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 10:10 AM ET · 13 to play · 1 final
Game Center
Game Center
2024 Week 7 · Sun, Oct 20, 2024 · Lambeau Field
FinalThe verdict · 2024 Week 7
It turned at Q4 0:03, 1st and 10, on Brandon McManus — 36.0 win-probability points to the Packers on one snap, the largest move of the game.
The snaps that bent it
Green Bay Packers 24–22 — decided on the final possessions. Biggest swing: Q4 0:03, Packers +36.0% win probability on one snap.
The biggest swing of the game · Q4 0:03 · 1st and 10
Brandon McManus
Packers
(:03) 17-B.McManus 45 yard field goal is GOOD, Center-42-M.Orzech, Holder-19-D.Whelan.
36.0
win-probability points on one snap
The largest move of the game. The two below are drawn against it.
What separated them
Giveaways
Texans owned this one and still lost it — no giveaways, against Packers at 2 giveaways.
Texansthe gap went the other way from the scoreboard
Throwing the ball
Packers won this one — -0.02 expected points per dropback, against Texans at -0.36 expected points per dropback.
Packersthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Running the ball
Texans owned this one and still lost it — +0.01 expected points per carry, against Packers at -0.19 expected points per carry.
Texansthe gap went the other way from the scoreboard
Third down
Packers won this one — 4 of 10 on third down, against Texans at 4 of 13 on third down.
Packersthe 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 2.9 win-probability points apart on the average play, and 7 apart at the widest — with the model the more convinced about Texans.
(:03) 17-B.McManus 45 yard field goal is GOOD, Center-42-M.Orzech, Holder-19-D.Whelan.
The modelled figures are the league play-by-play model's, not ours.
How the points landed
Brandon McManus's 45-yard field goal with 0:03 left in the 4th put Green Bay Packers ahead for good. It was the last score of the day.
Brandon McManus45-yd field goal45-yard field goalholder D.Whelan · snap M.OrzechLead never changed again+322–249 scores · bar length is the lead after each one
Down-to-down truth
Texanscategory by categoryPackers
Packers ahead 5–2 on categories, but the biggest gap belongs to Texans, 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, ±0.36 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: Texans ran 58 snaps at a 50% dropback rate against Packers’s 56 at 64%. Red-zone trips: Texans 4, Packers 3.
Packers won the down-to-down efficiency fight: -0.08 expected points added per play vs -0.18.
Derived from the play-by-play, no model
10 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.
HOU's pass rate over expected, −11.5 pts, is past their previous low of −4.9 pts in week 1 — the lowest of their 7 charted games through week 7.
57 snaps this game, floor 20 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 6.4 points. · −2.0σ from their own normal
HOU's early-down pass rate, 38.6%, is past their previous low of 41.4% in week 1 — the lowest of their 7 charted games through week 7.
44 early downs this game, floor 15 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 9.9 points. · −1.8σ from their own normal
GB's sack or hit rate turned over: 2.8% in week 6 against 24.1% here — they stayed blocked then and got home now, a turn of 3.1 of their own weekly swings across the two.
29 dropbacks this game, floor 12 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 6.8 points. · +1.6σ from their own normal
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 -30 pts to 19 pts
Over Expected room →Texans-11.5 ptsleaned — ran more than the situation asked · −12.7 vs their 1.2 pts, and they swing ±6.4 week to week (−1.98× that swing) · 57 snaps
Packers-0.6 ptsinside their normal wobble · +7.6 vs their -8.2 pts, and they swing ±8.3 week to week (+0.92× that swing) · 56 snaps
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale 8% to 83%
Tendencies room →Texans38.6%leaned — ran early · −17.4 vs their 56.1%, and they swing ±9.9 week to week (−1.76× that swing) · 44 early downs
Packers60.9%leaned — passed early · +16.6 vs their 44.2%, and they swing ±14.1 week to week (+1.18× that swing) · 46 early downs
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -7% to 56%
Tendencies room →Texans27.6%inside their normal wobble · +4.3 vs their 23.3%, and they swing ±7.5 week to week (+0.57× that swing) · 29 dropbacks
Packers8.3%leaned — dropped back clean · −15.9 vs their 24.3%, and they swing ±12.3 week to week (−1.30× that swing) · 36 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -24% to 90%
Fourth Down room →Texans—Only 2 fourth-and-short calls tonight — too few to read a tendency. Their season number is 33.3%.
Packers—Only 2 fourth-and-short calls tonight — too few to read a tendency. Their season number is 33.8%.
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -1% to 51%
Tendencies room →Texans25.0%right on their number · +0.1 vs their 24.9%, and they swing ±10.2 week to week (+0.01× that swing) · 36 dropbacks
Packers27.6%inside their normal wobble · +4.5 vs their 23.1%, and they swing ±6.2 week to week (+0.72× that swing) · 29 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -4% to 33%
Tendencies room →Texans16.7%right on their number · +0.8 vs their 15.9%, and they swing ±6.5 week to week (+0.12× that swing) · 36 dropbacks
Packers24.1%leaned — got home · +10.7 vs their 13.5%, and they swing ±6.8 week to week (+1.56× that swing) · 29 dropbacks
HOU's pass rate over expected was the night's one real departure: -11.5 pts, 12.7 points below their season mean of 1.2 pts and 2.0 times their own 6.4-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.
Houston Texans
48 dressed · 7 inactive · 1 never used
Inactive · 7
Dressed, never took a snap · 1
Green Bay Packers
48 dressed · 6 inactive · 1 never used
Inactive · 6
Dressed, never took a snap · 1
Who moved the needle
Passing · GB
24/33, 220 yds, 3 TD, 2 INT
-0.6 expected points added · +6.1% completion over expected
Passing · HOU
10/21, 86 yds, 0 TD, 0 INT
-11.4 expected points added · -14.8% completion over expected
Receiving · GB
3/6 for 48 yds, 1 TD
18% of team targets · -3.3 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.
Tucker Kraft banked 4.6 more points than his own workload asked for.
| Player | Full PPR | Vs expected | Snap share | Routes | Targets | Air yards | Line |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Joe MixonRB · Bell Cow Back | 26.4 | +4.3 | 66% | 52% | 16% | 0% | 25 car, 115 yd, 2 TD · 2/3, 9 yd |
| Josh JacobsRB · Bell Cow Back | 20.2 | +3.5 | 67% | 67% | 15% | 0% | 12 car, 76 yd · 5/5, 16 yd, 1 TD |
| Romeo DoubsWR · Alpha Receiver | 17.4 | +0.1 | 83% | 86% | 30% | 43% | 8/10, 94 yd |
| Jordan LoveQB · Starter QB | 16.8 | +0.7 | 100% | — | 0% | — | 24/33, 220 yd, 3 TD, 2 INT |
| Dontayvion WicksWR · Featured Receiver | 13.8 | +2.9 | 41% | 47% | 18% | 28% | 3/6, 48 yd, 1 TD |
| Tucker KraftTE · Rotational Receiver | 12.3 | +4.6 | 95% | 100% | 12% | 8% | 3/4, 33 yd, 1 TD |
| Stefon DiggsWR · Alpha Receiver | 7.3 | −4.2 | 81% | 86% | 37% | 48% | 5/7, 23 yd |
| C.J. StroudQB · Starter QB | 5.3 | −8.1 | 100% | — | 0% | — | 10/21, 86 yd · 5 car, 19 yd |
| Dalton SchultzTE · Rotational Receiver | 3.8 | +0.4 | 78% | 86% | 11% | 19% | 1/2, 28 yd |
| Jayden ReedWR · Rotational Receiver | 3.0 | −3.9 | 74% | 83% | 12% | 13% | 1 car, 0 yd · 2/4, 10 yd |
| Cade StoverTE · Rotational Receiver | 2.5 | +1.0 | 48% | 38% | 5% | 1% | 1/1, 15 yd |
| Xavier HutchinsonWR · Rotational Receiver | 2.1 | +0.7 | 64% | 59% | 5% | 8% | 1/1, 11 yd |
| Bo MeltonWR · Rotational Receiver | 1.7 | −0.4 | 14% | 14% | 3% | 3% | 1 car, -1 yd · 1/1, 8 yd |
| Christian WatsonWR · Rotational Receiver | 1.5 | −2.7 | 53% | 50% | 6% | 10% | 1 car, -4 yd · 1/2, 9 yd |
| Ben SimsTE · Rotational Receiver | 1.2 | −0.2 | 28% | 14% | 3% | 1% | 1/1, 2 yd |
| Emanuel WilsonRB | 1.1 | −1.4 | 21% | 19% | 0% | — | 5 car, 11 yd |
| Dare OgunbowaleRB | 0.6 | −4.4 | 23% | 34% | 5% | 0% | 1 car, 6 yd · 0/1, 0 yd |
| Dameon PierceRB | 0.2 | −0.7 | — | — | — | — | 7 snaps — too few to rate. |
| Tank DellWR · Featured Receiver | 0.0 | −8.3 | 72% | 86% | 21% | 33% | 0/4, 0 yd |
| Troy HairstonRB | 0.0 | — | — | — | — | — | Did not take a snap. |
2 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 Packers attack right, the Texans 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.
(:03) 17-B.McManus 45 yard field goal is GOOD, Center-42-M.Orzech, Holder-19-D.Whelan.
Q4 0:03 · Packers · 1st & 10 at HOU 26 · gained nothing · +0.65 EP · +35.2% win probability
152 snaps placed · 11 without a recorded yard line, left off the map · 4 marked moments — the largest win-probability swings, one per drive.
Post-game film: 163 plays across 23 drives, personnel groupings on 152 snaps, the eleven on the field by name, manual charting on 158. 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 GB moving 92 yards from the GB 8 for a touchdown. Each bar is the ground a drive actually covered; GB attacks right, HOU 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.
163 plays · ranked by the win probability each one moved
163 plays
Bar length is win probability the play movedHow the play was built
Empty backfield, nobody in motion.
Thrown on the first read, it should have been intercepted, caught in traffic.
Texans3
Packers0Texans3Packers6Texans3Packers7Texans9Packers7Texans10Packers7How the play was built
Empty backfield, no huddle, nobody in motion.
Thrown on the first read.
Texans10Packers13Texans10Packers14Texans13Packers14How the play was built
Nobody in motion.
Thrown on the first read, it should have been intercepted.
Texans19Packers14How the play was built
Empty backfield, no huddle, nobody in motion.
Texans19Packers20Texans19Packers21How the play was built
Nobody in motion.
How the play was built
Nobody in motion.
How the play was built
Nobody in motion.
Thrown out of the scramble drill, from outside the pocket, caught in traffic.
Texans22Packers21Texans22Packers24Win 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: Texans at Packers, every play.
Full stat lines
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C.J. Stroud | 10/21 | 86 | 0 | 0 | 4 | −11.4 |
| Player | Att | Yds | Avg | TD | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Joe Mixon | 25 | 115 | 4.6 | 2 | +0.2 |
| C.J. Stroud | 5 | 19 | 3.8 | 0 | +1.0 |
| Dare Ogunbowale |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dalton Schultz | 1 | 2 | 28 | 0 | 11% | +0.6 |
| Stefon Diggs | 5 | 7 | 23 | 0 | 37% |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| D'Angelo Ross | 7 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Neville Hewitt | 5 | 3 | 0.0 | 1 | 2 |
| Jake Hansen |
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jordan Love | 24/33 | 220 | 3 | 2 | 3 | −0.6 |
| 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_07_HOU_GB
The cards are drawn from the charted play-by-play, not live, and each one says so on its face.
Closing number vs result
Packers closed -3, won by 2 — but didn't cover.
Total closed 48; the game landed 46 — under by 2.0.
Conditions and crew
| 1 |
| 6 |
| 6.0 |
| 0 |
| +0.9 |
| Dameon Pierce | 2 | 2 | 1.0 | 0 | −1.0 |
| −0.6 |
| Cade Stover | 1 | 1 | 15 | 0 | 5% | +1.4 |
| Xavier Hutchinson | 1 | 1 | 11 | 0 | 5% | +1.7 |
| Joe Mixon | 2 | 3 | 9 | 0 | 16% | −0.8 |
| Dare Ogunbowale | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 5% | −1.4 |
| Tank Dell | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 21% | −2.5 |
| 4 |
| 3 |
| 0.0 |
| 0 |
| 0 |
| Derek Stingley | 5 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Tim Settle | 4 | 0 | 1.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jalen Pitre | 3 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Danielle Hunter | 2 | 0 | 1.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Eric Murray | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Ka'dar Hollman | 1 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Troy Hairston | 1 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Josh Jacobs | 12 | 76 | 6.3 | 0 | +0.9 |
| Emanuel Wilson | 5 | 11 | 2.2 | 0 | −0.6 |
| Jayden Reed | 1 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | −1.7 |
| Bo Melton | 1 | -1 | -1.0 | 0 | −1.1 |
| Christian Watson | 1 | -4 | -4.0 | 0 | −1.2 |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Romeo Doubs | 8 | 10 | 94 | 0 | 30% | +5.3 |
| Dontayvion Wicks | 3 | 6 | 48 | 1 | 18% | −3.3 |
| Tucker Kraft | 3 | 4 | 33 | 1 | 12% | +3.4 |
| Josh Jacobs | 5 | 5 | 16 | 1 | 15% | −1.1 |
| Jayden Reed | 2 | 4 | 10 | 0 | 12% | +1.5 |
| Christian Watson | 1 | 2 | 9 | 0 | 6% | −3.3 |
| Bo Melton | 1 | 1 | 8 | 0 | 3% | +1.5 |
| Ben Sims | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 3% | −0.3 |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Evan Williams | 6 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Xavier McKinney | 5 | 1 | 1.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Eric Wilson | 6 | 0 | 2.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Rashan Gary | 1 | 4 | 1.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Keisean Nixon | 2 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Isaiah McDuffie | 2 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kingsley Enagbare | 2 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jaire Alexander | 3 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Colby Wooden | 1 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Javon Bullard | 1 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
