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.
polling · 1800s tick · as of 6:42 PM ET · 13 to play · 1 final
Game Center
Game Center
2024 Week 3 · Sun, Sep 22, 2024 · Acrisure Stadium
FinalThe verdict · 2024 Week 3
It turned at Q3 8:01, 1st and 10, on Bud Dupree — 14.6 win-probability points to the Chargers on one snap, the largest move of the game, and it still was not enough.
Pittsburgh Steelers 20–10. Biggest swing: Q3 8:01, Chargers +14.6% win probability on one snap.
The snaps that bent it
The biggest swing of the game · Q3 8:01 · 1st and 10
Bud Dupree
Chargers
(8:01) (Shotgun) 2-J.Fields pass short middle intended for 84-C.Patterson INTERCEPTED by 48-B.Dupree (0-D.Henley) at LAC 34. 48-B.Dupree to LAC 34 for no gain (66-M.McCormick).
14.6
win-probability points on one snap
The largest move of the game. The two below are drawn against it.
What separated them
Explosive plays
Steelers won this one — 9 chunk plays, against Chargers at 2 chunk plays.
Steelersthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Staying on schedule
Steelers won this one — 46% of snaps stayed on schedule, against Chargers at 33% of snaps stayed on schedule.
Steelersthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Third down
Steelers won this one — 7 of 14 on third down, against Chargers at 3 of 11 on third down.
Steelersthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Every snap
Steelers won this one — +0.13 expected points per snap, against Chargers at -0.16 expected points per snap.
Steelersthe 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 1.7 win-probability points apart on the average play, and 6 apart at the widest — with the model the more convinced about Steelers.
(8:01) (Shotgun) 2-J.Fields pass short middle intended for 84-C.Patterson INTERCEPTED by 48-B.Dupree (0-D.Henley) at LAC 34. 48-B.Dupree to LAC 34 for no gain (66-M.McCormick).
The modelled figures are the league play-by-play model's, not ours.
How the points landed
Chris Boswell's 30-yard field goal with 14:17 left in the 4th put Pittsburgh Steelers ahead for good. The lead never changed over the 1 score that followed.
Chris Boswell30-yd field goal30-yard field goalholder C.Waitman · snap C.KuntzLead never changed again+310–136 scores · bar length is the lead after each one
Down-to-down truth
Chargerscategory by categorySteelers
Steelers ahead 8–1 on categories, including the biggest gap of the duel — red-zone touchdowns.
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: Chargers ran 45 snaps at a 56% dropback rate against Steelers’s 63 at 56%. Red-zone trips: Chargers 2, Steelers 5.
Steelers won the down-to-down efficiency fight: 0.13 expected points added per play vs -0.16.
Derived from the play-by-play, no model
10 of 11 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
10 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 -24 pts to 16 pts
Over Expected room →Chargers-12.7 ptsleaned — ran more than the situation asked · −11.1 vs their -1.6 pts, and they swing ±6.7 week to week (−1.65× that swing) · 45 snaps
Steelers-6.4 ptsright on their number · −0.1 vs their -6.3 pts, and they swing ±6.7 week to week (−0.02× that swing) · 63 snaps
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale 26% to 85%
Tendencies room →Chargers50.0%right on their number · −5.2 vs their 55.2%, and they swing ±11.6 week to week (−0.45× that swing) · 34 early downs
Steelers51.0%right on their number · +2.8 vs their 48.2%, and they swing ±8.1 week to week (+0.35× that swing) · 49 early downs
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -5% to 62%
Tendencies room →Chargers24.0%inside their normal wobble · −6.7 vs their 30.7%, and they swing ±12.3 week to week (−0.55× that swing) · 25 dropbacks
Steelers14.3%leaned — dropped back clean · −12.6 vs their 26.9%, and they swing ±12.3 week to week (−1.02× that swing) · 35 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -25% to 86%
Fourth Down room →Chargers—Only 0 fourth-and-short calls tonight — too few to read a tendency. Their season number is 17.9%.
Steelers—Only 2 fourth-and-short calls tonight — too few to read a tendency. Their season number is 31.3%.
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -2% to 61%
Tendencies room →Chargers25.7%right on their number · +0.9 vs their 24.8%, and they swing ±10.2 week to week (+0.09× that swing) · 35 dropbacks
Steelers20.0%inside their normal wobble · −9.6 vs their 29.6%, and they swing ±12.5 week to week (−0.77× that swing) · 25 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -4% to 36%
Tendencies room →Chargers14.3%right on their number · +0.2 vs their 14.1%, and they swing ±7.0 week to week (+0.03× that swing) · 35 dropbacks
Steelers28.0%leaned — got home · +11.4 vs their 16.6%, and they swing ±7.6 week to week (+1.49× that swing) · 25 dropbacks
LAC's pass rate over expected was the night's one real departure: -12.7 pts, 11.1 points below their season mean of -1.6 pts and 1.7 times their own 6.7-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.
Los Angeles Chargers
48 dressed · 6 inactive · 2 never used
Inactive · 6
Dressed, never took a snap · 2
Pittsburgh Steelers
48 dressed · 6 inactive · 3 never used
Inactive · 6
Dressed, never took a snap · 3
Who moved the needle
Passing · PIT
25/32, 245 yds, 1 TD, 1 INT
8.2 expected points added · +10.2% completion over expected
Passing · LAC
12/18, 125 yds, 1 TD, 0 INT
1.6 expected points added · +3.4% completion over expected
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.
Calvin Austin banked 11.0 more points than his own workload asked for.
| Player | Full PPR | Vs expected | Snap share | Routes | Targets | Air yards | Line |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Calvin AustinWR · Rotational Receiver | 19.5 | +11.0 | 54% | 57% | 16% | 32% | 4/5, 95 yd, 1 TD |
| Justin FieldsQB · Starter QB | 18.4 | +4.5 | 100% | — | 0% | — | 25/32, 245 yd, 1 TD, 1 INT · 6 car, 6 yd, 1 TD |
| Najee HarrisRB · Committee Back | 13.6 | −2.8 | 59% | 51% | 16% | 0% | 18 car, 70 yd · 5/5, 16 yd |
| Quentin JohnstonWR · Rotational Receiver | 12.4 | +9.3 | 80% | 88% | 11% | 16% | 2/2, 44 yd, 1 TD |
| George PickensWR · Featured Receiver | 10.7 | −0.2 | 74% | 89% | 23% | 40% | 5/7, 57 yd |
| Justin HerbertQB · Starter QB | 9.0 | +2.8 | 78% | — | 0% | — | 12/18, 125 yd, 1 TD · 1 car, 0 yd |
| J.K. DobbinsRB · Bell Cow Back | 8.4 | −3.0 | 65% | 56% | 16% | 0% | 15 car, 44 yd · 3/3, 10 yd |
| Cordarrelle PattersonRB · Receiving Back | 7.8 | −1.3 | 34% | 37% | 16% | 12% | 4 car, 33 yd · 3/5, 15 yd |
| Ladd McConkeyWR · Alpha Receiver | 7.4 | −1.8 | 72% | 88% | 32% | 50% | 3/6, 44 yd |
| Pat FreiermuthTE · Rotational Receiver | 7.3 | +0.6 | 81% | 91% | 16% | 16% | 4/5, 33 yd |
| Scott MillerWR · Rotational Receiver | 5.1 | +3.0 | 56% | 60% | 6% | 5% | 2/2, 31 yd |
| Will DisslyTE · Rotational Receiver | 4.9 | +1.9 | 50% | 40% | 16% | 4% | 3/3, 19 yd |
| Hayden HurstTE · Rotational Receiver | 3.5 | +0.9 | 61% | 64% | 11% | 6% | 2/2, 15 yd |
| Simi FehokoWR · Rotational Receiver | 2.7 | −3.4 | 72% | 80% | 16% | 24% | 1/3, 17 yd |
| Connor HeywardRB | 1.2 | −0.2 | 16% | 9% | 3% | 1% | 1/1, 2 yd |
| Jaylen WarrenRB | 1.1 | −2.0 | 34% | 46% | 3% | 0% | 3 car, 5 yd · 1/1, -4 yd |
| Taylor HeinickeQB | 1.0 | +0.5 | 22% | — | 0% | — | 2/2, 24 yd |
| Gus EdwardsRB | 0.9 | −0.4 | 35% | 44% | 0% | — | 3 car, 9 yd |
| Derius DavisWR · Rotational Receiver | 0.8 | −0.1 | 20% | 20% | 0% | — | 1 car, 8 yd |
| Stone SmarttTE | 0.0 | — | — | — | — | — | Did not take a snap. |
| Scott MatlockRB | 0.0 | — | 37% | 16% | 0% | — | No touches. |
| Rod WilliamsTE | 0.0 | — | — | — | — | — | No snap count on file, so his shares read as a dash. |
2 players played under 8 snaps, so their shares read as a dash rather than a number. 3 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 Steelers attack right, the Chargers 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.
(2:49) (No Huddle, Shotgun) 2-J.Fields pass short right to 14-G.Pickens to LAC 41 for 8 yards (7-K.Fulton). PENALTY on LAC-52-K.Mack, Roughing the Passer, 15 yards, enforced at LAC 41.
Q3 2:49 · Steelers · 3rd & 10 at LAC 49 · gained 8 · +2.87 EP · +13.5% win probability
141 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: 155 plays across 20 drives, personnel groupings on 141 snaps, the eleven on the field by name, manual charting on 150. 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.
6 of 20 drives ended in points. The longest march was PIT moving 84 yards from the PIT 16 for a touchdown. Each bar is the ground a drive actually covered; PIT attacks right, LAC 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.
155 plays · ranked by the win probability each one moved
155 plays
Bar length is win probability the play moved
Chargers6
Steelers0Chargers7Steelers0Chargers7Steelers6Chargers7Steelers7Chargers10Steelers7How the play was built
Nobody in motion.
Thrown out of the scramble drill, from outside the pocket, the ball was not catchable.
How the play was built
Empty backfield, nobody in motion.
Thrown on the first read.
How the play was built
No huddle, nobody in motion.
Thrown on the first read.
Chargers10Steelers10How the play was built
Nobody in motion.
Thrown on the first read, it should have been intercepted.
How the play was built
No huddle, nobody in motion.
Thrown on the first read.
Chargers10Steelers13How the play was built
A man in motion.
Thrown on the first read.
Chargers10Steelers19Chargers10Steelers20Win 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: Chargers at Steelers, every play.
Full stat lines
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Justin Herbert | 12/18 | 125 | 1 | 0 | 2 | +1.6 |
| Taylor Heinicke | 2/2 | 24 | 0 | 0 | 3 | −3.6 |
| Player | Att | Yds | Avg | TD | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| J.K. Dobbins | 15 | 44 | 2.9 | 0 | −4.3 |
| Gus Edwards | 3 | 9 | 3.0 | 0 | −0.5 |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ladd McConkey | 3 | 6 | 44 | 0 | 32% | +2.2 |
| Quentin Johnston | 2 | 2 | 44 | 1 |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Daiyan Henley | 6 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Denzel Perryman | 5 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Derwin James |
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Justin Fields | 25/32 | 245 | 1 | 1 | 2 | +8.2 |
| 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/2024_03_LAC_PIT
The cards are drawn from the charted play-by-play, not live, and each one says so on its face.
Closing number vs result
Steelers closed -3 and covered, winning by 10.
Total closed 36; the game landed 30 — under by 6.0.
Conditions and crew
| Derius Davis | 1 | 8 | 8.0 | 0 | +0.7 |
| Justin Herbert | 1 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | −1.3 |
| 11% |
| +5.0 |
| Will Dissly | 3 | 3 | 19 | 0 | 16% | +1.2 |
| Simi Fehoko | 1 | 3 | 17 | 0 | 16% | −0.3 |
| Hayden Hurst | 2 | 2 | 15 | 0 | 11% | −0.0 |
| J.K. Dobbins | 3 | 3 | 10 | 0 | 16% | −1.8 |
| 3 |
| 3 |
| 1.0 |
| 0 |
| 0 |
| Kristian Fulton | 5 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Alohi Gilman | 2 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Khalil Mack | 1 | 3 | 1.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Tuli Tuipulotu | 2 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Ja'Sir Taylor | 2 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Poona Ford | 1 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Asante Samuel | 1 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Najee Harris | 18 | 70 | 3.9 | 0 | −1.7 |
| Cordarrelle Patterson | 4 | 33 | 8.3 | 0 | +1.7 |
| Justin Fields | 6 | 6 | 1.0 | 1 | −5.8 |
| Jaylen Warren | 3 | 5 | 1.7 | 0 | +0.1 |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Calvin Austin | 4 | 5 | 95 | 1 | 16% | +8.3 |
| George Pickens | 5 | 7 | 57 | 0 | 23% | +2.8 |
| Pat Freiermuth | 4 | 5 | 33 | 0 | 16% | +3.7 |
| Scott Miller | 2 | 2 | 31 | 0 | 6% | +4.4 |
| Najee Harris | 5 | 5 | 16 | 0 | 16% | −1.3 |
| Cordarrelle Patterson | 3 | 5 | 15 | 0 | 16% | −5.1 |
| Connor Heyward | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 3% | −0.6 |
| Jaylen Warren | 1 | 1 | -4 | 0 | 3% | −1.2 |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Patrick Queen | 3 | 4 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Donte Jackson | 2 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Joey Porter | 3 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Cameron Heyward | 3 | 1 | 1.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Nick Herbig | 3 | 0 | 2.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Elandon Roberts | 2 | 1 | 1.0 | 0 | 0 |
| T.J. Watt | 3 | 0 | 1.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Larry Ogunjobi | 1 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| DeShon Elliott | 2 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Beanie Bishop | 1 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
