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 .md to those URLs or by sending Accept: text/markdown; other pages answer 404.
Chicago Bears 13 at Los Angeles Chargers 30. Final.
Chargers -9.5 ✓U 46 ✓
The verdict · 2023 Week 8
Los Angeles Chargers 30, Bears 13 — and it was over early.
It turned at Q1 12:52, 4th and 21 — 8.4 win-probability points to the Bears 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 12:52 · 4th and 21
Unnamed on the sheet
Bears
(12:52) 16-T.Gill punts 41 yards to LAC 8, Center-48-P.Scales, fair catch by 12-D.Davis. Penalty on LAC-0-D.Henley, Running Into the Kicker, declined.
Dome
Chargers closed -9.5 and covered, winning by 17.
Los Angeles Chargers 30–13 — never really in doubt late. Biggest swing: Q1 12:52, Bears +8.4% win probability on one snap.
8.4
win-probability points on one snap
The largest move of the game. The two below are drawn against it.
Darnell MooneyBearsQ1 14:54(14:54) (Shotgun) 17-T.Bagent pass deep right to 11-D.Mooney to LAC 38 for 41 yards (26-A.Samuel). Penalty on LAC-26-A.Samuel, Defensive Pass Interference, declined.
4.1pts
Tyson BagentChargersQ1 13:28(13:28) (Shotgun) 17-T.Bagent sacked at LAC 49 for -10 yards (97-J.Bosa).
7.7pts
What separated them
Running the ball
Bears owned this one and still lost it — +0.02 expected points per carry, against Chargers at -0.57 expected points per carry.
Bearsthe gap went the other way from the scoreboard
Throwing the ball
Chargers won this one — +0.30 expected points per dropback, against Bears at -0.25 expected points per dropback.
Chargersthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Red zone
Bears owned this one and still lost it — 2 touchdowns on 2 trips, against Chargers at 2 touchdowns on 3 trips.
Bearsthe gap went the other way from the scoreboard
Giveaways
Chargers won this one — 1 giveaway, against Bears at 2 giveaways.
1 of the 3 swings name a man the week's roster cannot confirm, so that portrait is withheld.
Drawn from the weekly play-by-play file, which paints on the Monday 4:00 AM ET sync after the game.
The model against the market, the momentum underneath, every drive — scrub to replay it
How the game was won
The model and the market were 5.9 win-probability points apart on the average play, and 32 apart at the widest — with the model the more convinced about Bears.
MarketModelmodel higher on Chargershigher on Bears161 of 167 plays carry both curves
(12:52) 16-T.Gill punts 41 yards to LAC 8, Center-48-P.Scales, fair catch by 12-D.Davis. Penalty on LAC-0-D.Henley, Running Into the Kicker, declined.
Swing −8.4 for ChargersExpected points +0.00 for ChargersThe model had Bears 24 points higher than the market did.play 7
The solid line is the betting market's home win probability; the dashed line is the play-by-play model's. The shaded band between them is the disagreement — emerald where the model liked the home team more, red where it liked the away team more. Drag across the curve or use arrow keys to replay the game; gold diamonds mark the biggest swings.
Highest-leverage plays
1st · 12:52LAC +8% win prob(12:52) 16-T.Gill punts 41 yards to LAC 8, Center-48-P.Scales, fair catch by 12-D.Davis. Penalty on LAC-0-D.Henley, Running Into the Kicker, declined.
1st · 13:28CHI +8% win prob(13:28) (Shotgun) 17-T.Bagent sacked at LAC 49 for -10 yards (97-J.Bosa).
1st · 14:54LAC +4% win prob(14:54) (Shotgun) 17-T.Bagent pass deep right to 11-D.Mooney to LAC 38 for 41 yards (26-A.Samuel). Penalty on LAC-26-A.Samuel, Defensive Pass Interference, declined.
1st · 7:19LAC +4% win prob(7:19) (Shotgun) 10-J.Herbert pass short left to 30-A.Ekeler for 39 yards, TOUCHDOWN.
1st · 5:17CHI +3% win prob(5:17) 16-T.Gill punts 38 yards to LAC 30, Center-48-P.Scales, fair catch by 12-D.Davis. PENALTY on CHI-12-V.Jones, Fair Catch Interference, 15 yards, enforced at LAC 30.
1st · 12:12LAC +3% win prob(12:12) (Shotgun) 10-J.Herbert pass short left to 13-K.Allen to LAC 13 for 4 yards (29-T.Stevenson).
SettledThe modelled figures are the league play-by-play model's, not ours.
How the points landed
The margin ledger
Austin Ekeler's 39-yard touchdown catch with 7:19 left in the 1st put Los Angeles Chargers ahead for good. The lead never changed over the 7 scores that followed.
3rd8:56Cameron Dicker·53-yd field goal53-yard field goalholder J.Scott · snap J.Harris+37–27
3rd3:05Cameron Dicker·46-yd field goal46-yard field goalholder J.Scott · snap J.Harris+37–30
4th2:22Tyson Bagent·1-yd TD run1-yard rushing touchdowntwo-point no good+613–30
8 scores · bar length is the lead after each one
Down-to-down truth
Situational splits
Bearscategory by categoryChargers
Bears2–6Chargers
297Total yards352
4.8Yards per play5.4
44%Success rate38%
43%Third-down rate54%
2Red-zone touchdowns2
4Explosive plays3
18First downs19
1Sacks taken0
2Turnovers1
The read
Chargers ahead 6–2 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, ±0.57 points.
Every snapexpected points added per play, all downs
−0.15Bears: −0.15 expected points added per play
−0.02Chargers: −0.02 expected points added per play
Dropping backexpected points added per dropback
−0.25Bears: −0.25 expected points added per play
+0.30Chargers: +0.30 expected points added per play
Running itexpected points added per rush
+0.02Bears: +0.02 expected points added per play
−0.57Chargers: −0.57 expected points added per play
Neither side “wins” volume or play-calling mix, so neither is drawn as a duel: Bears ran 62 snaps at a 65% dropback rate against Chargers’s 65 at 63%. Red-zone trips: Bears 2, Chargers 3.
NoteChargers won the down-to-down efficiency fight: -0.02 expected points added per play vs -0.15.
Derived from the play-by-play, no model
The Read
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.
CHI's play-action rate, 7.5%, is past their previous low of 15.6% in week 6 — the lowest of their 8 charted games through week 8.
2.2 times their own weekly swing below their number.
40 dropbacks this game, floor 12 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 7.3 points.
high through week 8Against their seasonFourth Down
CHI's fourth-and-short go rate, 80.0%, is past their previous high of 50.0% in week 3 — the highest of their 5 charted games through week 8.
2.0 times their own weekly swing above their number.
5 fourth-and-short calls this game, floor 3 — 9 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 19.9 points.
The season-grain rooms, pointed at this one game
Was this normal for them?
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.
their week-to-week swingall 32 teams
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -20 pts to 21 pts
leaned — stayed blocked · −7.6 vs their 12.4%, and they swing ±6.5 week to week (−1.17× that swing) · 41 dropbacks
Chargers5.0%
leaned — stayed blocked · −8.5 vs their 13.5%, and they swing ±6.9 week to week (−1.23× that swing) · 40 dropbacks
NoteCHI's play-action rate was the night's one real departure: 7.5%, 15.8 points below their season mean of 23.3% and 2.2 times their own 7.3-point weekly swing.
The Game Day Roster
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.
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 field map
Every snap, where it happened
The whole game as one hundred yards. The Chargers 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.
Bears←Chargers→
Q1Q2Q3Q4
T.Bagent pass+10% win probabilitymoment 1 of 4
(14:54) (Shotgun) 17-T.Bagent pass deep right to 11-D.Mooney to LAC 38 for 41 yards (26-A.Samuel). Penalty on LAC-26-A.Samuel, Defensive Pass Interference, declined.
Q1 14:54 · Bears · 1st & 10 at CHI 21 · gained 41 · +2.85 EP · +10.2% win probability
159 snaps placed · 8 without a recorded yard line, left off the map · 4 marked moments — the largest win-probability swings, one per drive.
The Film Room · post-game
Post-game film: 167 plays across 21 drives, personnel groupings on 159 snaps, the eleven on the field by name, manual charting on 162. 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.
Possession by possession
The field rail
8 of 21 drives ended in points. The longest march was LAC moving 92 yards from the LAC 8 for a touchdown. Each bar is the ground a drive actually covered; LAC attacks right, CHI attacks left. Hatching marks a trip inside the twenty.
Every snap
Play stream
167 of 167 plays
Team
Quarter
Down
Play type
Expected points added
Event
Charted
Plays shown
167
EPA per play
-0.06
Success rate
39%
Yards
647
Who was on the field
Personnel groupings
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. Open any play above to see the eleven men who were actually on the field for it.
Bears1 RB, 1 TE, 3 WR43-0.1665%
Chargers1 RB, 1 TE, 3 WR39+0.1374%
Chargers1 RB, 2 TE, 2 WR18+0.0556%
Bears1 RB, 2 TE, 2 WR8+0.06100%
Bears2 RB, 1 TE, 2 WR5-0.4440%
Chargers1 RB, 2 TE, 1 WR4——
Chargers1 RB, 3 TE, 1 WR3——
Bears1 RB, 3 TE, 1 WR3——
Bears2 RB, 2 TE, 1 WR2——
Chargers1 RB, 0 TE, 4 WR1——
Bears3 RB, 2 TE, 0 WR1——
snapsepapass rate
167 plays · ranked by the win probability each one moved
Every play
Ball
When
Play
Only
Who
167 plays
Bar length is win probability the play moved
1st quarter38 plays
How the play was built
A man in motion.
Thrown on the first read, caught in traffic.
FormationShotgunOffense on the fieldOne quarterback, one back, two tight ends and two receiversDefense on the fieldFive linemen, two linebackers and four backsRoute runGoCoverageCover 2, two deepMan or zoneZoneIn the boxSeven defendersRushing the passerFourPressure (charted)The passer was kept cleanTime to throw2.8 seconds
Punt6 plays, from the Bears 21 to the Chargers 37
Bears0Chargers6
Bears0Chargers7
Touchdown11 plays, from the Chargers 8 to the Bears 39
Punt6 plays, from the Bears 25 to the Bears 32
Bears0Chargers13
Bears0Chargers14
Touchdown10 plays, from the Chargers 45 to the Bears 9
The period ended4 plays, from the Bears 25 to the Bears 33
2nd quarter48 plays
Intercepted5 plays, from the Bears 40 to the Chargers 45
Bears0Chargers17
Field goal9 plays, from the Chargers 43 to the Bears 25
Bears6Chargers17
Bears7Chargers17
Touchdown17 plays, from the Bears 25 to the Chargers 11
Bears7Chargers23
Bears7Chargers24
Touchdown14 plays, from the Chargers 25 to the Bears 11
The period ended3 plays
3rd quarter40 plays
Bears7Chargers27
Field goal14 plays, from the Chargers 25 to the Bears 35
Punt5 plays, from the Bears 25 to the Bears 27
Punt4 plays
Turnover on downs5 plays, from the Bears 20 to the Bears 29
Bears7Chargers30
Field goal4 plays, from the Bears 29 to the Bears 28
The period ended8 plays, from the Bears 25 to the Chargers 26
4th quarter41 plays
Turnover on downs1 play
Turnover on downs7 plays, from the Chargers 27 to the Bears 35
Intercepted9 plays, from the Bears 35 to the Chargers 31
Fumble lost5 plays, from the Chargers 25 to the Bears 49
Bears13Chargers30
Touchdown11 plays, from the Chargers 41 to the Chargers 1
The period ended6 plays, from the Bears 44 to the Bears 41
The period ended2 plays
Win probability is the league play-by-play model, 98.5% of plays · a dash means none was published
The cards are drawn from the play-by-play sync, not live, and each one says so on its face.
Closing number vs result
Betting context
Closing spread
Chargers -9.5
Closing total
46
Bears moneyline
+340
Chargers moneyline
-440
Chargers closed -9.5 and covered, winning by 17.
Total closed 46; the game landed 43 — under by 3.0.
Conditions and crew
Game environment
Venue
SoFi Stadium
Roof / surface
dome · matrixturf
Kickoff weather
Played indoors — no weather to report.
Referee
Brad Rogers
Rest
Bears 7 days · Chargers 7 days
Coaches
Matt Eberflus vs Brandon Staley
2nd · 12:50CHI +3% win prob(12:50) (Shotgun) 17-T.Bagent pass short left intended for 2-D.Moore INTERCEPTED by 36-J.Taylor at LAC 35. 36-J.Taylor ran ob at LAC 43 for 8 yards (11-D.Mooney).
1st · 11:32LAC +2% win prob(11:32) (Shotgun) 10-J.Herbert pass short middle to 13-K.Allen to LAC 19 for 6 yards (22-E.Hicks).
