field goal7–12
CHIQ4 14:0430Punt7–12
WASQ4 13:44842Punt7–12
CHIQ4 10:28984Turnover7–12
WASQ4 6:1839Punt7–12
CHIQ4 4:211151Touchdown15–12
WASQ4 0:25476Touchdown15–18

Box score

Individual performances

Bears

Passing

PlayerC/AttYdsTDINT
Caleb Williams10/2413100

Rushing

PlayerCarYdsAvgTD
D'Andre Swift181297.21
Caleb Williams9475.20
Rome Odunze2136.50
DJ Moore273.50
Roschon Johnson263.01

Receiving

PlayerRecTgtYdsTD
Rome Odunze36410
Keenan Allen27390
DJ Moore24270
Cole Kmet11140
DeAndre Carter1170
Gerald Everett1230

Commanders

Passing

PlayerC/AttYdsTDINT
Jayden Daniels21/3832610

Rushing

PlayerCarYdsAvgTD
Brian Robinson16654.10
Austin Ekeler7527.40
Jayden Daniels8526.50
Jeremy McNichols1-1-1.00

Receiving

PlayerRecTgtYdsTD
Terry McLaurin581250
Zach Ertz711770
Noah Brown36731
John Bates12200
Brian Robinson11110
Luke McCaffrey1280
Austin Ekeler2360
Dyami Brown1160

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.

line +1.53.7%6.6%7.5%3.2%4.9%3.2%2.9%

Positive margins favour Commanders; negative favour Bears.

Half-point at risk

2.11%

outcomes that flip if the line moves 0.5

Model home win

60.2%

Expected total

44.4est.

Model

Where the number comes from

Each component is additive, in points of expected margin.

  • Team ratings (opponent-adjusted EPA)+3.01
  • Home-field advantage+1.71
  • Quarterback adjustment0.00
  • Rest differential-0.56
  • Expected margin+4.16