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.
connecting · reading the slate
Game Center
2023 Week 15 · Sat, Dec 16, 2023 · Paycor Stadium
FinalThe verdict · 2023 Week 15
It turned at OT 5:31, 3rd and 9, on Tyler Boyd — 44.6 win-probability points to the Bengals on one snap, the largest move of the game.
The snaps that bent it
Cincinnati Bengals 27–24 — decided on the final possessions. Biggest swing: OT 5:31, Bengals +44.6% win probability on one snap.
The biggest swing of the game · OT 5:31 · 3rd and 9
Tyler Boyd
Bengals
(5:31) (Shotgun) 6-J.Browning pass deep right to 83-T.Boyd to MIN 13 for 44 yards (24-C.Bynum).
44.6
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 — 1 giveaway, against Vikings at 2 giveaways.
Bengalsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Explosive plays
Bengals won this one — 6 chunk plays, against Vikings at 4 chunk plays.
Bengalsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Running the ball
Bengals won this one — +0.10 expected points per carry, against Vikings at -0.05 expected points per carry.
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 3.0 win-probability points apart on the average play, and 15 apart at the widest — with the model the more convinced about Bengals.
(5:31) (Shotgun) 6-J.Browning pass deep right to 83-T.Boyd to MIN 13 for 44 yards (24-C.Bynum).
The modelled figures are the league play-by-play model's, not ours.
How the points landed
Evan McPherson's 29-yard field goal with 3:15 left in overtime put Cincinnati Bengals ahead for good. It was the last score of the day.
Evan McPherson29-yd field goal29-yard field goalholder B.Robbins · snap C.AdomitisLead never changed again+324–279 scores · bar length is the lead after each one
Down-to-down truth
Vikingscategory by categoryBengals
Deadlocked at 4–4 categories. Biggest gap to Bengals, in 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: Vikings ran 67 snaps at a 58% dropback rate against Bengals’s 67 at 70%. Red-zone trips: Vikings 5, Bengals 5.
Vikings outgained Bengals 424-381 but lost the turnover battle 2-1. That was the game.
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.
MIN's play-action rate, 46.2%, is past their previous high of 36.4% in week 7 — the highest of their 14 charted games through week 15.
39 dropbacks this game, floor 12 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 7.6 points. · +2.2σ from their own normal
CIN's sack or hit rate turned over: 6.8% in week 14 against 25.6% here — they stayed blocked then and got home now, a turn of 2.6 of their own weekly swings across the two.
39 dropbacks this game, floor 12 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 7.3 points. · +1.2σ from their own normal
CIN's early-down pass rate turned over: 46.7% in week 14 against 71.7% here — they ran early then and passed early now, a turn of 2.6 of their own weekly swings across the two.
53 early downs this game, floor 15 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 9.7 points. · +0.9σ from their own normal
CIN's play-action rate turned over: 33.3% in week 14 against 17.0% here — they faked the run then and dropped back clean now, a turn of 2.1 of their own weekly swings across the two.
47 dropbacks this game, floor 12 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 7.8 points. · −0.0σ 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 -14 pts to 25 pts
Over Expected room →Vikings3.2 ptsright on their number · +1.0 vs their 2.2 pts, and they swing ±4.7 week to week (+0.21× that swing) · 67 snaps
Bengals4.8 ptsright on their number · −0.9 vs their 5.7 pts, and they swing ±7.7 week to week (−0.12× that swing) · 67 snaps
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale 31% to 89%
Tendencies room →Vikings53.7%inside their normal wobble · −6.1 vs their 59.8%, and they swing ±11.4 week to week (−0.54× that swing) · 54 early downs
Bengals71.7%inside their normal wobble · +8.6 vs their 63.1%, and they swing ±9.7 week to week (+0.88× that swing) · 53 early downs
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -4% to 50%
Tendencies room →Vikings46.2%off script — faked the run · +16.6 vs their 29.6%, and they swing ±7.6 week to week (+2.19× that swing) · 39 dropbacks
Bengals17.0%right on their number · −0.3 vs their 17.3%, and they swing ±7.8 week to week (−0.04× that swing) · 47 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -34% to 108%
Fourth Down room →Vikings33.3%right on their number · −3.6 vs their 36.9%, and they swing ±27.9 week to week (−0.13× that swing) · 3 fourth-and-short calls
Bengals33.3%right on their number · +3.8 vs their 29.6%, and they swing ±20.8 week to week (+0.18× that swing) · 3 fourth-and-short calls
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -6% to 97%
Tendencies room →Vikings42.6%inside their normal wobble · −9.9 vs their 52.5%, and they swing ±17.1 week to week (−0.58× that swing) · 47 dropbacks
Bengals28.2%right on their number · +3.6 vs their 24.6%, and they swing ±10.5 week to week (+0.34× that swing) · 39 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -2% to 35%
Tendencies room →Vikings17.0%inside their normal wobble · +3.7 vs their 13.3%, and they swing ±5.3 week to week (+0.70× that swing) · 47 dropbacks
Bengals25.6%leaned — got home · +9.1 vs their 16.5%, and they swing ±7.3 week to week (+1.25× that swing) · 39 dropbacks
MIN's play-action rate was the night's one real departure: 46.2%, 16.6 points above their season mean of 29.6% and 2.2 times their own 7.6-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.
Minnesota Vikings
48 dressed · 7 inactive · 2 never used
Inactive · 7
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
29/42, 324 yds, 2 TD, 1 INT
10.3 expected points added · +4.5% completion over expected
Passing · MIN
26/33, 303 yds, 2 TD, 2 INT
11.7 expected points added · +17.1% completion over expected
Receiving · MIN
6/6 for 111 yds, 2 TD
19% of team targets · 10.8 expected points added
Receiving · MIN
7/10 for 84 yds, 0 TD
31% of team targets · 1.5 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.
Jordan Addison banked 18.3 more points than his own workload asked for.
| Player | Full PPR | Vs expected | Snap share | Routes | Targets | Air yards | Line |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jordan AddisonWR · Featured Receiver | 29.1 | +18.3 | 91% | 92% | 19% | 22% | 6/6, 111 yd, 2 TD |
| Ty ChandlerRB · Bell Cow Back | 24.7 | +4.9 | 81% | 69% | 13% | 0% | 23 car, 132 yd, 1 TD · 3/4, 25 yd |
| Tee HigginsWR · Featured Receiver | 22.1 | +8.2 | 87% | 98% | 20% | 49% | 4/8, 61 yd, 2 TD |
| Jake BrowningQB · Starter QB | 19.0 | +0.3 | 100% | — | 0% | — | 29/42, 324 yd, 2 TD, 1 INT · 4 car, 0 yd |
| Nick MullensQB · Starter QB | 17.1 | +1.6 | 100% | — | 0% | — | 26/33, 303 yd, 2 TD, 2 INT · 6 car, 10 yd |
| Justin JeffersonWR · Alpha Receiver | 15.4 | −2.9 | 96% | 100% | 31% | 52% | 0/1, 0 yd · 7/10, 84 yd |
| Joe MixonRB · Committee Back | 15.1 | +1.4 | 70% | 74% | 8% | 0% | 10 car, 47 yd, 1 TD · 3/3, 14 yd |
| T.J. HockensonTE · Featured Receiver | 12.3 | +2.1 | 87% | 90% | 22% | 20% | 6/7, 63 yd |
| Ja'Marr ChaseWR · Rotational Receiver | 10.4 | +4.0 | 71% | 70% | 10% | 16% | 4/4, 64 yd |
| Tanner HudsonTE · Rotational Receiver | 9.9 | +2.9 | 36% | 51% | 13% | 11% | 5/5, 49 yd |
| Chase BrownRB | 8.1 | −0.1 | 19% | 11% | 8% | 0% | 7 car, 23 yd · 3/3, 28 yd |
| Tyler BoydWR · Rotational Receiver | 7.3 | +0.7 | 57% | 62% | 13% | 4% | 2/5, 53 yd |
| Mitchell WilcoxTE · Rotational Receiver | 4.0 | +1.2 | 24% | 15% | 5% | 1% | 2/2, 20 yd |
| Irv SmithTE · Rotational Receiver | 3.8 | −1.1 | 24% | 23% | 8% | 8% | 2/3, 18 yd |
| Josh OliverTE · Rotational Receiver | 3.4 | +0.4 | 51% | 33% | 6% | 2% | 2/2, 14 yd |
| Charlie JonesWR · Rotational Receiver | 3.0 | −1.8 | — | — | — | — | 4 snaps — too few to rate. |
| Trayveon WilliamsRB | 2.2 | +0.1 | — | — | — | — | 4 snaps — too few to rate. |
| Andrei IosivasWR · Rotational Receiver | 1.5 | −1.3 | 26% | 23% | 5% | 0% | 1/2, 5 yd |
| Johnny MundtTE · Rotational Receiver | 1.3 | −0.3 | — | — | — | — | 7 snaps — too few to rate. |
| K.J. OsbornWR · Rotational Receiver | 1.3 | −1.7 | 54% | 74% | 6% | 8% | 1/2, 3 yd |
| Kene NwangwuRB | 0.1 | −0.4 | — | — | — | — | 7 snaps — too few to rate. |
| Drew SampleTE · Rotational Receiver | 0.0 | −1.3 | 57% | 49% | 3% | 0% | 0/1, 0 yd |
| Brandon PowellWR · Rotational Receiver | 0.0 | — | — | — | — | — | 2 snaps — too few to rate. |
5 players played under 8 snaps, so their shares read as a dash rather than a number. 1 line has no expected-points read and sits 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 Vikings 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.
(5:31) (Shotgun) 6-J.Browning pass deep right to 83-T.Boyd to MIN 13 for 44 yards (24-C.Bynum).
OT 5:31 · Bengals · 3rd & 9 at CIN 43 · gained 44 · +3.83 EP · +44.6% win probability
168 snaps placed · 16 without a recorded yard line, left off the map · 4 marked moments — the largest win-probability swings, one per drive.
Post-game film: 184 plays across 22 drives, personnel groupings on 168 snaps, the eleven on the field by name, manual charting on 178. 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 22 drives ended in points. The longest march was MIN moving 92 yards from the MIN 8 for a touchdown. Each bar is the ground a drive actually covered; CIN attacks right, MIN 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.
184 plays · ranked by the win probability each one moved
184 plays
Bar length is win probability the play moved
Vikings0
Bengals3Vikings6Bengals3Vikings7Bengals3How the play was built
A man in motion.
Thrown on the first read, it should have been intercepted.
How the play was built
Nobody in motion.
Thrown out of the scramble drill, the receiver created it himself.
Vikings13Bengals3Vikings14Bengals3Vikings17Bengals3Vikings17Bengals9Vikings17Bengals10How the play was built
Empty backfield, a man in motion.
Thrown on the first read.
How the play was built
Nobody in motion.
Vikings17Bengals16Vikings17Bengals17How the play was built
A man in motion.
How the play was built
Two in the backfield, play action, a man in motion.
Thrown out of the scramble drill, from outside the pocket.
Vikings23Bengals17Vikings24Bengals17How the play was built
A man in motion.
Thrown out of the scramble drill, caught in traffic.
Vikings24Bengals23Vikings24Bengals24How the play was built
Empty backfield, nobody in motion.
How the play was built
Two in the backfield, a quarterback sneak, a man in motion.
How the play was built
Nobody in motion.
Thrown out of the scramble drill, from outside the pocket, caught in traffic.
Vikings24Bengals27Win 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: Vikings at Bengals, every play.
Full stat lines
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nick Mullens | 26/33 | 303 | 2 | 2 | 3 | +11.7 |
| Justin Jefferson | 0/1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | −0.4 |
| Player | Att | Yds | Avg | TD | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ty Chandler | 23 | 132 | 5.7 | 1 | +3.3 |
| Nick Mullens | 6 | 10 | 1.7 | 0 | −4.7 |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jordan Addison | 6 | 6 | 111 | 2 | 19% | +10.8 |
| Justin Jefferson | 7 | 10 | 84 | 0 |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Camryn Bynum | 8 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Ivan Pace | 7 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Byron Murphy |
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jake Browning | 29/42 | 324 | 2 | 1 | 4 | +10.3 |
| 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/2023_15_MIN_CIN
The cards are drawn from the charted play-by-play, not live, and each one says so on its face.
Closing number vs result
Bengals closed -3 and it landed exactly on the number — a push.
Total closed 41.5; the game landed 51 — over by 9.5.
Conditions and crew
| Kene Nwangwu | 1 | 1 | 1.0 | 0 | −0.5 |
| 31% |
| +1.5 |
| T.J. Hockenson | 6 | 7 | 63 | 0 | 22% | +5.0 |
| Ty Chandler | 3 | 4 | 25 | 0 | 13% | +1.0 |
| Josh Oliver | 2 | 2 | 14 | 0 | 6% | +0.9 |
| Johnny Mundt | 1 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 3% | +0.1 |
| K.J. Osborn | 1 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 6% | −0.7 |
| 5 |
| 1 |
| 0.0 |
| 0 |
| 0 |
| Josh Metellus | 5 | 0 | 1.0 | 0 | 0 |
| D.J. Wonnum | 3 | 2 | 1.0 | 0 | 2 |
| Danielle Hunter | 3 | 2 | 2.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Troy Dye | 2 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Akayleb Evans | 3 | 1 | 0.0 | 1 | 2 |
| Harrison Smith | 3 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Patrick Jones | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Joe Mixon | 10 | 47 | 4.7 | 1 | +3.6 |
| Chase Brown | 7 | 23 | 3.3 | 0 | −0.7 |
| Trayveon Williams | 1 | 10 | 10.0 | 0 | −0.2 |
| Jake Browning | 4 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | −2.5 |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ja'Marr Chase | 4 | 4 | 64 | 0 | 10% | +5.9 |
| Tee Higgins | 4 | 8 | 61 | 2 | 20% | +4.1 |
| Tyler Boyd | 2 | 5 | 53 | 0 | 13% | +3.4 |
| Tanner Hudson | 5 | 5 | 49 | 0 | 13% | +3.7 |
| Chase Brown | 3 | 3 | 28 | 0 | 8% | +2.6 |
| Mitchell Wilcox | 2 | 2 | 20 | 0 | 5% | +1.5 |
| Irv Smith | 2 | 3 | 18 | 0 | 8% | −3.4 |
| Joe Mixon | 3 | 3 | 14 | 0 | 8% | +0.3 |
| Charlie Jones | 2 | 3 | 10 | 0 | 8% | −1.1 |
| Andrei Iosivas | 1 | 2 | 5 | 0 | 5% | +0.1 |
| Trayveon Williams | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 3% | −0.4 |
| Drew Sample | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3% | −0.4 |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jordan Battle | 3 | 7 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Germaine Pratt | 4 | 6 | 0.5 | 0 | 0 |
| D.J. Turner | 4 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Dax Hill | 4 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Logan Wilson | 3 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| B.J. Hill | 1 | 4 | 0.0 | 1 | 1 |
| Myles Murphy | 2 | 2 | 1.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Josh Tupou | 1 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Cam Sample | 2 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mike Hilton | 3 | 0 | 0.0 | 1 | 2 |
