For the complete documentation index, see llms.txt. Markdown variants of the ranked boards (dynasty and fantasy rankings for NFL, NBA, MLB and CFB) are available by appending.mdto those URLs or by sendingAccept: text/markdown; other pages answer 404.
This page's interactive half has not started on this device. Nothing was read, and nothing was invented in its place. Reload the page.
This page's interactive half has not started on this device. Nothing was read, and nothing was invented in its place. Reload the page.
polling · 1800s tick · as of 11:44 AM ET · 1 to play · 15 final
Game Center
Game Center
2020 Week 17 · Sun, Jan 3, 2021 · Soldier Field
FinalThe verdict · 2020 Week 17
It turned at Q2 8:40, 3rd and 4, on Marquez Valdes-Scantling — 20.9 win-probability points to the Packers on one snap, the largest move of the game.
The snaps that bent it
Green Bay Packers 35–16 — never really in doubt late. Biggest swing: Q2 8:40, Packers +20.9% win probability on one snap.
The biggest swing of the game · Q2 8:40 · 3rd and 4
Marquez Valdes-Scantling
Packers
(8:40) (Shotgun) 12-A.Rodgers pass deep middle to 83-M.Valdes-Scantling for 72 yards, TOUCHDOWN.
20.9
win-probability points on one snap
The largest move of the game. The two below are drawn against it.
What separated them
Throwing the ball
Packers won this one — +0.80 expected points per dropback, against Bears at -0.15 expected points per dropback.
Packersthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Every snap
Packers won this one — +0.48 expected points per snap, against Bears at -0.12 expected points per snap.
Packersthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Giveaways
Packers won this one — no giveaways, against Bears at 3 giveaways.
Packersthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Red zone
Packers won this one — 4 touchdowns on 5 trips, against Bears at 1 touchdown on 5 trips.
Packersthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Who won it for them
What it says about next week
Note
The model against the market, the momentum underneath, every drive — scrub to replay it
The model and the market were 12.2 win-probability points apart on the average play, and 25 apart at the widest — with the model the more convinced about Bears.
(8:40) (Shotgun) 12-A.Rodgers pass deep middle to 83-M.Valdes-Scantling for 72 yards, TOUCHDOWN.
The modelled figures are the league play-by-play model's, not ours.
How the points landed
Marquez Valdes-Scantling's 72-yard touchdown catch with 8:40 left in the 2nd put Green Bay Packers ahead for good. The lead never changed over the 5 scores that followed.
Marquez Valdes-Scantling72-yd TD catch72-yard touchdown catchfrom Aaron RodgersLead never changed again+714–109 scores · bar length is the lead after each one
Down-to-down truth
Packerscategory by categoryBears
Packers ahead 5–2 on categories, including the biggest gap of the duel — turnovers.
Expected points added, per play
The centre line is an average play. A bar to the right of it is a side that gained more than the situation was worth; a bar to the left is a side that lost ground. All six bars share one scale, ±0.80 points.
Every snapexpected points added per play, all downs
Dropping backexpected points added per dropback
Running itexpected points added per rush
Neither side “wins” volume or play-calling mix, so neither is drawn as a duel: Packers ran 44 snaps at a 59% dropback rate against Bears’s 74 at 61%. Red-zone trips: Packers 5, Bears 5.
Bears outgained Packers 356-316 but lost the turnover battle 3-0. That was the game.
Derived from the play-by-play, no model
7 of 8 readings cleared their snap floor and were tested against four comparisons: this week's whole slate, the team's own season, the week before, and the team's own ordinary spread. Every bar below is set in that team's own week-to-week swing, never in league points — one team's swing runs 1.6 to 3.1 times the entire league's spread.
1 of 8 readings cleared their snap floor in this game, which is under the three this column needs before it will draw the rule. The readings themselves stand.
GB's sack or hit rate turned over: 16.7% in week 16 against 6.7% here — they got home then and stayed blocked now, a turn of 2.1 of their own weekly swings across the two.
45 dropbacks this game, floor 12 — 16 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 4.7 points. · −1.3σ from their own normal
The season-grain rooms, pointed at this one game
7 of 8 readings cleared their snap floor. Every deviation below is measured in that team's own game-to-game swing, not in league points — because one game's swing runs from 1.6 to 3.1 times the whole league's spread.
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -15 pts to 19 pts
Over Expected room →Packers6.3 ptsinside their normal wobble · +3.6 vs their 2.7 pts, and they swing ±6.2 week to week (+0.59× that swing) · 44 snaps
Bears-5.6 ptsinside their normal wobble · −6.0 vs their 0.4 pts, and they swing ±6.1 week to week (−0.98× that swing) · 74 snaps
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale 29% to 90%
Tendencies room →Packers54.1%right on their number · +1.6 vs their 52.4%, and they swing ±7.7 week to week (+0.21× that swing) · 37 early downs
Bears64.2%right on their number · +4.6 vs their 59.6%, and they swing ±12.0 week to week (+0.38× that swing) · 53 early downs
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -43% to 153%
Fourth Down room →Packers—Only 1 fourth-and-short call tonight — too few to read a tendency. Their season number is 56.7%.
Bears71.4%leaned — went for it · +39.8 vs their 31.6%, and they swing ±27.6 week to week (+1.44× that swing) · 7 fourth-and-short calls
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -4% to 32%
Tendencies room →Packers6.7%leaned — stayed blocked · −6.2 vs their 12.9%, and they swing ±4.7 week to week (−1.32× that swing) · 45 dropbacks
Bears23.1%leaned — got home · +8.7 vs their 14.3%, and they swing ±7.1 week to week (+1.23× that swing) · 26 dropbacks
Play-action rate
Charted from 2022. The columns exist for 2020 and are entirely empty, which is not a season of data.
Blitz rate sent
Charted from 2022. The columns exist for 2020 and are entirely empty, which is not a season of data.
CHI's fourth-and-short go rate was the night's one real departure: 71.4%, 39.8 points above their season mean of 31.6% and 1.4 times their own 27.6-point weekly swing.
Who was out, who dressed and never took a snap, and who was on the field how much. Game-day list and snap counts from the weekly roster and snap feeds. Practice-squad and injured-reserve players are not shown — they were never on the game-day list.
Green Bay Packers
48 dressed · 6 inactive · 2 never used
Inactive · 6
Dressed, never took a snap · 2
Chicago Bears
48 dressed · 6 inactive · 1 never used
Inactive · 6
Dressed, never took a snap · 1
Who moved the needle
Passing · CHI
33/42, 252 yds, 0 TD, 1 INT
-3.5 expected points added · +9.7% completion over expected
Passing · GB
19/24, 240 yds, 4 TD, 0 INT
20.8 expected points added · +14.2% completion over expected
Receiving · CHI
11/13 for 93 yds, 0 TD
32% of team targets · 3.3 expected points added
Receiving · GB
2/3 for 87 yds, 1 TD
13% of team targets · 8.2 expected points added
No opportunity read for this era
Snap, route and expected-points data starts in 2021. This game is older than the usage record, so there is no opportunity read for it — the box score above is the complete picture we hold.
The whole game as one hundred yards. The Bears attack right, the Packers attack left, so a change of possession is a reversal you can see. Reading down is the order the snaps were played — not the clock, so a two-minute drill gets the same room as any other fourteen snaps. This game is final.
(8:40) (Shotgun) 12-A.Rodgers pass deep middle to 83-M.Valdes-Scantling for 72 yards, TOUCHDOWN.
Q2 8:40 · Packers · 3rd & 4 at GB 28 · gained 72 · +6.98 EP · +23.3% win probability
145 snaps placed · 12 without a recorded yard line, left off the map · 4 marked moments — the largest win-probability swings, one per drive.
Post-game film: 157 plays across 17 drives, personnel groupings on 157 snaps. Everything here paints the morning after the week's games — there is no live play-level feed in this product, so nothing on this page updates while a game is being played.
9 of 17 drives ended in points. The longest march was CHI moving 87 yards from the CHI 11 for a field goal. Each bar is the ground a drive actually covered; CHI attacks right, GB attacks left. Hatching marks a trip inside the twenty.
Offensive grouping on every pass and run. A group needs five snaps in this game before it gets a number — under that the sample is a coin flip and the cell reads a dash instead. The names of the eleven on the field are only recorded from 2023 onward, so this game gives the grouping without the roster.
157 plays · ranked by the win probability each one moved
157 plays
Bar length is win probability the play moved
Packers0
Bears6Packers0Bears7Packers6Bears7Packers7Bears7Packers7Bears10Packers13Bears10Packers14Bears10Packers20Bears10Packers21Bears10Packers21Bears13Packers21Bears16Packers27Bears16Packers28Bears16Packers34Bears16Packers35Bears16Win probability is the league play-by-play model, 98.5% of plays · a dash means none was published
Just the plays, on their own page: Packers at Bears, every play.
Full stat lines
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aaron Rodgers | 19/24 | 240 | 4 | 0 | 1 | +20.8 |
| Player | Att | Yds | Avg | TD | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aaron Jones | 11 | 42 | 3.8 | 1 | −0.1 |
| Jamaal Williams | 5 | 26 | 5.2 | 0 | +0.5 |
| Aaron Rodgers | 1 | 4 | 4.0 | 0 | +0.0 |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Marquez Valdes-Scantling | 2 | 3 | 87 | 1 | 13% | +8.2 |
| Davante Adams | 6 | 6 | 46 | 1 | 25% | +6.7 |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Krys Barnes | 8 | 6 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kevin King | 7 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 2 |
| Darnell Savage | 8 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Adrian Amos |
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mitchell Trubisky | 33/42 | 252 | 0 | 1 | 1 | −3.5 |
| Player | Att | Yds | Avg | TD | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| David Montgomery |
Every number on them comes from the same read as this page, and each one says in words where it came from.
How the win probability moved, the three snaps that bent it, and every drive in order.
/football/games/2020_17_GB_CHI
The cards are drawn from the play-by-play sync, not live, and each one says so on its face.
Closing number vs result
Packers closed -4.5 and covered, winning by 19.
Total closed 48.5; the game landed 51 — over by 2.5.
Conditions and crew
Division game — familiarity tightens these matchups; closing numbers tend to be sharper.
| Marquez Valdes-Scantling | 1 | 4 | 4.0 | 0 | −0.0 |
| A.J. Dillon | 1 | 3 | 3.0 | 0 | −0.0 |
| Aaron Jones | 4 | 5 | 43 | 0 | 21% | +2.4 |
| Robert Tonyan | 2 | 2 | 18 | 1 | 8% | +2.8 |
| Allen Lazard | 2 | 4 | 17 | 0 | 17% | +0.7 |
| Dominique Dafney | 1 | 1 | 13 | 1 | 4% | +3.1 |
| Marcedes Lewis | 1 | 1 | 9 | 0 | 4% | −0.5 |
| Tavon Austin | 1 | 1 | 7 | 0 | 4% | +0.2 |
| Equanimeous St. Brown | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 4% | −1.3 |
| 6 |
| 3 |
| 0.0 |
| 1 |
| 1 |
| Kenny Clark | 2 | 4 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Christian Kirksey | 4 | 2 | 1.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Chandon Sullivan | 3 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Rashan Gary | 3 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Dean Lowry | 2 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jaire Alexander | 2 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 |
| 69 |
| 3.1 |
| 1 |
| −3.3 |
| Mitchell Trubisky | 4 | 22 | 5.5 | 0 | +4.2 |
| Cordarrelle Patterson | 4 | 18 | 4.5 | 0 | +0.3 |
| Artavis Pierce | 1 | -1 | -1.0 | 0 | −1.9 |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Darnell Mooney | 11 | 13 | 93 | 0 | 32% | +3.3 |
| David Montgomery | 9 | 9 | 63 | 0 | 22% | −1.1 |
| Cole Kmet | 7 | 8 | 41 | 0 | 20% | −7.0 |
| Allen Robinson | 2 | 5 | 37 | 0 | 12% | +0.5 |
| Anthony Miller | 2 | 2 | 13 | 0 | 5% | +3.2 |
| Jimmy Graham | 2 | 2 | 5 | 0 | 5% | −4.4 |
| Javon Wims | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 5% | −0.9 |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Danny Trevathan | 4 | 5 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Khalil Mack | 3 | 1 | 1.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kyle Fuller | 3 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Eddie Jackson | 2 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Josh Woods | 3 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Roquan Smith | 1 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Tashaun Gipson | 1 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Sherrick McManis | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Demetrius Harris | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Akiem Hicks | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
