The biggest swing of the game · Q4 1:11 · 3rd and 1
Christian McCaffrey
49ers
(1:11) 23-C.McCaffrey right guard for 6 yards, TOUCHDOWN.
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 12:42 AM ET · 16 to play
Game Center
Game Center
2023 Divisional Round · Sat, Jan 20, 2024 · Levi's Stadium
FinalThe verdict · 2023 Divisional Round
It turned at Q4 1:11, 3rd and 1, on Christian McCaffrey — 19.3 win-probability points to the 49ers on one snap, the largest move of the game.
The snaps that bent it
The biggest swing of the game · Q4 1:11 · 3rd and 1
Christian McCaffrey
49ers
(1:11) 23-C.McCaffrey right guard for 6 yards, TOUCHDOWN.
San Francisco 49ers 24–21 — decided on the final possessions. Biggest swing: Q4 1:11, 49ers +19.3% win probability on one snap.
19.3
win-probability points on one snap
The largest move of the game. The two below are drawn against it.
What separated them
Giveaways
49ers won this one — no giveaways, against Packers at 2 giveaways.
49ersthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Running the ball
49ers won this one — +0.19 expected points per carry, against Packers at -0.07 expected points per carry.
49ersthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Every snap
49ers won this one — +0.17 expected points per snap, against Packers at -0.03 expected points per snap.
49ersthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Third down
49ers won this one — 10 of 16 on third down, against Packers at 7 of 13 on third down.
49ersthe 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 17.8 win-probability points apart on the average play, and 31 apart at the widest — with the model the more convinced about Packers.
(1:11) 23-C.McCaffrey right guard for 6 yards, TOUCHDOWN.
The modelled figures are the league play-by-play model's, not ours.
How the points landed
Christian McCaffrey's 6-yard rushing touchdown with 1:11 left in the 4th put San Francisco 49ers ahead for good. It was the last score of the day.
8 scores · bar length is the lead after each one
Down-to-down truth
49ers ahead 6–2 on categories, but the biggest gap belongs to Packers, in 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 62 snaps at a 58% dropback rate against 49ers’s 62 at 66%. Red-zone trips: Packers 5, 49ers 3.
49ers won the down-to-down efficiency fight: 0.17 expected points added per play vs -0.03.
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.
Nothing cleared the bars. No reading led the week's slate, set a season mark, reversed the week before, or sat two of the team's own standard deviations off their number — which is what most Sundays look like, and is the finding rather than a gap.
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.
This is not a regular-season game, so every season number below is that team's 2023 regular season — the only stretch long enough to be a habit.
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -16 pts to 17 pts
Over Expected room →right on their number · +1.4 vs their 0.4 pts, and they swing ±6.6 week to week (+0.22× that swing) · 61 snaps
right on their number · +1.3 vs their -2.2 pts, and they swing ±4.5 week to week (+0.29× that swing) · 62 snaps
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale 24% to 84%
Tendencies room →right on their number · −0.0 vs their 55.4%, and they swing ±11.3 week to week (−0.00× that swing) · 47 early downs
leaned — passed early · +12.8 vs their 50.2%, and they swing ±10.2 week to week (+1.26× that swing) · 46 early downs
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -2% to 45%
Tendencies room →leaned — faked the run · +10.2 vs their 23.2%, and they swing ±8.4 week to week (+1.21× that swing) · 36 dropbacks
leaned — dropped back clean · −10.5 vs their 20.3%, and they swing ±8.7 week to week (−1.21× that swing) · 41 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -24% to 108%
Fourth Down room →Only 2 fourth-and-short calls tonight — too few to read a tendency. Their season number is 41.7%.
no read · no ruler yet — only 3 games of theirs this season
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -7% to 51%
Tendencies room →inside their normal wobble · +9.4 vs their 22.3%, and they swing ±11.1 week to week (+0.84× that swing) · 41 dropbacks
leaned — sat back · −12.6 vs their 20.9%, and they swing ±10.9 week to week (−1.16× that swing) · 36 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale 1% to 32%
Tendencies room →inside their normal wobble · −4.4 vs their 16.6%, and they swing ±6.0 week to week (−0.72× that swing) · 41 dropbacks
right on their number · +0.1 vs their 16.6%, and they swing ±5.8 week to week (+0.02× that swing) · 36 dropbacks
SF's early-down pass rate was the night's one real departure: 63.0%, 12.8 points above their season mean of 50.2% and 1.3 times their own 10.2-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.
Green Bay Packers
48 dressed · 6 inactive · 1 never used
Inactive · 6
Dressed, never took a snap · 1
San Francisco 49ers
48 dressed · 7 inactive · 2 never used
Inactive · 7
Dressed, never took a snap · 2
Who moved the needle
Passing · SF
23/39, 252 yds, 1 TD, 0 INT
7.2 expected points added · -4.8% completion over expected
Passing · GB
21/34, 194 yds, 2 TD, 2 INT
-0.1 expected points added · -1.5% 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.
Christian McCaffrey banked 5.0 more points than his own workload asked for.
| Player | Full PPR | Vs expected | Snap share | Routes | Targets | Air yards | Line |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 31.8 | +5.0 | 98% | 95% | 33% | 9% | 17 car, 98 yd, 2 TD · 7/12, 30 yd | |
| 18.1 | +4.9 | 97% | 95% | 19% | 25% | 4/7, 81 yd, 1 TD | |
| 16.6 | −2.1 | 81% | 81% | 18% | 0% | 18 car, 108 yd · 3/6, 8 yd | |
| 15.5 | −1.9 | 100% | — | 0% | — | 23/39, 252 yd, 1 TD · 6 car, 14 yd | |
| 14.1 | −3.3 | 100% | — | 0% | — | 21/34, 194 yd, 2 TD, 2 INT · 5 car, 3 yd | |
| 12.3 | +1.6 | 81% | 83% | 18% | 44% | 4/6, 83 yd | |
| 11.0 | +0.8 | 63% | 67% | 17% | 20% | 1 car, -1 yd · 5/6, 61 yd | |
| 9.9 | −2.4 | 85% | 78% | 18% | 10% | 3/6, 9 yd, 1 TD | |
| 8.4 | +1.3 | 61% | 72% | 12% | 8% | 1 car, 9 yd · 4/4, 35 yd | |
| 6.2 | −3.1 | 100% | 95% | 17% | 19% | 3/6, 32 yd | |
| 4.4 | −1.5 | 28% | 36% | 12% | 15% | 3/4, 14 yd | |
| 4.4 | +1.4 | 14% | 14% | 6% | 0% | 2/2, 24 yd | |
| 3.7 | +0.5 | — | — | — | — | 5 snaps — too few to rate. | |
| 2.7 | +0.7 | 39% | 36% | 3% | 5% | 1/1, 17 yd | |
| 2.1 | −0.7 | 55% | 53% | 6% | 11% | 1/2, 11 yd | |
| 1.7 | −1.7 | 28% | 36% | 6% | 9% | 1/2, 7 yd | |
| 1.4 | −0.1 | 15% | 6% | 3% | 1% | 1/1, 4 yd | |
| 0.0 | — | 12% | 14% | 0% | — | No touches. | |
| 0.0 | — | — | — | — | — | 6 snaps — too few to rate. | |
| 0.0 | −2.5 | 40% | 39% | 6% | 8% | 0/2, 0 yd |
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 whole game as one hundred yards. The 49ers 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.
(:52) (Shotgun) 10-J.Love pass deep middle intended for 9-C.Watson INTERCEPTED by 57-D.Greenlaw [97-N.Bosa] at SF 42. 57-D.Greenlaw to GB 40 for 18 yards (11-J.Reed).
Q4 0:52 · Packers · 1st & 10 at GB 36 · gained nothing · -3.24 EP · −25.3% win probability
157 snaps placed · 10 without a recorded yard line, left off the map · 4 marked moments — the largest win-probability swings, one per drive.
Post-game film: 167 plays across 20 drives, personnel groupings on 157 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.
8 of 20 drives ended in points. The longest march was SF moving 86 yards from the SF 14 for a touchdown. Each bar is the ground a drive actually covered; SF 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.
167 plays · ranked by the win probability each one moved
167 plays
How the play was built
A man in motion.
Thrown on the second read, from outside the pocket.
How the play was built
Nobody in motion.
A designed throw, the target set before the snap.
How the play was built
Two in the backfield, nobody in motion.
How the play was built
Empty backfield, nobody in motion.
Thrown on the first read.
How the play was built
Two in the backfield, a man in motion.
How the play was built
Nobody in motion.
Thrown on the first read, the receiver created it himself.
How the play was built
Two in the backfield, nobody in motion.
How the play was built
Empty backfield, a screen, nobody in motion.
Thrown out of the scramble drill, from outside the pocket, it should have been intercepted.
Win 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 49ers, every play.
Full stat lines
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jordan Love | 21/34 | 194 | 2 | 2 | 0 | −0.1 |
| Player | Att | Yds | Avg | TD | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aaron Jones | 18 | 108 | 6.0 | 0 | +2.7 |
| Emanuel Wilson | 4 | 16 | 4.0 | 0 | −0.5 |
| Jayden Reed | 1 | 9 | 9.0 | 0 | +0.9 |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Romeo Doubs | 4 | 6 | 83 | 0 | 18% | +6.4 |
| Jayden Reed | 4 | 4 | 35 | 0 | 12% | +0.7 |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Quay Walker | 3 | 4 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| De'Vondre Campbell | 4 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Kenny Clark | 2 | 3 | 0.5 | 0 | 0 |
| Jaire Alexander |
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Brock Purdy | 23/39 | 252 | 1 | 0 | 1 | +7.2 |
| Player | Att | Yds | Avg | TD | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Christian McCaffrey |
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_20_GB_SF
The cards are drawn from the play-by-play sync, not live, and each one says so on its face.
Closing number vs result
49ers closed -10.5, won by 3 — but didn't cover.
Total closed 50.5; the game landed 45 — under by 5.5.
Conditions and crew
| Jordan Love | 5 | 3 | 0.6 | 0 | −5.1 |
| Bo Melton | 1 | 1 | 19 | 1 | 3% | +2.4 |
| Luke Musgrave | 3 | 4 | 14 | 0 | 12% | +1.2 |
| Emanuel Wilson | 1 | 1 | 11 | 0 | 3% | +1.6 |
| Christian Watson | 1 | 2 | 11 | 0 | 6% | −2.4 |
| Tucker Kraft | 3 | 6 | 9 | 1 | 18% | −4.0 |
| Aaron Jones | 3 | 6 | 8 | 0 | 18% | −3.7 |
| Ben Sims | 1 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 3% | −0.3 |
| Dontayvion Wicks | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 6% | −1.6 |
| 4 |
| 1 |
| 0.0 |
| 0 |
| 0 |
| Keisean Nixon | 3 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Tedarrell Slaton | 3 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Carrington Valentine | 3 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Darnell Savage | 2 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Jonathan Owens | 1 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Preston Smith | 1 | 1 | 0.5 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 |
| 98 |
| 5.8 |
| 2 |
| +4.4 |
| Brock Purdy | 6 | 14 | 2.3 | 0 | −2.4 |
| Jauan Jennings | 1 | -1 | -1.0 | 0 | −1.1 |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| George Kittle | 4 | 7 | 81 | 1 | 19% | +6.6 |
| Jauan Jennings | 5 | 6 | 61 | 0 | 17% | +4.5 |
| Brandon Aiyuk | 3 | 6 | 32 | 0 | 17% | +1.2 |
| Christian McCaffrey | 7 | 12 | 30 | 0 | 33% | −3.5 |
| Deebo Samuel | 2 | 2 | 24 | 0 | 6% | +1.5 |
| Chris Conley | 1 | 1 | 17 | 0 | 3% | +1.1 |
| Ray-Ray McCloud | 1 | 2 | 7 | 0 | 6% | −1.3 |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dre Greenlaw | 4 | 2 | 0.0 | 2 | 2 |
| Fred Warner | 4 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Deommodore Lenoir | 4 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Ambry Thomas | 3 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Charvarius Ward | 4 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Nick Bosa | 2 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Chase Young | 2 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Tashaun Gipson | 3 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Logan Ryan | 2 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Arik Armstead | 1 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |