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.
This page's interactive half has not started on this device. Nothing was read, and nothing was invented in its place. Reload the page.
This 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 4:36 AM ET · 16 to play
Game Center
Game Center
2023 Week 14 · Mon, Dec 11, 2023 · MetLife Stadium
FinalThe verdict · 2023 Week 14
It turned at Q4 0:02, 4th and 6, on Randy Bullock — 32.1 win-probability points to the Giants on one snap, the largest move of the game.
The snaps that bent it
New York Giants 24–22 — decided on the final possessions. Biggest swing: Q4 0:02, Giants +32.1% win probability on one snap.
The biggest swing of the game · Q4 0:02 · 4th and 6
Randy Bullock
Giants
(:02) 46-R.Bullock 37 yard field goal is GOOD, Center-59-C.Kreiter, Holder-6-J.Gillan.
32.1
win-probability points on one snap
The largest move of the game. The two below are drawn against it.
What separated them
Staying on schedule
Giants won this one — 54% of snaps stayed on schedule, against Packers at 40% of snaps stayed on schedule.
Giantsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Explosive plays
Giants won this one — 9 chunk plays, against Packers at 5 chunk plays.
Giantsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Red zone
Giants won this one — 3 touchdowns on 4 trips, against Packers at 2 touchdowns on 5 trips.
Giantsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Giveaways
Giants won this one — 1 giveaway, against Packers at 2 giveaways.
Giantsthe 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 19.1 win-probability points apart on the average play, and 31 apart at the widest — with the model the more convinced about Giants.
(:02) 46-R.Bullock 37 yard field goal is GOOD, Center-59-C.Kreiter, Holder-6-J.Gillan.
The modelled figures are the league play-by-play model's, not ours.
How the points landed
Randy Bullock's 37-yard field goal with 0:02 left in the 4th put New York Giants ahead for good. It was the last score of the day.
Randy Bullock37-yd field goal37-yard field goalholder J.Gillan · snap C.KreiterLead never changed again+322–249 scores · bar length is the lead after each one
Down-to-down truth
Packerscategory by categoryGiants
Giants ahead 7–2 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, ±0.35 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: Packers ran 67 snaps at a 63% dropback rate against Giants’s 54 at 50%. Red-zone trips: Packers 5, Giants 4.
Giants won the down-to-down efficiency fight: 0.01 expected points added per play vs -0.04.
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.
2 of 12 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.
GB's sack or hit rate, 7.4%, is past their previous low of 9.7% in week 7 — the lowest of their 13 charted games through week 14.
27 dropbacks this game, floor 12 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 6.0 points. · −1.5σ from their own normal
GB's play-action rate turned over: 35.9% in week 13 against 9.5% here — they faked the run then and dropped back clean now, a turn of 3.1 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 8.4 points. · −1.6σ from their own normal
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 -25 pts to 21 pts
Over Expected room →Packers-3.2 ptsinside their normal wobble · −3.6 vs their 0.4 pts, and they swing ±6.6 week to week (−0.55× that swing) · 66 snaps
Giants-5.2 ptsright on their number · −3.4 vs their -1.8 pts, and they swing ±8.9 week to week (−0.38× that swing) · 54 snaps
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale 26% to 90%
Tendencies room →Packers56.9%right on their number · +1.5 vs their 55.4%, and they swing ±11.3 week to week (+0.13× that swing) · 51 early downs
Giants44.2%leaned — ran early · −14.0 vs their 58.2%, and they swing ±12.3 week to week (−1.14× that swing) · 43 early downs
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -6% to 46%
Tendencies room →Packers9.5%leaned — dropped back clean · −13.7 vs their 23.2%, and they swing ±8.4 week to week (−1.62× that swing) · 42 dropbacks
Giants14.8%inside their normal wobble · −5.1 vs their 19.9%, and they swing ±10.1 week to week (−0.51× that swing) · 27 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -53% to 146%
Fourth Down room →Packers25.0%inside their normal wobble · −16.7 vs their 41.7%, and they swing ±25.9 week to week (−0.64× that swing) · 4 fourth-and-short calls
Giants25.0%inside their normal wobble · −21.3 vs their 46.3%, and they swing ±39.0 week to week (−0.54× that swing) · 4 fourth-and-short calls
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -9% to 91%
Tendencies room →Packers11.1%leaned — sat back · −11.2 vs their 22.3%, and they swing ±11.1 week to week (−1.01× that swing) · 27 dropbacks
Giants33.3%inside their normal wobble · −9.9 vs their 43.2%, and they swing ±18.6 week to week (−0.53× that swing) · 42 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -4% to 32%
Tendencies room →Packers7.4%leaned — stayed blocked · −9.2 vs their 16.6%, and they swing ±6.0 week to week (−1.52× that swing) · 27 dropbacks
Giants16.7%inside their normal wobble · +4.9 vs their 11.8%, and they swing ±6.0 week to week (+0.82× that swing) · 42 dropbacks
GB's play-action rate was the night's one real departure: 9.5%, 13.7 points below their season mean of 23.2% and 1.6 times their own 8.4-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.
Green Bay Packers
48 dressed · 6 inactive · 4 never used
Inactive · 6
Dressed, never took a snap · 4
New York Giants
48 dressed · 5 inactive · 2 never used
Inactive · 5
Dressed, never took a snap · 2
Who moved the needle
Passing · GB
25/39, 218 yds, 1 TD, 1 INT
-0.2 expected points added · +1.1% completion over expected
Passing · NYG
17/21, 158 yds, 1 TD, 0 INT
5.2 expected points added · +15.6% completion over expected
Receiving · NYG
6/7 for 79 yds, 0 TD
35% of team targets · 1.9 expected points added
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.
Isaiah Hodgins banked 5.8 more points than his own workload asked for.
| Player | Full PPR | Vs expected | Snap share | Routes | Targets | Air yards | Line |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Saquon BarkleyRB · Committee Back | 23.1 | +4.7 | 86% | 70% | 20% | 3% | 20 car, 86 yd, 2 TD · 3/4, 15 yd |
| Jayden ReedWR · Alpha Receiver | 20.5 | +2.6 | 69% | 67% | 26% | 3% | 4 car, 38 yd, 1 TD · 8/10, 27 yd |
| Wan'Dale RobinsonWR · Alpha Receiver | 17.5 | +5.7 | 79% | 67% | 35% | 51% | 2 car, 36 yd · 6/7, 79 yd |
| Tommy DeVitoQB · Starter QB | 17.4 | +4.3 | 100% | — | 0% | — | 17/21, 158 yd, 1 TD · 10 car, 71 yd |
| Tucker KraftTE · Rotational Receiver | 10.4 | +4.9 | 100% | 98% | 11% | 14% | 4/4, 64 yd |
| Isaiah HodginsWR · Rotational Receiver | 10.2 | +5.8 | 36% | 19% | 10% | 16% | 2/2, 22 yd, 1 TD |
| A.J. DillonRB · Bell Cow Back | 9.8 | −1.0 | 53% | 45% | 8% | 0% | 15 car, 53 yd · 2/3, 25 yd |
| Jordan LoveQB · Starter QB | 8.9 | −7.6 | 100% | — | 0% | — | 25/39, 218 yd, 1 TD, 1 INT · 2 car, 2 yd |
| Malik HeathWR · Rotational Receiver | 7.6 | +2.8 | 34% | 24% | 5% | 5% | 1/2, 6 yd, 1 TD |
| Patrick TaylorRB | 7.2 | +2.2 | 47% | 52% | 5% | 0% | 4 car, 30 yd · 2/2, 22 yd |
| Romeo DoubsWR · Featured Receiver | 7.2 | −3.6 | 82% | 93% | 18% | 23% | 4/7, 32 yd |
| Samori ToureWR · Rotational Receiver | 4.2 | −1.8 | 26% | 26% | 11% | 24% | 2/4, 22 yd |
| Dontayvion WicksWR · Rotational Receiver | 4.0 | −4.5 | 63% | 62% | 16% | 26% | 2/6, 20 yd |
| Daniel BellingerTE · Rotational Receiver | 3.5 | +0.8 | 89% | 67% | 10% | 4% | 2/2, 15 yd |
| Darius SlaytonWR · Rotational Receiver | 3.4 | +0.8 | 93% | 78% | 10% | 7% | 2/2, 14 yd |
| Jalin HyattWR · Rotational Receiver | 3.3 | −0.6 | 64% | 67% | 15% | 9% | 2/3, 13 yd |
| Matt BreidaRB | 1.6 | +0.6 | 18% | 7% | 0% | — | 2 car, 16 yd |
| Lawrence CagerTE · Rotational Receiver | 0.0 | — | 16% | 11% | 0% | — | No touches. |
| Gunner OlszewskiWR | 0.0 | — | — | — | — | — | Did not take a snap. |
1 player 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 Giants attack right, the Packers 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.
(:02) 46-R.Bullock 37 yard field goal is GOOD, Center-59-C.Kreiter, Holder-6-J.Gillan.
Q4 0:02 · Giants · 4th & 6 at GB 18 · gained nothing · +0.29 EP · +29.8% win probability
156 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: 170 plays across 23 drives, personnel groupings on 156 snaps, the eleven on the field by name, manual charting on 165. 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.
9 of 23 drives ended in points. The longest march was NYG moving 75 yards from the NYG 25 for a touchdown. Each bar is the ground a drive actually covered; NYG attacks right, GB 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.
170 plays · ranked by the win probability each one moved
170 plays
Bar length is win probability the play moved
Packers6
Giants0Packers7Giants0Packers7Giants6Packers7Giants7How the play was built
Two in the backfield, a man in motion.
How the play was built
A man in motion.
Thrown on the first read, it should have been intercepted.
Packers10Giants7Packers10Giants13Packers10Giants14Packers13Giants14Packers13Giants20Packers13Giants21Packers16Giants21How the play was built
Two in the backfield, a man in motion.
Packers22Giants21How the play was built
Nobody in motion.
Thrown on the first read.
How the play was built
Nobody in motion.
Packers22Giants24Win 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: Packers at Giants, every play.
Full stat lines
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jordan Love | 25/39 | 218 | 1 | 1 | 2 | −0.2 |
| Player | Att | Yds | Avg | TD | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A.J. Dillon | 15 | 53 | 3.5 | 0 | −0.9 |
| Jayden Reed | 4 | 38 | 9.5 | 1 | +2.0 |
| Patrick Taylor | 4 | 30 | 7.5 | 0 | +1.5 |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tucker Kraft | 4 | 4 | 64 | 0 | 11% | +4.3 |
| Romeo Doubs | 4 | 7 | 32 | 0 | 18% | +0.1 |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Isaiah McDuffie | 5 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Darnell Savage | 6 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| De'Vondre Campbell | 4 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Devonte Wyatt |
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tommy DeVito | 17/21 | 158 | 1 | 0 | 0 | +5.2 |
| Player | Att | Yds | Avg | TD | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Saquon Barkley |
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_14_GB_NYG
The cards are drawn from the play-by-play sync, not live, and each one says so on its face.
Closing number vs result
Packers closed -6 and lost outright — an upset against the closing number.
Total closed 37.5; the game landed 46 — over by 8.5.
Conditions and crew
| Jordan Love | 2 | 2 | 1.0 | 0 | −4.9 |
| Jayden Reed | 8 | 10 | 27 | 0 | 26% | −1.7 |
| A.J. Dillon | 2 | 3 | 25 | 0 | 8% | −1.2 |
| Patrick Taylor | 2 | 2 | 22 | 0 | 5% | +1.3 |
| Samori Toure | 2 | 4 | 22 | 0 | 11% | +0.8 |
| Dontayvion Wicks | 2 | 6 | 20 | 0 | 16% | −2.9 |
| Malik Heath | 1 | 2 | 6 | 1 | 5% | +2.2 |
| 4 |
| 0 |
| 0.0 |
| 0 |
| 0 |
| Carrington Valentine | 4 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Keisean Nixon | 3 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Colby Wooden | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Karl Brooks | 1 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Lukas Van Ness | 1 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kenny Clark | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 |
| 86 |
| 4.3 |
| 2 |
| −10.8 |
| Tommy DeVito | 10 | 71 | 7.1 | 0 | +3.0 |
| Wan'Dale Robinson | 2 | 36 | 18.0 | 0 | +2.3 |
| Matt Breida | 2 | 16 | 8.0 | 0 | +0.9 |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wan'Dale Robinson | 6 | 7 | 79 | 0 | 35% | +1.9 |
| Isaiah Hodgins | 2 | 2 | 22 | 1 | 10% | +4.2 |
| Saquon Barkley | 3 | 4 | 15 | 0 | 20% | −1.3 |
| Daniel Bellinger | 2 | 2 | 15 | 0 | 10% | +1.9 |
| Darius Slayton | 2 | 2 | 14 | 0 | 10% | +0.3 |
| Jalin Hyatt | 2 | 3 | 13 | 0 | 15% | −0.4 |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Deonte Banks | 9 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Kayvon Thibodeaux | 1 | 7 | 0.5 | 0 | 1 |
| Bobby Okereke | 5 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| A'Shawn Robinson | 2 | 4 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Micah McFadden | 2 | 3 | 0.5 | 0 | 0 |
| Cordale Flott | 4 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Xavier McKinney | 1 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Adoree' Jackson | 2 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Azeez Ojulari | 1 | 3 | 0.5 | 0 | 0 |
| Dexter Lawrence | 0 | 3 | 0.5 | 0 | 0 |
