The biggest swing of the game · Q3 2:40 · 2nd and 8
Demarcus Robinson
Rams
(2:40) (Shotgun) 9-M.Stafford pass deep right to 15-D.Robinson for 25 yards, TOUCHDOWN. Penalty on MIN-1-S.Griffin, Defensive Pass Interference, declined.
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 12:21 AM ET · 16 to play
Game Center
Game Center
2024 Week 8 · Thu, Oct 24, 2024 · SoFi Stadium
FinalThe verdict · 2024 Week 8
It turned at Q3 2:40, 2nd and 8, on Demarcus Robinson — 14.5 win-probability points to the Rams on one snap, the largest move of the game.
The snaps that bent it
The biggest swing of the game · Q3 2:40 · 2nd and 8
Demarcus Robinson
Rams
(2:40) (Shotgun) 9-M.Stafford pass deep right to 15-D.Robinson for 25 yards, TOUCHDOWN. Penalty on MIN-1-S.Griffin, Defensive Pass Interference, declined.
Los Angeles Rams 30–20. Biggest swing: Q3 2:40, Rams +14.5% win probability on one snap.
14.5
win-probability points on one snap
The largest move of the game. The two below are drawn against it.
What separated them
Explosive plays
Rams won this one — 7 chunk plays, against Vikings at 3 chunk plays.
Ramsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Third down
Rams won this one — 4 of 9 on third down, against Vikings at 2 of 7 on third down.
Ramsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Giveaways
Vikings owned this one and still lost it — no giveaways, against Rams at 1 giveaway.
Vikingsthe gap went the other way from the scoreboard
Throwing the ball
Rams won this one — +0.47 expected points per dropback, against Vikings at +0.30 expected points per dropback.
Ramsthe 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 12.5 win-probability points apart on the average play, and 19 apart at the widest — with the model the more convinced about Rams.
(2:40) (Shotgun) 9-M.Stafford pass deep right to 15-D.Robinson for 25 yards, TOUCHDOWN. Penalty on MIN-1-S.Griffin, Defensive Pass Interference, declined.
The modelled figures are the league play-by-play model's, not ours.
How the points landed
Demarcus Robinson's 25-yard touchdown catch with 2:40 left in the 3rd put Los Angeles Rams ahead for good. The lead never changed over the 3 scores that followed.
9 scores · bar length is the lead after each one
Down-to-down truth
Rams ahead 8–1 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, ±0.47 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 49 snaps at a 59% dropback rate against Rams’s 63 at 54%. Red-zone trips: Vikings 4, Rams 5.
Rams won the down-to-down efficiency fight: 0.19 expected points added per play vs 0.11.
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.
MIN's sack or hit rate, 5.9%, is past their previous low of 15.7% in week 3 — the lowest of their 7 charted games through week 8.
34 dropbacks this game, floor 12 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 6.1 points.
MIN's pass rate over expected, −1.8 pts, is past their previous low of +0.9 pts in week 5 — the lowest of their 7 charted games through week 8.
49 snaps this game, floor 20 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 4.4 points.
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.
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -21 pts to 16 pts
Over Expected room →leaned — ran more than the situation asked · −5.9 vs their 4.1 pts, and they swing ±4.4 week to week (−1.34× that swing) · 49 snaps
right on their number · −0.5 vs their -4.0 pts, and they swing ±6.7 week to week (−0.08× that swing) · 63 snaps
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale 23% to 84%
Tendencies room →right on their number · +0.2 vs their 54.5%, and they swing ±7.7 week to week (+0.03× that swing) · 42 early downs
right on their number · −2.4 vs their 53.3%, and they swing ±12.0 week to week (−0.20× that swing) · 53 early downs
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale 5% to 57%
Tendencies room →right on their number · −2.8 vs their 26.9%, and they swing ±7.5 week to week (−0.38× that swing) · 29 dropbacks
inside their normal wobble · −7.2 vs their 30.8%, and they swing ±10.1 week to week (−0.72× that swing) · 34 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -34% to 97%
Fourth Down room →Only 2 fourth-and-short calls tonight — too few to read a tendency. Their season number is 31.0%.
right on their number · +1.7 vs their 31.6%, and they swing ±25.7 week to week (+0.07× that swing) · 3 fourth-and-short calls
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale 3% to 77%
Tendencies room →right on their number · −0.7 vs their 44.8%, and they swing ±12.4 week to week (−0.06× that swing) · 34 dropbacks
leaned — sat back · −14.0 vs their 27.8%, and they swing ±9.2 week to week (−1.53× that swing) · 29 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -4% to 32%
Tendencies room →leaned — stayed blocked · −10.4 vs their 16.3%, and they swing ±6.1 week to week (−1.70× that swing) · 34 dropbacks
inside their normal wobble · +5.7 vs their 11.6%, and they swing ±6.2 week to week (+0.92× that swing) · 29 dropbacks
MIN's sack or hit rate was the night's one real departure: 5.9%, 10.4 points below their season mean of 16.3% and 1.7 times their own 6.1-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
Los Angeles Rams
48 dressed · 5 inactive · 3 never used
Inactive · 5
Dressed, never took a snap · 3
Who moved the needle
Passing · LA
25/34, 279 yds, 4 TD, 1 INT
15.9 expected points added · +4.5% completion over expected
Passing · MIN
18/25, 240 yds, 2 TD, 0 INT
8.5 expected points added · +11.8% completion over expected
Receiving · MIN
8/9 for 115 yds, 0 TD
39% of team targets · 7.3 expected points added
What each man’s workload was worth, against what he actually banked. Final. Usage and expected points land with the weekly sync, not live.
Josh Oliver banked 5.5 more points than his own workload asked for.
| Player | Full PPR | Vs expected | Snap share | Routes | Targets | Air yards | Line |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19.5 | +0.4 | 100% | 97% | 39% | 40% | 8/9, 115 yd | |
| 18.2 | +2.6 | 100% | — | 0% | — | 18/25, 240 yd, 2 TD · 3 car, 6 yd | |
| 11.5 | −3.7 | 92% | 83% | 9% | 9% | 19 car, 58 yd · 2/2, 37 yd | |
| 11.0 | +5.5 | 70% | 55% | 9% | 3% | 2/2, 30 yd, 1 TD | |
| 8.0 | +5.1 | — | — | — | — | 3 snaps — too few to rate. | |
| 4.2 | −0.9 | 92% | 90% | 13% | 15% | 2/3, 22 yd | |
| 3.6 | −3.1 | 42% | 59% | 17% | 10% | 2/4, 16 yd | |
| 2.0 | −1.3 | 62% | 66% | 9% | 12% | 1/2, 10 yd | |
| 0.0 | — | — | — | — | — | 6 snaps — too few to rate. |
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 Rams 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.
(15:00) (Shotgun) 14-S.Darnold pass deep right to 33-A.Jones ran ob at LA 23 for 25 yards.
Q4 15:00 · Vikings · 3rd & 3 at LA 48 · gained 25 · +2.63 EP · +15.9% win probability
153 snaps placed · 12 without a recorded yard line, left off the map · 4 marked moments — the largest win-probability swings, one per drive.
Post-game film: 165 plays across 18 drives, personnel groupings on 153 snaps, the eleven on the field by name, manual charting on 160. 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 18 drives ended in points. The longest march was MIN moving 70 yards from the MIN 30 for a touchdown. Each bar is the ground a drive actually covered; LA 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.
165 plays · ranked by the win probability each one moved
165 plays
How the play was built
A man in motion.
Thrown as a checkdown.
How the play was built
A man in motion.
Thrown out of the scramble drill, from outside the pocket.
How the play was built
Nobody in motion.
Thrown on the first read.
How the play was built
A man in motion.
Thrown on the first read, caught in traffic.
How the play was built
Empty backfield, a man in motion.
Thrown on the first read, the receiver created it himself.
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: Vikings at Rams, every play.
Full stat lines
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sam Darnold | 18/25 | 240 | 2 | 0 | 3 | +8.5 |
| Player | Att | Yds | Avg | TD | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aaron Jones | 19 | 58 | 3.1 | 0 | −3.8 |
| Sam Darnold | 3 | 6 | 2.0 | 0 | +0.6 |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Justin Jefferson | 8 | 9 | 115 | 0 | 39% | +7.3 |
| Aaron Jones | 2 | 2 | 37 | 0 | 9% | +3.8 |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ivan Pace | 7 | 6 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Josh Metellus | 3 | 4 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Camryn Bynum | 3 | 4 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Harrison Smith |
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Matthew Stafford | 25/34 | 279 | 4 | 1 | 0 | +15.9 |
| Player | Att | Yds | Avg | TD | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kyren Williams |
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_08_MIN_LA
The cards are drawn from the play-by-play sync, not live, and each one says so on its face.
Closing number vs result
Vikings closed -3 and lost outright — an upset against the closing number.
Total closed 47.5; the game landed 50 — over by 2.5.
Conditions and crew
| Josh Oliver | 2 | 2 | 30 | 1 | 9% | +2.7 |
| Jordan Addison | 2 | 3 | 22 | 0 | 13% | +2.7 |
| Jalen Nailor | 2 | 4 | 16 | 0 | 17% | −2.2 |
| Johnny Mundt | 1 | 2 | 10 | 0 | 9% | +0.0 |
| Trent Sherfield | 1 | 1 | 10 | 1 | 4% | +1.7 |
| 5 |
| 2 |
| 0.0 |
| 0 |
| 0 |
| Stephon Gilmore | 4 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Andrew Van Ginkel | 1 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jonathan Greenard | 1 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Byron Murphy | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | 1 | 2 |
| Patrick Jones | 1 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jonathan Bullard | 1 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 |
| 97 |
| 4.2 |
| 0 |
| −2.3 |
| Blake Corum | 4 | 9 | 2.3 | 0 | −1.6 |
| Puka Nacua | 2 | 5 | 2.5 | 0 | −0.2 |
| Matthew Stafford | 3 | -4 | -1.3 | 0 | −2.1 |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Puka Nacua | 7 | 9 | 106 | 0 | 26% | +8.4 |
| Cooper Kupp | 5 | 8 | 51 | 1 | 24% | +1.2 |
| Demarcus Robinson | 2 | 3 | 35 | 2 | 9% | +2.2 |
| Kyren Williams | 5 | 7 | 19 | 1 | 21% | −0.1 |
| Hunter Long | 1 | 1 | 18 | 0 | 3% | +1.0 |
| Tutu Atwell | 1 | 2 | 18 | 0 | 6% | +1.1 |
| Colby Parkinson | 2 | 2 | 17 | 0 | 6% | +1.7 |
| Blake Corum | 1 | 1 | 9 | 0 | 3% | +0.3 |
| Tyler Johnson | 1 | 1 | 6 | 0 | 3% | +0.1 |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Christian Rozeboom | 2 | 4 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Cobie Durant | 5 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kobie Turner | 1 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Omar Speights | 3 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jared Verse | 1 | 2 | 1.5 | 0 | 0 |
| Darious Williams | 3 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Michael Hoecht | 1 | 2 | 0.5 | 0 | 0 |
| Quentin Lake | 1 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Byron Young | 1 | 1 | 1.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Braden Fiske | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |