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.
Not startedThis 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 11:25 PM ET · 13 to play · 1 final
Game Center
Game Center
2021 Week 1 · Sun, Sep 12, 2021 · SoFi Stadium
FinalThe verdict · 2021 Week 1
It turned at Q1 12:00, 3rd and 6, on David Long — 10.0 win-probability points to the Rams on one snap, the largest move of the game.
The snaps that bent it
Los Angeles Rams 34–14 — never really in doubt late. Biggest swing: Q1 12:00, Rams +10.0% win probability on one snap.
The biggest swing of the game · Q1 12:00 · 3rd and 6
David Long
Rams
(12:00) (Shotgun) 14-A.Dalton pass deep left intended for 11-D.Mooney INTERCEPTED by 22-D.Long (41-K.Young) at LA -8. Touchback.
10.0
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
Rams won this one — +0.70 expected points per dropback, against Bears at -0.21 expected points per dropback.
Ramsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Every snap
Rams won this one — +0.44 expected points per snap, against Bears at -0.10 expected points per snap.
Ramsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Giveaways
Rams won this one — no giveaways, against Bears at 2 giveaways.
Ramsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Red zone
Bears owned this one and still lost it — 2 touchdowns on 3 trips, against Rams at 2 touchdowns on 6 trips.
Bearsthe gap went the other way from the scoreboard
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 8.4 win-probability points apart on the average play, and 32 apart at the widest — with the model the more convinced about Bears.
(12:00) (Shotgun) 14-A.Dalton pass deep left intended for 11-D.Mooney INTERCEPTED by 22-D.Long (41-K.Young) at LA -8. Touchback.
The modelled figures are the league play-by-play model's, not ours.
How the points landed
Van Jefferson's 67-yard touchdown catch with 10:48 left in the 1st put Los Angeles Rams ahead for good. The lead never changed over the 7 scores that followed.
Van Jefferson67-yd TD catch67-yard touchdown catchfrom Matthew StaffordLead never changed again+70–78 scores · bar length is the lead after each one
Down-to-down truth
Bearscategory by categoryRams
Rams ahead 6–2 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, ±0.70 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: Bears ran 69 snaps at a 65% dropback rate against Rams’s 46 at 59%. Red-zone trips: Bears 3, Rams 6.
Rams won the down-to-down efficiency fight: 0.44 expected points added per play vs -0.10.
Derived from the play-by-play, no model
8 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.
Nothing cleared the bars. No reading led the week's slate, set a season mark, reversed the week before, or sat two of the team's own standard deviations off their number — which is what most Sundays look like, and is the finding rather than a gap.
The season-grain rooms, pointed at this one game
8 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 -19 pts to 17 pts
Over Expected room →Bears0.6 ptsright on their number · +3.1 vs their -2.5 pts, and they swing ±6.3 week to week (+0.49× that swing) · 69 snaps
Rams11.0 ptsleaned — threw more than the situation asked · +8.2 vs their 2.8 pts, and they swing ±5.5 week to week (+1.48× that swing) · 46 snaps
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale 28% to 83%
Tendencies room →Bears59.3%right on their number · +4.3 vs their 54.9%, and they swing ±10.4 week to week (+0.41× that swing) · 54 early downs
Rams51.4%inside their normal wobble · −6.8 vs their 58.2%, and they swing ±9.6 week to week (−0.71× that swing) · 35 early downs
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -36% to 154%
Fourth Down room →Bears66.7%right on their number · +7.4 vs their 59.3%, and they swing ±37.1 week to week (+0.20× that swing) · 3 fourth-and-short calls
Rams33.3%right on their number · +4.7 vs their 28.6%, and they swing ±14.8 week to week (+0.32× that swing) · 3 fourth-and-short calls
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -9% to 41%
Tendencies room →Bears11.1%right on their number · −4.5 vs their 15.6%, and they swing ±9.8 week to week (−0.45× that swing) · 27 dropbacks
Rams8.9%inside their normal wobble · −3.8 vs their 12.7%, and they swing ±4.6 week to week (−0.82× that swing) · 45 dropbacks
Play-action rate
Charted from 2022. The columns exist for 2021 and are entirely empty, which is not a season of data.
Blitz rate sent
Charted from 2022. The columns exist for 2021 and are entirely empty, which is not a season of data.
LA's pass rate over expected was the night's one real departure: 11.0 pts, 8.2 points above their season mean of 2.8 pts and 1.5 times their own 5.5-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.
Chicago Bears
48 dressed · 7 inactive
Inactive · 7
Los Angeles Rams
48 dressed · 6 inactive · 3 never used
Inactive · 6
Dressed, never took a snap · 3
Who moved the needle
Passing · LA
20/26, 321 yds, 3 TD, 0 INT
18.8 expected points added · +8.3% completion over expected
Passing · CHI
27/38, 206 yds, 0 TD, 1 INT
-10.9 expected points added · -5.0% completion over expected
What each man’s workload was worth, against what he actually banked. Final. Usage and expected points land the morning after the game, not live.
David Montgomery banked 8.5 more points than his own workload asked for.
| Player | Full PPR | Vs expected | Snap share | Routes | Targets | Air yards | Line |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| David MontgomeryRB · Bell Cow Back | 18.8 | +8.5 | 59% | 51% | 3% | 0% | 16 car, 108 yd, 1 TD · 1/1, 10 yd |
| Allen RobinsonWR · Alpha Receiver | 9.5 | −6.2 | 91% | 91% | 28% | 25% | 6/11, 35 yd |
| Cole KmetTE · Rotational Receiver | 9.2 | −1.0 | 74% | 73% | 18% | 18% | 5/7, 42 yd |
| Marquise GoodwinWR · Rotational Receiver | 8.3 | +1.2 | 38% | 36% | 10% | 17% | 1 car, -2 yd · 4/4, 45 yd |
| Damien WilliamsRB · Receiving Back | 8.0 | −2.7 | 43% | 47% | 13% | 0% | 6 car, 12 yd · 4/5, 28 yd |
| Darnell MooneyWR · Rotational Receiver | 7.6 | −4.2 | 100% | 96% | 18% | 25% | 5/7, 26 yd |
| Justin FieldsQB | 6.7 | +2.4 | — | — | — | — | 5 snaps — too few to rate. |
| Andy DaltonQB · Starter QB | 5.5 | −7.7 | 93% | — | 0% | — | 27/38, 206 yd, 1 INT · 2 car, 13 yd |
| Damiere ByrdWR · Rotational Receiver | 4.9 | +0.7 | 52% | 49% | 8% | 8% | 3/3, 19 yd |
| Jimmy GrahamTE · Rotational Receiver | 2.1 | −0.9 | 20% | 20% | 5% | 7% | 1/2, 11 yd |
| Khalil HerbertRB | 0.0 | — | — | — | — | — | 1 snap — too few to rate. |
| Nsimba WebsterWR | 0.0 | — | — | — | — | — | Did not take a snap. |
3 players played under 8 snaps, so their shares read as a dash rather than a number. 2 lines have no expected-points read and sit off the plane.
Expected points are modelled in full PPR, so the “vs expected” column stays in that unit whichever format the pills are set to. Switching the pills changes the points column, not the plane.
The whole game as one hundred yards. The Rams attack right, the Bears 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.
(12:00) (Shotgun) 14-A.Dalton pass deep left intended for 11-D.Mooney INTERCEPTED by 22-D.Long (41-K.Young) at LA -8. Touchback.
Q1 12:00 · Bears · 3rd & 6 at LA 8 · gained nothing · -5.83 EP · −15.3% win probability
143 snaps placed · 10 without a recorded yard line, left off the map · 4 marked moments — the largest win-probability swings, one per drive.
Post-game film: 153 plays across 17 drives, personnel groupings on 153 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.
8 of 17 drives ended in points. The longest march was CHI moving 81 yards from the CHI 19 for a touchdown. Each bar is the ground a drive actually covered; LA attacks right, CHI 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.
153 plays · ranked by the win probability each one moved
153 plays
Bar length is win probability the play moved
Bears0
Rams6Bears0Rams7Bears0Rams10Bears0Rams13Bears6Rams13Bears7Rams13Bears7Rams19Bears7Rams20Bears13Rams20Bears14Rams20Bears14Rams26Bears14Rams27Bears14Rams33Bears14Rams34Win 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: Bears at Rams, every play.
Full stat lines
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Andy Dalton | 27/38 | 206 | 0 | 1 | 3 | −10.9 |
| Justin Fields | 2/2 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | +0.4 |
| Player | Att | Yds | Avg | TD | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| David Montgomery | 16 | 108 | 6.8 | 1 | +4.6 |
| Andy Dalton | 2 | 13 | 6.5 | 0 | +1.1 |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Marquise Goodwin | 4 | 4 | 45 | 0 | 10% | +5.7 |
| Cole Kmet | 5 | 7 | 42 | 0 | 18% |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Roquan Smith | 6 | 5 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Alec Ogletree | 2 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Eddie Jackson |
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Matthew Stafford | 20/26 | 321 | 3 | 0 | 1 | +18.8 |
| Player | Att | Yds | Avg | TD | EPA |
|---|
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/2021_01_CHI_LA
The cards are drawn from the charted play-by-play, not live, and each one says so on its face.
Closing number vs result
Rams closed -9.5 and covered, winning by 20.
Total closed 46; the game landed 48 — over by 2.0.
Conditions and crew
| Damien Williams | 6 | 12 | 2.0 | 0 | −1.6 |
| Justin Fields | 1 | 3 | 3.0 | 1 | +0.9 |
| Marquise Goodwin | 1 | -2 | -2.0 | 0 | −1.0 |
| +2.4 |
| Allen Robinson | 6 | 11 | 35 | 0 | 28% | −3.3 |
| Damien Williams | 4 | 5 | 28 | 0 | 13% | −0.7 |
| Darnell Mooney | 5 | 7 | 26 | 0 | 18% | −8.4 |
| Damiere Byrd | 3 | 3 | 19 | 0 | 8% | +0.1 |
| Jimmy Graham | 1 | 2 | 11 | 0 | 5% | +1.3 |
| David Montgomery | 1 | 1 | 10 | 0 | 3% | +0.8 |
| 5 |
| 0 |
| 0.0 |
| 0 |
| 0 |
| Jaylon Johnson | 3 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Kindle Vildor | 2 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Angelo Blackson | 1 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Akiem Hicks | 1 | 2 | 0.5 | 0 | 0 |
| Tashaun Gipson | 3 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Marqui Christian | 1 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Robert Quinn | 0 | 1 | 0.5 | 0 | 0 |
| Darrell Henderson | 16 | 70 | 4.4 | 1 | +2.0 |
| Robert Woods | 1 | 7 | 7.0 | 0 | +0.5 |
| Sony Michel | 1 | 2 | 2.0 | 0 | −0.3 |
| Matthew Stafford | 5 | -5 | -1.0 | 0 | −4.9 |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cooper Kupp | 7 | 10 | 108 | 1 | 38% | +5.8 |
| Van Jefferson | 2 | 3 | 80 | 1 | 12% | +5.0 |
| Tyler Higbee | 5 | 6 | 68 | 0 | 23% | +3.7 |
| Robert Woods | 3 | 4 | 27 | 1 | 15% | +2.9 |
| DeSean Jackson | 2 | 2 | 21 | 0 | 8% | +1.4 |
| Darrell Henderson | 1 | 1 | 17 | 0 | 4% | +1.5 |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kenny Young | 5 | 5 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Jordan Fuller | 4 | 5 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Taylor Rapp | 4 | 4 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jalen Ramsey | 5 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Darious Williams | 5 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Justin Hollins | 4 | 2 | 2.0 | 0 | 0 |
| David Long | 4 | 0 | 0.0 | 1 | 2 |
| Troy Reeder | 2 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Aaron Donald | 1 | 2 | 1.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Sebastian Joseph | 1 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
