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.
polling · 1800s tick · as of 12:42 AM ET · 16 to play
Game Center
Game Center
2021 Week 4 · Sun, Oct 3, 2021 · Soldier Field
FinalThe verdict · 2021 Week 4
It turned at Q1 2:48, 1st and 8 — 13.4 win-probability points to the Bears on one snap, the largest move of the game.
The snaps that bent it
The biggest swing of the game · Q1 2:48 · 1st and 8
Unnamed on the sheet
Bears
(2:48) (Shotgun) 16-J.Goff FUMBLES (Aborted) at CHI 8, RECOVERED by CHI-98-B.Nichols at CHI 10. 98-B.Nichols to CHI 11 for 1 yard (72-H.Vaitai). Penalty on DET-16-J.Goff, Illegal Motion, declined.
Chicago Bears 24–14. Biggest swing: Q1 2:48, Bears +13.4% win probability on one snap.
13.4
win-probability points on one snap
The largest move of the game. The two below are drawn against it.
What separated them
Red zone
Bears won this one — 3 touchdowns on 4 trips, against Lions at 1 touchdown on 6 trips.
Bearsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Running the ball
Bears won this one — +0.17 expected points per carry, against Lions at -0.29 expected points per carry.
Bearsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Third down
Lions owned this one and still lost it — 4 of 11 on third down, against Bears at 1 of 8 on third down.
Lionsthe gap went the other way from the scoreboard
Explosive plays
Bears won this one — 11 chunk plays, against Lions at 7 chunk plays.
Bearsthe 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 1.7 win-probability points apart on the average play, and 6 apart at the widest — with the model the more convinced about Lions.
(2:48) (Shotgun) 16-J.Goff FUMBLES (Aborted) at CHI 8, RECOVERED by CHI-98-B.Nichols at CHI 10. 98-B.Nichols to CHI 11 for 1 yard (72-H.Vaitai). Penalty on DET-16-J.Goff, Illegal Motion, declined.
The modelled figures are the league play-by-play model's, not ours.
How the points landed
David Montgomery's 4-yard rushing touchdown with 8:53 left in the 1st put Chicago Bears ahead for good. The lead never changed over the 5 scores that followed.
6 scores · bar length is the lead after each one
Down-to-down truth
Lionscategory by categoryBears
Bears ahead 6–3 on categories, including the biggest gap of the duel — sacks taken.
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, ±0.35 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: Lions ran 67 snaps at a 64% dropback rate against Bears’s 55 at 35%. Red-zone trips: Lions 6, Bears 4.
Bears won the down-to-down efficiency fight: 0.19 expected points added per play vs -0.05.
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.
CHI's early-down pass rate, 26.1%, was the lowest of the 32 team-games charted in week 4 — 7.2 points clear of the next team along.
46 early downs this game, floor 15 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 10.4 points.
CHI's pass rate over expected turned over: +4.5 pts in week 3 against −14.3 pts here — they threw more than the situation asked then and ran more than the situation asked now, a turn of 3.0 of their own weekly swings across the two.
55 snaps this game, floor 20 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 6.3 points.
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 -25 pts to 14 pts
Over Expected room →Lions-3.4 ptsright on their number · +2.1 vs their -5.5 pts, and they swing ±7.8 week to week (+0.27× that swing) · 67 snaps
Bears-14.3 ptsleaned — ran more than the situation asked · −11.8 vs their -2.5 pts, and they swing ±6.3 week to week (−1.89× that swing) · 55 snaps
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale 22% to 83%
Tendencies room →Lions56.6%right on their number · −0.2 vs their 56.8%, and they swing ±10.1 week to week (−0.02× that swing) · 53 early downs
Bears26.1%off script — ran early · −28.8 vs their 54.9%, and they swing ±10.4 week to week (−2.77× that swing) · 46 early downs
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -36% to 154%
Fourth Down room →Lions75.0%inside their normal wobble · +16.9 vs their 58.1%, and they swing ±29.0 week to week (+0.58× that swing) · 4 fourth-and-short calls
Bears—Only 2 fourth-and-short calls tonight — too few to read a tendency. Their season number is 59.3%.
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -9% to 41%
Tendencies room →Lions21.1%leaned — got home · +10.5 vs their 10.6%, and they swing ±6.5 week to week (+1.62× that swing) · 19 dropbacks
Bears16.3%right on their number · +0.7 vs their 15.6%, and they swing ±9.8 week to week (+0.07× that swing) · 43 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.
CHI's early-down pass rate was the night's one real departure: 26.1%, 28.8 points below their season mean of 54.9% and 2.8 times their own 10.4-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.
Detroit Lions
48 dressed · 5 inactive · 1 never used
Inactive · 5
Dressed, never took a snap · 1
Chicago Bears
48 dressed · 5 inactive · 2 never used
Inactive · 5
Dressed, never took a snap · 2
Who moved the needle
Passing · DET
24/38, 299 yds, 2 TD, 0 INT
4.8 expected points added · +1.0% completion over expected
Passing · CHI
11/17, 209 yds, 0 TD, 1 INT
3.2 expected points added · +9.2% completion over expected
What each man’s workload was worth, against what he actually banked. Final. Usage and expected points land with the weekly sync, not live.
David Montgomery banked 7.9 more points than his own workload asked for.
| Player | Full PPR | Vs expected | Snap share | Routes | Targets | Air yards | Line |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| David MontgomeryRB · Committee Back | 22.6 | +7.9 | 62% | 53% | 0% | — | 23 car, 106 yd, 2 TD |
| Kalif RaymondWR · Rotational Receiver | 19.6 | +5.7 | 75% | 74% | 16% | 28% | 3/6, 46 yd, 2 TD |
| Darnell MooneyWR · Alpha Receiver | 18.5 | +6.3 | 71% | 79% | 41% | 51% | 1 car, 10 yd · 5/7, 125 yd |
| Jared GoffQB · Starter QB | 16.8 | −4.0 | 100% | — | 0% | — | 24/38, 299 yd, 2 TD · 3 car, 8 yd |
| Damien WilliamsRB · Receiving Back | 15.0 | +6.4 | 33% | 42% | 12% | 0% | 8 car, 55 yd, 1 TD · 2/2, 15 yd |
| Amon-Ra St. BrownWR · Featured Receiver | 13.0 | +1.4 | 72% | 72% | 22% | 21% | 6/8, 70 yd |
| Quintez CephusWR · Rotational Receiver | 12.3 | +3.8 | 87% | 77% | 14% | 18% | 4/5, 83 yd |
| Allen RobinsonWR · Rotational Receiver | 9.3 | +2.9 | 69% | 84% | 18% | 24% | 3/3, 63 yd |
| D'Andre SwiftRB · Committee Back | 8.9 | −6.9 | 73% | 81% | 16% | 2% | 8 car, 16 yd · 4/6, 33 yd |
| T.J. HockensonTE · Featured Receiver | 8.2 | −3.4 | 82% | 93% | 22% | 21% | 4/8, 42 yd |
| Justin FieldsQB · Starter QB | 7.3 | −1.5 | 100% | — | 0% | — | 11/17, 209 yd, 1 INT · 3 car, 9 yd |
| Jamaal WilliamsRB · Committee Back | 6.6 | −0.8 | 30% | 16% | 0% | — | 14 car, 66 yd |
| Trinity BensonWR · Rotational Receiver | 3.2 | −1.7 | 28% | 28% | 8% | 6% | 2/3, 12 yd |
| KhaDarel HodgeWR · Rotational Receiver | 2.3 | +0.5 | 11% | 19% | 3% | 4% | 1/1, 13 yd |
| Cole KmetTE · Rotational Receiver | 1.6 | −4.7 | 98% | 95% | 18% | 27% | 1/3, 6 yd |
| Khalil HerbertRB | 0.7 | −0.6 | — | — | — | — | 7 snaps — too few to rate. |
| Marquise GoodwinWR · Rotational Receiver | 0.1 | −5.4 | 50% | 58% | 12% | 3% | 1 car, 1 yd · 0/2, 0 yd |
| J.P. HoltzTE · Rotational Receiver | 0.0 | — | 19% | 5% | 0% | — | No touches. |
| Nsimba WebsterWR | 0.0 | — | — | — | — | — | Did not take a snap. |
2 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 Bears attack right, the Lions 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.
(2:48) (Shotgun) 16-J.Goff FUMBLES (Aborted) at CHI 8, RECOVERED by CHI-98-B.Nichols at CHI 10. 98-B.Nichols to CHI 11 for 1 yard (72-H.Vaitai). Penalty on DET-16-J.Goff, Illegal Motion, declined.
Q1 2:48 · Lions · 1st & goal at CHI 8 · gained nothing · -5.56 EP · −11.4% win probability
152 snaps placed · 11 without a recorded yard line, left off the map · 4 marked moments — the largest win-probability swings, one per drive.
Post-game film: 163 plays across 19 drives, personnel groupings on 163 snaps. Everything here paints once the weekly sync ingests the game — there is no live play-level feed in this product, so nothing on this page updates while a game is being played.
6 of 19 drives ended in points. The longest march was CHI moving 89 yards from the CHI 11 for a touchdown. Each bar is the ground a drive actually covered; CHI attacks right, DET 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.
163 plays · ranked by the win probability each one moved
163 plays
Bar length is win probability the play moved
Lions0
Bears6Lions0Bears7Lions0Bears13Lions0Bears14Lions0Bears20Lions0Bears21Lions6Bears21Lions7Bears21Lions7Bears24Lions13Bears24Lions14Bears24Win 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: Lions at Bears, every play.
Full stat lines
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jared Goff | 24/38 | 299 | 2 | 0 | 4 | +4.8 |
| Player | Att | Yds | Avg | TD | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jamaal Williams | 14 | 66 | 4.7 | 0 | +2.2 |
| D'Andre Swift | 8 | 16 | 2.0 | 0 | −3.9 |
| Jared Goff | 3 | 8 | 2.7 | 0 | −6.5 |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Quintez Cephus | 4 | 5 | 83 | 0 | 14% | +5.9 |
| Amon-Ra St. Brown | 6 | 8 | 70 | 0 | 22% | +3.3 |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alex Anzalone | 4 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Derrick Barnes | 4 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Amani Oruwariye | 2 | 3 | 0.0 | 1 | 1 |
| Will Harris |
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Justin Fields | 11/17 | 209 | 0 | 1 | 1 | +3.2 |
| 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/2021_04_DET_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
Bears closed -3 and covered, winning by 10.
Total closed 42; the game landed 38 — under by 4.0.
Conditions and crew
Division game — familiarity tightens these matchups; closing numbers tend to be sharper.
| Kalif Raymond | 3 | 6 | 46 | 2 | 16% | +6.6 |
| T.J. Hockenson | 4 | 8 | 42 | 0 | 22% | −1.1 |
| D'Andre Swift | 4 | 6 | 33 | 0 | 16% | −0.3 |
| KhaDarel Hodge | 1 | 1 | 13 | 0 | 3% | +0.9 |
| Trinity Benson | 2 | 3 | 12 | 0 | 8% | +0.0 |
| 3 |
| 2 |
| 0.0 |
| 0 |
| 0 |
| Bobby Price | 3 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Charles Harris | 3 | 1 | 1.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Austin Bryant | 4 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Michael Brockers | 2 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Nicholas Williams | 1 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Tracy Walker III | 2 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 |
| 106 |
| 4.6 |
| 2 |
| +4.5 |
| Damien Williams | 8 | 55 | 6.9 | 1 | +2.1 |
| Darnell Mooney | 1 | 10 | 10.0 | 0 | +1.1 |
| Justin Fields | 3 | 9 | 3.0 | 0 | −0.2 |
| Khalil Herbert | 3 | 7 | 2.3 | 0 | −1.3 |
| Marquise Goodwin | 1 | 1 | 1.0 | 0 | −0.3 |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Darnell Mooney | 5 | 7 | 125 | 0 | 41% | +5.0 |
| Allen Robinson | 3 | 3 | 63 | 0 | 18% | +3.5 |
| Damien Williams | 2 | 2 | 15 | 0 | 12% | +0.2 |
| Cole Kmet | 1 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 18% | −1.1 |
| Marquise Goodwin | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 12% | −1.8 |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Roquan Smith | 8 | 2 | 1.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Deon Bush | 6 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Alec Ogletree | 7 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Angelo Blackson | 2 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Duke Shelley | 5 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Robert Quinn | 4 | 0 | 1.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Trevis Gipson | 3 | 1 | 1.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Bilal Nichols | 1 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Caleb Johnson | 2 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Eddie Jackson | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
