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 12:37 AM ET · 16 to play
Game Center
Game Center
2023 Week 9 · Sun, Nov 5, 2023 · Paycor Stadium
FinalThe verdict · 2023 Week 9
It turned at Q4 13:25, 1st and 10, on Dalton Kincaid — 12.9 win-probability points to the Bengals on one snap, the largest move of the game.
The snaps that bent it
The biggest swing of the game · Q4 13:25 · 1st and 10
Dalton Kincaid
Bengals
(13:25) (No Huddle, Shotgun) 17-J.Allen pass short middle to 86-D.Kincaid to CIN 11 for 11 yards (33-N.Scott, 57-G.Pratt). FUMBLES (57-G.Pratt), RECOVERED by CIN-33-N.Scott at CIN 13. 33-N.Scott to CIN 13 for no gain (60-M.Morse). Officially a Reception for 9 yards.
Cincinnati Bengals 24–18. Biggest swing: Q4 13:25, Bengals +12.9% win probability on one snap.
12.9
win-probability points on one snap
The largest move of the game. The two below are drawn against it.
What separated them
Giveaways
Bengals won this one — no giveaways, against Bills at 2 giveaways.
Bengalsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Running the ball
Bills owned this one and still lost it — +0.18 expected points per carry, against Bengals at -0.11 expected points per carry.
Billsthe gap went the other way from the scoreboard
Staying on schedule
Bills owned this one and still lost it — 55% of snaps stayed on schedule, against Bengals at 47% of snaps stayed on schedule.
Billsthe gap went the other way from the scoreboard
Throwing the ball
Bengals won this one — +0.30 expected points per dropback, against Bills at +0.01 expected points per dropback.
Bengalsthe 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 1.2 win-probability points apart on the average play, and 6 apart at the widest — with the model the more convinced about Bengals.
(13:25) (No Huddle, Shotgun) 17-J.Allen pass short middle to 86-D.Kincaid to CIN 11 for 11 yards (33-N.Scott, 57-G.Pratt). FUMBLES (57-G.Pratt), RECOVERED by CIN-33-N.Scott at CIN 13. 33-N.Scott to CIN 13 for no gain (60
The modelled figures are the league play-by-play model's, not ours.
How the points landed
Joe Mixon's 2-yard rushing touchdown with 0:38 left in the 1st put Cincinnati Bengals ahead for good. The lead never changed over the 4 scores that followed.
7 scores · bar length is the lead after each one
Down-to-down truth
Billscategory by categoryBengals
Bengals ahead 4–2 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, ±0.35 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: Bills ran 56 snaps at a 80% dropback rate against Bengals’s 64 at 72%. Red-zone trips: Bills 3, Bengals 4.
Bengals won the down-to-down efficiency fight: 0.19 expected points added per play vs 0.04.
Derived from the play-by-play, no model
11 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 early-down pass rate, 83.7%, was the highest of the 28 team-games charted in week 9 — 12.3 points clear of the next team along.
43 early downs this game, floor 15 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 14.5 points.
CIN's pass rate over expected, +18.1 pts, was the highest of the 28 team-games charted in week 9 — 2.9 points clear of the next team along.
64 snaps this game, floor 20 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 7.7 points.
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 -23 pts to 26 pts
Over Expected room →Bills15.2 ptsleaned — threw more than the situation asked · +14.9 vs their 0.3 pts, and they swing ±9.2 week to week (+1.62× that swing) · 55 snaps
Bengals18.1 ptsleaned — threw more than the situation asked · +12.4 vs their 5.7 pts, and they swing ±7.7 week to week (+1.62× that swing) · 64 snaps
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale 19% to 93%
Tendencies room →Bills83.7%leaned — passed early · +27.9 vs their 55.8%, and they swing ±14.5 week to week (+1.92× that swing) · 43 early downs
Bengals66.7%right on their number · +3.5 vs their 63.1%, and they swing ±9.7 week to week (+0.37× that swing) · 48 early downs
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -5% to 46%
Tendencies room →Bills11.1%inside their normal wobble · −9.0 vs their 20.1%, and they swing ±10.0 week to week (−0.90× that swing) · 45 dropbacks
Bengals17.4%right on their number · +0.1 vs their 17.3%, and they swing ±7.8 week to week (+0.01× that swing) · 46 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -65% to 161%
Fourth Down room →Bills—Only 1 fourth-and-short call tonight — too few to read a tendency. Their season number is 48.3%.
Bengals50.0%inside their normal wobble · +20.4 vs their 29.6%, and they swing ±20.8 week to week (+0.98× that swing) · 4 fourth-and-short calls
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -2% to 51%
Tendencies room →Bills34.8%leaned — sent pressure · +11.0 vs their 23.8%, and they swing ±9.9 week to week (+1.10× that swing) · 46 dropbacks
Bengals15.6%inside their normal wobble · −9.0 vs their 24.6%, and they swing ±10.5 week to week (−0.86× that swing) · 45 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -2% to 36%
Tendencies room →Bills13.0%inside their normal wobble · −4.2 vs their 17.2%, and they swing ±7.5 week to week (−0.56× that swing) · 46 dropbacks
Bengals11.1%inside their normal wobble · −5.4 vs their 16.5%, and they swing ±7.3 week to week (−0.74× that swing) · 45 dropbacks
BUF's early-down pass rate was the night's one real departure: 83.7%, 27.9 points above their season mean of 55.8% and 1.9 times their own 14.5-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.
Buffalo Bills
48 dressed · 6 inactive · 2 never used
Inactive · 6
Dressed, never took a snap · 2
Cincinnati Bengals
48 dressed · 5 inactive · 3 never used
Inactive · 5
Dressed, never took a snap · 3
Who moved the needle
Passing · CIN
31/44, 348 yds, 2 TD, 0 INT
12.7 expected points added · +6.0% completion over expected
Passing · BUF
26/38, 258 yds, 1 TD, 1 INT
4.6 expected points added · +12.6% 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.
Stefon Diggs banked 9.6 more points than his own workload asked for.
| Player | Full PPR | Vs expected | Snap share | Routes | Targets | Air yards | Line |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Josh AllenQB · Starter QB | 24.7 | +1.4 | 100% | — | 0% | — | 26/38, 258 yd, 1 TD, 1 INT · 8 car, 44 yd, 1 TD |
| Stefon DiggsWR · Featured Receiver | 22.6 | +9.6 | 95% | 82% | 22% | 16% | 6/7, 86 yd, 1 TD |
| Joe BurrowQB · Starter QB | 22.3 | −4.2 | 100% | — | 0% | — | 31/44, 348 yd, 2 TD · 5 car, 4 yd |
| Tee HigginsWR · Featured Receiver | 19.0 | +2.5 | 83% | 91% | 21% | 29% | 8/9, 110 yd |
| Joe MixonRB · Bell Cow Back | 17.8 | −6.3 | 73% | 70% | 14% | 0% | 14 car, 37 yd, 1 TD · 5/6, 31 yd |
| Dalton KincaidTE · Alpha Receiver | 16.1 | 0.0 | 90% | 87% | 34% | 14% | 10/11, 81 yd |
| Drew SampleTE · Rotational Receiver | 12.0 | +6.1 | 37% | 24% | 10% | 0% | 3/4, 30 yd, 1 TD |
| Irv SmithTE · Rotational Receiver | 11.6 | +2.9 | 36% | 46% | 10% | 7% | 3/4, 26 yd, 1 TD |
| Khalil ShakirWR · Rotational Receiver | 9.7 | +3.3 | 71% | 71% | 13% | 12% | 4/4, 57 yd |
| Tyler BoydWR · Rotational Receiver | 8.6 | −1.0 | 81% | 87% | 12% | 25% | 3/5, 56 yd |
| Tanner HudsonTE · Rotational Receiver | 8.5 | +0.4 | 23% | 28% | 12% | 9% | 4/5, 45 yd |
| Ja'Marr ChaseWR · Featured Receiver | 8.1 | −11.0 | 90% | 96% | 19% | 34% | 4/8, 41 yd |
| James CookRB · Committee Back | 7.9 | −0.7 | 55% | 51% | 13% | 0% | 6 car, 20 yd · 4/4, 19 yd |
| Latavius MurrayRB | 2.0 | −0.2 | 45% | 38% | 3% | 1% | 2 car, 4 yd · 1/1, 6 yd |
| Trent SherfieldWR · Rotational Receiver | 1.9 | −0.7 | 36% | 24% | 6% | 6% | 1/2, 9 yd |
| Andrei IosivasWR · Rotational Receiver | 1.9 | +0.2 | 13% | 7% | 2% | 3% | 1/1, 9 yd |
| Trayveon WilliamsRB | 1.3 | −0.2 | 19% | 15% | 0% | — | 3 car, 13 yd |
| Ty JohnsonRB | 0.0 | — | — | — | — | — | Did not take a snap. |
| Gabe DavisWR | 0.0 | −4.2 | — | — | — | — | No snap count on file, so his shares read as a dash. |
| Deonte HartyWR · Rotational Receiver | 0.0 | −3.1 | — | — | — | — | 3 snaps — too few to rate. |
| Trenton IrwinWR · Rotational Receiver | 0.0 | — | 20% | 20% | 0% | — | No touches. |
| Chris EvansRB | 0.0 | — | — | — | — | — | 5 snaps — too few to rate. |
| Stanley MorganWR | 0.0 | — | — | — | — | — | Did not take a snap. |
5 players played under 8 snaps, so their shares read as a dash rather than a number. 4 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 Bengals attack right, the Bills 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.
(3:38) (Shotgun) 9-J.Burrow pass short right to 83-T.Boyd ran ob at BUF 27 for 15 yards.
Q1 3:38 · Bengals · 3rd & 10 at BUF 42 · gained 15 · +2.38 EP · +11.6% win probability
152 snaps placed · 14 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 18 drives, personnel groupings on 152 snaps, the eleven on the field by name, manual charting on 161. 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 18 drives ended in points. The longest march was BUF moving 85 yards from the BUF 15 for a touchdown. Each bar is the ground a drive actually covered; CIN attacks right, BUF 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. Open any play above to see the eleven men who were actually on the field for it.
166 plays · ranked by the win probability each one moved
166 plays
Bar length is win probability the play moved
Bills0
Bengals6Bills0Bengals7Bills6Bengals7Bills7Bengals7How the play was built
Empty backfield, a man in motion.
Thrown on the first read, the receiver created it himself.
Bills7Bengals13Bills7Bengals14Bills7Bengals20Bills7Bengals21Bills10Bengals21How the play was built
No huddle, nobody in motion.
Thrown on the first read.
Bills10Bengals24Bills16Bengals24Bills18Bengals24Win 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: Bills at Bengals, every play.
Full stat lines
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Josh Allen | 26/38 | 258 | 1 | 1 | 1 | +4.6 |
| Player | Att | Yds | Avg | TD | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Josh Allen | 8 | 44 | 5.5 | 1 | +3.2 |
| James Cook | 6 | 20 | 3.3 | 0 | −1.1 |
| Latavius Murray | 2 | 4 | 2.0 | 0 | +1.2 |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stefon Diggs | 6 | 7 | 86 | 1 | 22% | +8.9 |
| Dalton Kincaid | 10 | 11 | 81 | 0 | 34% | −0.9 |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jordan Poyer | 8 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Tyrel Dodson | 7 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Taron Johnson | 4 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Dorian Williams |
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Joe Burrow | 31/44 | 348 | 2 | 0 | 1 | +12.7 |
| Player | Att | Yds | Avg | TD | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Joe Mixon |
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/2023_09_BUF_CIN
The cards are drawn from the play-by-play sync, not live, and each one says so on its face.
Closing number vs result
Bengals closed -1.5 and covered, winning by 6.
Total closed 51; the game landed 42 — under by 9.0.
Conditions and crew
| Khalil Shakir | 4 | 4 | 57 | 0 | 13% | +2.8 |
| James Cook | 4 | 4 | 19 | 0 | 13% | −0.1 |
| Trent Sherfield | 1 | 2 | 9 | 0 | 6% | −0.2 |
| Latavius Murray | 1 | 1 | 6 | 0 | 3% | +0.4 |
| Deonte Harty | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3% | −0.6 |
| Gabe Davis | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 6% | −4.2 |
| 3 |
| 1 |
| 0.0 |
| 0 |
| 0 |
| Taylor Rapp | 3 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Dane Jackson | 3 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 3 |
| Terrel Bernard | 1 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Christian Benford | 2 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jordan Phillips | 0 | 3 | 0.5 | 0 | 0 |
| Rasul Douglas | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| 14 |
| 37 |
| 2.6 |
| 1 |
| −1.1 |
| Trayveon Williams | 3 | 13 | 4.3 | 0 | −0.4 |
| Joe Burrow | 5 | 4 | 0.8 | 0 | −1.4 |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tee Higgins | 8 | 9 | 110 | 0 | 21% | +9.1 |
| Tyler Boyd | 3 | 5 | 56 | 0 | 12% | +1.3 |
| Tanner Hudson | 4 | 5 | 45 | 0 | 12% | +3.7 |
| Ja'Marr Chase | 4 | 8 | 41 | 0 | 19% | +0.3 |
| Joe Mixon | 5 | 6 | 31 | 0 | 14% | −1.7 |
| Drew Sample | 3 | 4 | 30 | 1 | 10% | +0.6 |
| Irv Smith | 3 | 4 | 26 | 1 | 10% | +2.1 |
| Andrei Iosivas | 1 | 1 | 9 | 0 | 2% | +0.7 |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Germaine Pratt | 5 | 5 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mike Hilton | 9 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Logan Wilson | 3 | 4 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| D.J. Reader | 2 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Chidobe Awuzie | 2 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Nick Scott | 1 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Dax Hill | 0 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Cam Taylor-Britt | 1 | 1 | 0.0 | 1 | 1 |
| D.J. Turner | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| B.J. Hill | 1 | 1 | 1.0 | 0 | 0 |
