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 11:23 PM ET · 13 to play · 1 final
Game Center
Game Center
2022 Week 7 · Sun, Oct 23, 2022 · AT&T Stadium
FinalThe verdict · 2022 Week 7
It turned at Q4 12:29, 1st and 1, on Jamaal Williams — 20.9 win-probability points to the Cowboys on one snap, the largest move of the game.
The snaps that bent it
Dallas Cowboys 24–6 — never really in doubt late. Biggest swing: Q4 12:29, Cowboys +20.9% win probability on one snap.
The biggest swing of the game · Q4 12:29 · 1st and 1
Jamaal Williams
Cowboys
(12:29) 30-Ja.Williams up the middle to DAL 2 for -1 yards (90-D.Lawrence). FUMBLES (90-D.Lawrence), RECOVERED by DAL-42-A.Barr at DAL 1.
20.9
win-probability points on one snap
The largest move of the game. The two below are drawn against it.
What separated them
Giveaways
Cowboys won this one — 1 giveaway, against Lions at 5 giveaways.
Cowboysthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Red zone
Cowboys won this one — 3 touchdowns on 5 trips, against Lions at 0 touchdowns on 1 trip.
Cowboysthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Every snap
Cowboys won this one — +0.03 expected points per snap, against Lions at -0.29 expected points per snap.
Cowboysthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Throwing the ball
Cowboys won this one — +0.14 expected points per dropback, against Lions at -0.24 expected points per dropback.
Cowboysthe 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 11.1 win-probability points apart on the average play, and 25 apart at the widest — with the model the more convinced about Lions.
(12:29) 30-Ja.Williams up the middle to DAL 2 for -1 yards (90-D.Lawrence). FUMBLES (90-D.Lawrence), RECOVERED by DAL-42-A.Barr at DAL 1.
The modelled figures are the league play-by-play model's, not ours.
How the points landed
Ezekiel Elliott's 1-yard rushing touchdown with 10:21 left in the 3rd put Dallas Cowboys ahead for good. The lead never changed over the 2 scores that followed.
6 scores · bar length is the lead after each one
Down-to-down truth
Lionscategory by categoryCowboys
Cowboys ahead 8–0 on categories, including the biggest gap of the duel — red-zone touchdowns.
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 56 snaps at a 57% dropback rate against Cowboys’s 57 at 49%. Red-zone trips: Lions 1, Cowboys 5.
Cowboys won the down-to-down efficiency fight: 0.03 expected points added per play vs -0.29.
Derived from the play-by-play, no model
11 of 11 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.
2 of 11 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.
DAL's play-action rate, 42.9%, was the highest of the 28 team-games charted in week 7 — 7.1 points clear of the next team along.
28 dropbacks this game, floor 12 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 11.5 points. · +1.6σ from their own normal
DET's blitz rate sent, 10.7%, is past their previous low of 33.3% in week 2 — the lowest of their 6 charted games through week 7.
28 dropbacks this game, floor 12 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 11.2 points. · −2.0σ from their own normal
The season-grain rooms, pointed at this one game
11 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 -20 pts to 15 pts
Over Expected room →Lions-4.5 ptsright on their number · −2.7 vs their -1.8 pts, and they swing ±6.4 week to week (−0.42× that swing) · 56 snaps
Cowboys-1.4 ptsinside their normal wobble · +4.8 vs their -6.2 pts, and they swing ±5.0 week to week (+0.95× that swing) · 57 snaps
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale 23% to 77%
Tendencies room →Lions53.2%right on their number · +0.1 vs their 53.1%, and they swing ±9.1 week to week (+0.01× that swing) · 47 early downs
Cowboys50.0%right on their number · +0.8 vs their 49.2%, and they swing ±10.0 week to week (+0.08× that swing) · 48 early downs
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -5% to 54%
Tendencies room →Lions28.1%right on their number · +0.4 vs their 27.7%, and they swing ±8.5 week to week (+0.05× that swing) · 32 dropbacks
Cowboys42.9%leaned — faked the run · +18.2 vs their 24.7%, and they swing ±11.5 week to week (+1.58× that swing) · 28 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -42% to 115%
Fourth Down room →Lions—Only 0 fourth-and-short calls tonight — too few to read a tendency. Their season number is 50.7%.
Cowboys0.0%leaned — took the kick · −29.3 vs their 29.3%, and they swing ±27.5 week to week (−1.07× that swing) · 3 fourth-and-short calls
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -2% to 62%
Tendencies room →Lions10.7%off script — sat back · −22.4 vs their 33.1%, and they swing ±11.2 week to week (−2.00× that swing) · 28 dropbacks
Cowboys21.9%right on their number · −2.6 vs their 24.5%, and they swing ±10.1 week to week (−0.26× that swing) · 32 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -7% to 39%
Tendencies room →Lions17.9%right on their number · +3.2 vs their 14.6%, and they swing ±8.6 week to week (+0.38× that swing) · 28 dropbacks
Cowboys18.8%right on their number · +2.0 vs their 16.8%, and they swing ±8.6 week to week (+0.23× that swing) · 32 dropbacks
DET's blitz rate sent was the night's one real departure: 10.7%, 22.4 points below their season mean of 33.1% and 2.0 times their own 11.2-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 · 7 inactive · 1 never used
Inactive · 7
Dressed, never took a snap · 1
Dallas Cowboys
48 dressed · 6 inactive · 1 never used
Inactive · 6
Dressed, never took a snap · 1
Who moved the needle
Passing · DET
21/26, 228 yds, 0 TD, 2 INT
-6.6 expected points added · +9.3% completion over expected
Passing · DAL
19/25, 207 yds, 1 TD, 0 INT
9.7 expected points added · +10.0% 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.
Brock Wright banked 3.4 more points than his own workload asked for.
| Player | Full PPR | Vs expected | Snap share | Routes | Targets | Air yards | Line |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ezekiel ElliottRB · Committee Back | 17.7 | +1.5 | 49% | 46% | 0% | — | 15 car, 57 yd, 2 TD |
| Kalif RaymondWR · Featured Receiver | 14.5 | +3.3 | 90% | 91% | 24% | 32% | 2 car, 20 yd · 5/6, 75 yd |
| Tony PollardRB · Committee Back | 12.9 | +1.1 | 65% | 57% | 8% | 1% | 12 car, 83 yd · 2/2, 26 yd |
| Dak PrescottQB · Starter QB | 12.3 | −2.6 | 100% | — | 0% | — | 19/25, 207 yd, 1 TD · 3 car, 0 yd |
| CeeDee LambWR · Featured Receiver | 10.6 | −1.1 | 83% | 96% | 24% | 39% | 1 car, -4 yd · 4/6, 70 yd |
| Dalton SchultzTE · Featured Receiver | 9.9 | +0.8 | 65% | 71% | 20% | 9% | 5/5, 49 yd |
| Brock WrightTE · Rotational Receiver | 9.7 | +3.4 | 53% | 38% | 16% | 6% | 4/4, 57 yd |
| T.J. HockensonTE · Featured Receiver | 8.8 | +0.9 | 83% | 94% | 20% | 26% | 4/5, 48 yd |
| Peyton HendershotTE · Rotational Receiver | 8.5 | +2.2 | 30% | 21% | 8% | 0% | 2/2, 5 yd, 1 TD |
| Noah BrownWR · Alpha Receiver | 8.0 | −4.5 | 79% | 86% | 28% | 31% | 5/7, 50 yd |
| Jamaal WilliamsRB · Bell Cow Back | 7.3 | −3.7 | 44% | 31% | 4% | 0% | 15 car, 79 yd · 1/1, 4 yd |
| Craig ReynoldsRB · Receiving Back | 6.0 | −0.7 | 34% | 44% | 12% | 0% | 4 car, 12 yd · 3/3, 18 yd |
| Tom KennedyWR · Rotational Receiver | 3.4 | −1.2 | 51% | 59% | 12% | 15% | 2/3, 14 yd |
| Josh ReynoldsWR · Rotational Receiver | 1.8 | −2.3 | 80% | 88% | 8% | 27% | 1/2, 8 yd |
| Jake FergusonTE · Rotational Receiver | 1.7 | +0.1 | 38% | 32% | 4% | 2% | 1/1, 7 yd |
| Jared GoffQB · Starter QB | 1.5 | −7.9 | 100% | — | 0% | — | 21/26, 228 yd, 2 INT · 1 car, 4 yd |
| Amon-Ra St. BrownWR · Rotational Receiver | 1.4 | −0.1 | 17% | 13% | 4% | 0% | 1/1, 4 yd |
| Kavontae TurpinWR · Rotational Receiver | 0.3 | −0.5 | — | — | — | — | 6 snaps — too few to rate. |
| Justin JacksonRB | 0.2 | −1.2 | 20% | 22% | 0% | — | 3 car, 2 yd |
| Michael GallupWR · Rotational Receiver | 0.0 | −3.6 | 67% | 79% | 8% | 18% | 0/2, 0 yd |
1 player played under 8 snaps, so their shares read as a dash rather than a number.
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 Cowboys 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.
(12:29) 30-Ja.Williams up the middle to DAL 2 for -1 yards (90-D.Lawrence). FUMBLES (90-D.Lawrence), RECOVERED by DAL-42-A.Barr at DAL 1.
Q4 12:29 · Lions · 1st & goal at DAL 1 · gained nothing · -6.16 EP · −31.0% win probability
150 snaps placed · 9 without a recorded yard line, left off the map · 4 marked moments — the largest win-probability swings, one per drive.
Post-game film: 159 plays across 22 drives, personnel groupings on 159 snaps, manual charting on 138. 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.
6 of 22 drives ended in points. The longest march was DAL moving 82 yards from the DAL 18 for a touchdown. Each bar is the ground a drive actually covered; DAL 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.
159 plays · ranked by the win probability each one moved
159 plays
Bar length is win probability the play moved
Lions3
Cowboys0Lions3Cowboys3Lions6Cowboys3How the play was built
Empty backfield, a man in motion.
Thrown on the first read, caught in traffic.
Lions6Cowboys9Lions6Cowboys10How the play was built
A man in motion.
Thrown on the second read, caught in traffic.
How the play was built
A man in motion.
How the play was built
A screen, play action, a man in motion.
A designed throw, the target set before the snap.
How the play was built
Two in the backfield, nobody in motion.
Lions6Cowboys16Lions6Cowboys17Lions6Cowboys23Lions6Cowboys24Win 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 Cowboys, every play.
Full stat lines
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jared Goff | 21/26 | 228 | 0 | 2 | 5 | −6.6 |
| Player | Att | Yds | Avg | TD | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jamaal Williams | 15 | 79 | 5.3 | 0 | −6.0 |
| Kalif Raymond | 2 | 20 | 10.0 | 0 | +1.4 |
| Craig Reynolds |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kalif Raymond | 5 | 6 | 75 | 0 | 24% | +4.3 |
| Brock Wright | 4 | 4 | 57 | 0 | 16% |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jeff Okudah | 11 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| DeShon Elliott | 5 | 4 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Alex Anzalone |
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dak Prescott | 19/25 | 207 | 1 | 0 | 2 | +9.7 |
| 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/2022_07_DET_DAL
The cards are drawn from the charted play-by-play, not live, and each one says so on its face.
Closing number vs result
Cowboys closed -7 and covered, winning by 18.
Total closed 49.5; the game landed 30 — under by 19.5.
Conditions and crew
| 4 |
| 12 |
| 3.0 |
| 0 |
| −2.0 |
| Jared Goff | 1 | 4 | 4.0 | 0 | −1.1 |
| Justin Jackson | 3 | 2 | 0.7 | 0 | −1.8 |
| +4.2 |
| T.J. Hockenson | 4 | 5 | 48 | 0 | 20% | +2.8 |
| Craig Reynolds | 3 | 3 | 18 | 0 | 12% | +1.1 |
| Tom Kennedy | 2 | 3 | 14 | 0 | 12% | −1.1 |
| Josh Reynolds | 1 | 2 | 8 | 0 | 8% | −3.1 |
| Jamaal Williams | 1 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 4% | −0.5 |
| Amon-Ra St. Brown | 1 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 4% | −0.0 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
| 0.5 |
| 0 |
| 0 |
| Kerby Joseph | 3 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Amani Oruwariye | 3 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Malcolm Rodriguez | 4 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Julian Okwara | 1 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| A.J. Parker | 3 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Aidan Hutchinson | 2 | 1 | 1.5 | 0 | 0 |
| Jared Goff | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Tony Pollard | 12 | 83 | 6.9 | 0 | −0.4 |
| Ezekiel Elliott | 15 | 57 | 3.8 | 2 | −0.5 |
| Kavontae Turpin | 1 | 3 | 3.0 | 0 | −0.4 |
| Dak Prescott | 3 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | −2.3 |
| CeeDee Lamb | 1 | -4 | -4.0 | 0 | −1.1 |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CeeDee Lamb | 4 | 6 | 70 | 0 | 24% | +6.5 |
| Noah Brown | 5 | 7 | 50 | 0 | 28% | −3.1 |
| Dalton Schultz | 5 | 5 | 49 | 0 | 20% | +3.9 |
| Tony Pollard | 2 | 2 | 26 | 0 | 8% | +2.2 |
| Jake Ferguson | 1 | 1 | 7 | 0 | 4% | +1.0 |
| Peyton Hendershot | 2 | 2 | 5 | 1 | 8% | +0.8 |
| Michael Gallup | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 8% | −1.3 |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Leighton Vander Esch | 5 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jayron Kearse | 7 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Donovan Wilson | 4 | 3 | 1.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Micah Parsons | 5 | 1 | 2.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Anthony Barr | 4 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Jourdan Lewis | 2 | 1 | 0.0 | 1 | 1 |
| Sam Williams | 3 | 0 | 2.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Demarcus Lawrence | 2 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Carlos Watkins | 1 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Malik Hooker | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
