The biggest swing of the game · Q1 5:27 · 4th and 1
Derrick Henry
Titans
(5:27) (Shotgun) 22-D.Henry up the middle for 2 yards, TOUCHDOWN.
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 12:21 AM ET · 16 to play
Game Center
Game Center
2022 Week 2 · Mon, Sep 19, 2022 · New Era Field
FinalThe verdict · 2022 Week 2
It turned at Q1 5:27, 4th and 1, on Derrick Henry — 7.0 win-probability points to the Titans on one snap, the largest move of the game, and it still was not enough.
The snaps that bent it
The biggest swing of the game · Q1 5:27 · 4th and 1
Derrick Henry
Titans
(5:27) (Shotgun) 22-D.Henry up the middle for 2 yards, TOUCHDOWN.
Buffalo Bills 41–7 — never really in doubt late. Biggest swing: Q1 5:27, Titans +7.0% win probability on one snap.
7.0
win-probability points on one snap
The largest move of the game. The two below are drawn against it.
What separated them
Every snap
Bills won this one — +0.23 expected points per snap, against Titans at -0.38 expected points per snap.
Billsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Explosive plays
Bills won this one — 7 chunk plays, against Titans at 0 chunk plays.
Billsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Giveaways
Bills won this one — no giveaways, against Titans at 3 giveaways.
Billsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Throwing the ball
Bills won this one — +0.39 expected points per dropback, against Titans at -0.42 expected points per dropback.
Billsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Who won it for them
Note
The model against the market, the momentum underneath, every drive — scrub to replay it
The model and the market were 10.2 win-probability points apart on the average play, and 24 apart at the widest — with the model the more convinced about Titans.
(5:27) (Shotgun) 22-D.Henry up the middle for 2 yards, TOUCHDOWN.
The modelled figures are the league play-by-play model's, not ours.
How the points landed
Tyler Bass's 49-yard field goal with 7:25 left in the 2nd put Buffalo Bills ahead for good. The lead never changed over the 5 scores that followed.
8 scores · bar length is the lead after each one
Down-to-down truth
Bills ahead 8–1 on categories, including the biggest gap of the duel — explosive plays.
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, ±0.42 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: Titans ran 53 snaps at a 53% dropback rate against Bills’s 63 at 67%. Red-zone trips: Titans 1, Bills 6.
Bills won the down-to-down efficiency fight: 0.23 expected points added per play vs -0.38.
Derived from the play-by-play, no model
12 of 12 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.
BUF's pass rate over expected, +18.2 pts, was the highest of the 32 team-games charted in week 2 — 2.9 points clear of the next team along.
63 snaps this game, floor 20 — 16 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 7.7 points.
TEN's sack or hit rate turned over: 25.8% in week 1 against 7.1% here — they got home then and stayed blocked now, a turn of 2.3 of their own weekly swings across the two.
42 dropbacks this game, floor 12 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 8.0 points.
BUF's sack or hit rate turned over: 30.6% in week 1 against 10.7% here — they got home then and stayed blocked now, a turn of 3.4 of their own weekly swings across the two.
28 dropbacks this game, floor 12 — 16 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 5.9 points.
The season-grain rooms, pointed at this one game
12 of 12 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 -37 pts to 28 pts
Over Expected room →right on their number · +1.3 vs their -10.7 pts, and they swing ±9.8 week to week (+0.13× that swing) · 53 snaps
leaned — threw more than the situation asked · +12.0 vs their 6.1 pts, and they swing ±7.7 week to week (+1.56× that swing) · 63 snaps
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale 16% to 87%
Tendencies room →right on their number · +3.6 vs their 46.4%, and they swing ±11.7 week to week (+0.31× that swing) · 40 early downs
inside their normal wobble · +5.4 vs their 60.6%, and they swing ±9.7 week to week (+0.55× that swing) · 47 early downs
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -7% to 57%
Tendencies room →inside their normal wobble · −10.7 vs their 25.0%, and they swing ±12.5 week to week (−0.85× that swing) · 28 dropbacks
right on their number · −3.2 vs their 19.8%, and they swing ±8.3 week to week (−0.38× that swing) · 42 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -50% to 174%
Fourth Down room →inside their normal wobble · +12.5 vs their 20.8%, and they swing ±24.6 week to week (+0.51× that swing) · 3 fourth-and-short calls
inside their normal wobble · +38.3 vs their 61.7%, and they swing ±43.9 week to week (+0.87× that swing) · 3 fourth-and-short calls
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -14% to 47%
Tendencies room →right on their number · +2.9 vs their 20.9%, and they swing ±9.4 week to week (+0.31× that swing) · 42 dropbacks
right on their number · −5.7 vs their 16.4%, and they swing ±11.9 week to week (−0.48× that swing) · 28 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -7% to 34%
Tendencies room →inside their normal wobble · −6.8 vs their 13.9%, and they swing ±8.0 week to week (−0.84× that swing) · 42 dropbacks
inside their normal wobble · −3.3 vs their 14.0%, and they swing ±5.9 week to week (−0.55× that swing) · 28 dropbacks
BUF's pass rate over expected was the night's one real departure: 18.2 pts, 12.0 points above their season mean of 6.1 pts and 1.6 times their own 7.7-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.
Tennessee Titans
48 dressed · 5 inactive
Inactive · 5
Buffalo Bills
48 dressed · 7 inactive
Inactive · 7
Who moved the needle
Passing · BUF
26/38, 317 yds, 4 TD, 0 INT
16.2 expected points added · +3.8% completion over expected
Passing · TEN
11/20, 117 yds, 0 TD, 2 INT
-11.5 expected points added · -11.2% completion over expected
Receiving · BUF
12/15 for 148 yds, 3 TD
38% of team targets · 14.6 expected points added
What each man’s workload was worth, against what he actually banked. Final. Usage and expected points land with the weekly sync, not live.
Stefon Diggs banked 13.1 more points than his own workload asked for.
| Player | Full PPR | Vs expected | Snap share | Routes | Targets | Air yards | Line |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 44.8 | +13.1 | 66% | 79% | 38% | 46% | 12/15, 148 yd, 3 TD | |
| 29.7 | +6.0 | 76% | — | 0% | — | 26/38, 317 yd, 4 TD · 1 car, 10 yd | |
| 9.7 | +3.3 | 26% | 21% | 8% | 8% | 2/3, 17 yd, 1 TD | |
| 8.7 | −0.5 | 45% | 61% | 26% | 22% | 4/6, 47 yd | |
| 8.5 | +0.6 | 46% | 39% | 0% | — | 13 car, 25 yd, 1 TD | |
| 8.1 | −0.7 | 69% | 79% | 13% | 11% | 4/5, 41 yd | |
| 7.9 | +0.1 | 66% | 68% | 22% | 22% | 4/5, 39 yd | |
| 7.0 | +1.4 | 78% | 79% | 8% | 13% | 2/3, 50 yd | |
| 5.7 | +0.5 | 46% | 43% | 8% | 10% | 2/3, 37 yd | |
| 5.3 | −3.4 | 26% | 7% | 3% | 4% | 11 car, 53 yd · 0/1, 0 yd | |
| 4.7 | −1.1 | 50% | 50% | 4% | 0% | 9 car, 37 yd · 1/1, 0 yd | |
| 4.1 | −3.4 | 54% | 67% | 8% | 0% | 6 car, 19 yd · 2/3, 2 yd | |
| 2.9 | −6.8 | 50% | 68% | 22% | 19% | 1/5, 19 yd | |
| 2.6 | −0.6 | 28% | 36% | 5% | 3% | 1/2, 16 yd | |
| 2.3 | −3.6 | 61% | 61% | 17% | 33% | 1/4, 13 yd | |
| 1.7 | −1.6 | 19% | 21% | 3% | 0% | 3 car, 17 yd · 0/1, 0 yd | |
| 1.6 | +0.3 | 41% | 29% | 3% | 1% | 1/1, 6 yd | |
| 1.5 | 0.0 | 23% | 32% | 4% | 0% | 1/1, 5 yd | |
| 0.9 | −7.1 | 70% | — | 0% | — | 11/20, 117 yd, 2 INT · 1 car, 2 yd | |
| 0.2 | −0.8 | 24% | — | 0% | — | 0/2, 0 yd · 3 car, 2 yd | |
| 0.0 | — | — | — | — | — | Did not take a snap. | |
| 0.0 | −3.1 | 35% | 21% | 5% | 8% | 0/2, 0 yd | |
| 0.0 | — | — | — | — | — | No snap count on file, so his shares read as a dash. | |
| 0.0 | −1.9 | 32% | 18% | 4% | 6% | 0/1, 0 yd | |
| -0.2 | −4.4 | 30% | — | 0% | — | 1/4, 6 yd · 4 car, 16 yd |
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 Bills attack right, the Titans 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.
(5:27) (Shotgun) 22-D.Henry up the middle for 2 yards, TOUCHDOWN.
Q1 5:27 · Titans · 4th & 1 at BUF 2 · gained 2 · +2.92 EP · +11.1% win probability
158 snaps placed · 8 without a recorded yard line, left off the map · 4 marked moments — the largest win-probability swings, one per drive.
Post-game film: 166 plays across 22 drives, personnel groupings on 166 snaps, manual charting on 142. 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.
7 of 22 drives ended in points. The longest march was BUF moving 80 yards from the BUF 20 for a touchdown. Each bar is the ground a drive actually covered; BUF attacks right, TEN 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.
166 plays · ranked by the win probability each one moved
166 plays
How the play was built
Nobody in motion.
Thrown on the second read.
How the play was built
Nobody in motion.
Win 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: Titans at Bills, every play.
Full stat lines
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ryan Tannehill | 11/20 | 117 | 0 | 2 | 2 | −11.5 |
| Malik Willis | 1/4 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | −1.9 |
| Player | Att | Yds | Avg | TD | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hassan Haskins | 9 | 37 | 4.1 | 0 | +0.2 |
| Derrick Henry | 13 | 25 | 1.9 | 1 | −1.7 |
| Malik Willis |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Treylon Burks | 4 | 6 | 47 | 0 | 26% | +4.8 |
| Robert Woods | 4 | 5 | 39 | 0 | 22% | −1.9 |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Roger McCreary | 11 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kevin Byard | 4 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Zach Cunningham | 4 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Caleb Farley |
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Josh Allen | 26/38 | 317 | 4 | 0 | 1 | +16.2 |
| Case Keenum | 0/2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | −1.9 |
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/2022_02_TEN_BUF
The cards are drawn from the play-by-play sync, not live, and each one says so on its face.
Closing number vs result
Bills closed -10 and covered, winning by 34.
Total closed 47.5; the game landed 48 — over by 0.5.
Conditions and crew
| 4 |
| 16 |
| 4.0 |
| 0 |
| −5.6 |
| Ryan Tannehill | 1 | 2 | 2.0 | 0 | +0.5 |
| Austin Hooper | 1 | 5 | 19 | 0 | 22% | −0.7 |
| Nick Westbrook-Ikhine | 1 | 4 | 13 | 0 | 17% | −9.9 |
| Kyle Philips | 1 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 4% | −0.8 |
| Hassan Haskins | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 4% | −1.0 |
| Josh Gordon | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 4% | −0.5 |
| 3 |
| 1 |
| 0.0 |
| 0 |
| 0 |
| Naquan Jones | 2 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| DeMarcus Walker | 2 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Tre Avery | 3 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Joseph Jones | 2 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kevin Strong | 1 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Amani Hooker | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Player | Att | Yds | Avg | TD | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| James Cook | 11 | 53 | 4.8 | 0 | +0.8 |
| Devin Singletary | 6 | 19 | 3.2 | 0 | −1.5 |
| Zack Moss | 3 | 17 | 5.7 | 0 | −0.8 |
| Josh Allen | 1 | 10 | 10.0 | 0 | +2.0 |
| Case Keenum | 3 | 2 | 0.7 | 0 | −5.4 |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stefon Diggs | 12 | 15 | 148 | 3 | 38% | +14.6 |
| Jake Kumerow | 2 | 3 | 50 | 0 | 8% | +3.2 |
| Dawson Knox | 4 | 5 | 41 | 0 | 13% | +1.8 |
| Isaiah McKenzie | 2 | 3 | 37 | 0 | 8% | +1.8 |
| Reggie Gilliam | 2 | 3 | 17 | 1 | 8% | +1.1 |
| Jamison Crowder | 1 | 2 | 16 | 0 | 5% | +2.2 |
| Quintin Morris | 1 | 1 | 6 | 0 | 3% | +0.3 |
| Devin Singletary | 2 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 8% | −2.8 |
| James Cook | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3% | −0.5 |
| Zack Moss | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3% | −3.7 |
| Khalil Shakir | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 5% | −1.9 |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Taron Johnson | 4 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kaiir Elam | 3 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Gregory Rousseau | 2 | 1 | 1.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Christian Benford | 3 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jordan Poyer | 2 | 1 | 0.0 | 1 | 2 |
| Matt Milano | 2 | 1 | 0.0 | 1 | 1 |
| Siran Neal | 1 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Tremaine Edmunds | 2 | 0 | 1.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Jaquan Johnson | 1 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Dane Jackson | 1 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |