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 11:27 PM ET · 13 to play · 1 final
Game Center
Game Center
2025 Week 4 · Sun, Sep 28, 2025 · Allegiant Stadium
FinalThe verdict · 2025 Week 4
It turned at Q4 0:38, 4th and 3, on Daniel Carlson — 45.7 win-probability points to the Bears on one snap, the largest move of the game.
The snaps that bent it
Chicago Bears 25–24 — decided on the final possessions. Biggest swing: Q4 0:38, Bears +45.7% win probability on one snap.
The biggest swing of the game · Q4 0:38 · 4th and 3
Daniel Carlson
Bears
(:38) 8-D.Carlson 54 yard field goal is BLOCKED (39-J.Blackwell), Center-50-J.Bobenmoyer, Holder-6-A.Cole.
45.7
win-probability points on one snap
The largest move of the game. The two below are drawn against it.
What separated them
Giveaways
Bears won this one — 1 giveaway, against Raiders at 4 giveaways.
Bearsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Explosive plays
Raiders owned this one and still lost it — 9 chunk plays, against Bears at 4 chunk plays.
Raidersthe gap went the other way from the scoreboard
Staying on schedule
Raiders owned this one and still lost it — 53% of snaps stayed on schedule, against Bears at 42% of snaps stayed on schedule.
Raidersthe gap went the other way from the scoreboard
Third down
Bears won this one — 7 of 17 on third down, against Raiders at 2 of 8 on third down.
Bearsthe 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 3.3 win-probability points apart on the average play, and 9 apart at the widest — with the model the more convinced about Raiders.
(:38) 8-D.Carlson 54 yard field goal is BLOCKED (39-J.Blackwell), Center-50-J.Bobenmoyer, Holder-6-A.Cole.
The modelled figures are the league play-by-play model's, not ours.
How the points landed
D'Andre Swift's 2-yard rushing touchdown with 1:39 left in the 4th put Chicago Bears ahead for good. It was the last score of the day.
D'Andre Swift2-yd TD run2-yard rushing touchdowntwo-point no goodLead never changed again+625–2410 scores · bar length is the lead after each one
Down-to-down truth
Bearscategory by categoryRaiders
Raiders ahead 7–2 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, ±0.35 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: Bears ran 64 snaps at a 66% dropback rate against Raiders’s 51 at 43%. Red-zone trips: Bears 5, Raiders 4.
Raiders outgained Bears 357-272 but lost the turnover battle 4-1. That was the game.
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.
1 of 12 readings cleared their snap floor in this game, which is under the three this column needs before it will draw the rule. The readings themselves stand.
LV's play-action rate turned over: 20.0% in week 3 against 40.9% here — they dropped back clean then and faked the run now, a turn of 2.5 of their own weekly swings across the two.
22 dropbacks this game, floor 12 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 8.5 points. · +1.8σ from their own normal
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 -25 pts to 22 pts
Over Expected room →Bears-3.7 ptsright on their number · +0.2 vs their -3.9 pts, and they swing ±4.1 week to week (+0.04× that swing) · 63 snaps
Raiders-13.8 ptsleaned — ran more than the situation asked · −12.2 vs their -1.6 pts, and they swing ±9.1 week to week (−1.35× that swing) · 51 snaps
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale 24% to 92%
Tendencies room →Bears60.0%inside their normal wobble · +5.5 vs their 54.5%, and they swing ±9.4 week to week (+0.58× that swing) · 45 early downs
Raiders40.5%leaned — ran early · −17.4 vs their 57.9%, and they swing ±13.4 week to week (−1.30× that swing) · 42 early downs
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale 3% to 56%
Tendencies room →Bears28.6%right on their number · −3.1 vs their 31.6%, and they swing ±9.4 week to week (−0.32× that swing) · 42 dropbacks
Raiders40.9%leaned — faked the run · +15.3 vs their 25.6%, and they swing ±8.5 week to week (+1.80× that swing) · 22 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -34% to 143%
Fourth Down room →Bears—Only 2 fourth-and-short calls tonight — too few to read a tendency. Their season number is 44.8%.
Raiders33.3%inside their normal wobble · −21.2 vs their 54.5%, and they swing ±34.7 week to week (−0.61× that swing) · 3 fourth-and-short calls
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale 1% to 58%
Tendencies room →Bears50.0%leaned — sent pressure · +20.1 vs their 29.9%, and they swing ±11.2 week to week (+1.80× that swing) · 22 dropbacks
Raiders23.8%right on their number · +1.8 vs their 22.0%, and they swing ±6.7 week to week (+0.26× that swing) · 42 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -7% to 34%
Tendencies room →Bears4.5%leaned — stayed blocked · −8.5 vs their 13.0%, and they swing ±8.0 week to week (−1.05× that swing) · 22 dropbacks
Raiders4.8%leaned — stayed blocked · −9.1 vs their 13.9%, and they swing ±7.6 week to week (−1.20× that swing) · 42 dropbacks
LV's play-action rate was the night's one real departure: 40.9%, 15.3 points above their season mean of 25.6% and 1.8 times their own 8.5-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.
Chicago Bears
48 dressed · 7 inactive · 1 never used
Inactive · 7
Dressed, never took a snap · 1
Las Vegas Raiders
48 dressed · 7 inactive · 3 never used
Inactive · 7
Dressed, never took a snap · 3
Who moved the needle
Passing · CHI
22/37, 212 yds, 1 TD, 1 INT
-1.1 expected points added · -11.4% completion over expected
Passing · LV
14/21, 117 yds, 2 TD, 3 INT
-9.6 expected points added · -3.6% 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.
Ashton Jeanty banked 16.1 more points than his own workload asked for.
| Player | Full PPR | Vs expected | Snap share | Routes | Targets | Air yards | Line |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ashton JeantyRB · Bell Cow Back | 33.5 | +16.1 | 85% | 83% | 10% | 7% | 21 car, 138 yd, 1 TD · 2/2, 17 yd, 2 TD |
| Rome OdunzeWR · Featured Receiver | 16.9 | −0.1 | 76% | 83% | 22% | 44% | 4/8, 69 yd, 1 TD |
| D'Andre SwiftRB · Committee Back | 16.0 | −3.6 | 66% | 67% | 17% | 2% | 14 car, 38 yd, 1 TD · 4/6, 22 yd |
| Caleb WilliamsQB · Starter QB | 11.8 | −12.2 | 100% | — | 0% | — | 22/37, 212 yd, 1 TD, 1 INT · 8 car, 13 yd |
| Geno SmithQB · Starter QB | 9.8 | −1.5 | 100% | — | 0% | — | 14/21, 117 yd, 2 TD, 3 INT · 4 car, 31 yd |
| Brock BowersTE · Alpha Receiver | 9.6 | −0.5 | 77% | 83% | 30% | 12% | 5/6, 46 yd |
| Olamide ZaccheausWR · Rotational Receiver | 9.1 | +0.1 | 60% | 69% | 17% | 9% | 5/6, 41 yd |
| Raheem MostertRB | 8.3 | +4.6 | 15% | 13% | 5% | 2% | 4 car, 62 yd · 1/1, 11 yd |
| DJ MooreWR · Rotational Receiver | 7.8 | 0.0 | 76% | 83% | 14% | 5% | 4/5, 38 yd |
| Cole KmetTE · Alpha Receiver | 7.6 | −9.8 | 100% | 100% | 25% | 43% | 3/9, 46 yd |
| Jakobi MeyersWR · Alpha Receiver | 7.0 | −4.5 | 98% | 96% | 35% | 58% | 4/7, 30 yd |
| Tre TuckerWR · Rotational Receiver | 4.2 | −0.2 | 98% | 96% | 10% | 0% | 2 car, 9 yd · 2/2, 13 yd |
| Kyle MonangaiRB | 1.8 | −0.1 | 28% | 24% | 0% | — | 4 car, 18 yd |
| Luther Burden IIIWR · Rotational Receiver | 1.6 | −1.3 | 28% | 26% | 6% | 0% | 2/2, -4 yd |
| Devin DuvernayWR | 0.0 | — | — | — | — | — | Did not take a snap. |
| Roschon JohnsonRB | 0.0 | — | — | — | — | — | Did not take a snap. |
| Jahdae WalkerWR · Rotational Receiver | 0.0 | — | — | — | — | — | 1 snap — too few to rate. |
| Jack BechWR · Rotational Receiver | 0.0 | — | — | — | — | — | 5 snaps — too few to rate. |
| Ian ThomasTE · Rotational Receiver | 0.0 | — | 56% | 35% | 0% | — | No touches. |
| Dont'e Thornton Jr.WR · Rotational Receiver | 0.0 | −4.1 | 60% | 70% | 10% | 23% | 0/2, 0 yd |
| Justin ShorterWR | 0.0 | — | — | — | — | — | Did not take a snap. |
| Dylan LaubeRB | 0.0 | — | — | — | — | — | Did not take a snap. |
6 players played under 8 snaps, so their shares read as a dash rather than a number. 7 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 Raiders attack right, the Bears 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.
(:38) 8-D.Carlson 54 yard field goal is BLOCKED (39-J.Blackwell), Center-50-J.Bobenmoyer, Holder-6-A.Cole.
Q4 0:38 · Raiders · 4th & 3 at CHI 36 · gained nothing · -1.51 EP · −38.0% win probability
150 snaps placed · 13 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 22 drives, personnel groupings on 150 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.
10 of 22 drives ended in points. The longest march was LV moving 80 yards from the LV 20 for a touchdown. Each bar is the ground a drive actually covered; LV attacks right, CHI 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
A man in motion.
Thrown on the first read, it should have been intercepted.
Bears3
Raiders0How the play was built
Nobody in motion.
How the play was built
Empty backfield, nobody in motion.
Thrown on the first read, the ball was not catchable.
Bears3Raiders6Bears3Raiders7How the play was built
Nobody in motion.
Thrown on the first read, it should have been intercepted.
Bears6Raiders7How the play was built
Two in the backfield, a man in motion.
Bears6Raiders13Bears6Raiders14Bears9Raiders14How the play was built
No huddle, nobody in motion.
Thrown on the first read.
Bears15Raiders14Bears16Raiders14Bears16Raiders20Bears16Raiders21How the play was built
Nobody in motion.
Bears19Raiders21Bears19Raiders24How the play was built
Nobody in motion.
Thrown on the first read.
How the play was built
A run-pass option, nobody in motion.
Bears25Raiders24Win 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: Bears at Raiders, every play.
Full stat lines
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Caleb Williams | 22/37 | 212 | 1 | 1 | 1 | −1.1 |
| Player | Att | Yds | Avg | TD | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| D'Andre Swift | 14 | 38 | 2.7 | 1 | −0.9 |
| Kyle Monangai | 4 | 18 | 4.5 | 0 | −0.1 |
| Caleb Williams |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rome Odunze | 4 | 8 | 69 | 1 | 22% | +0.0 |
| Cole Kmet | 3 | 9 | 46 | 0 | 25% |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tremaine Edmunds | 6 | 5 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kevin Byard | 5 | 2 | 0.0 | 2 | 2 |
| Tyrique Stevenson |
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Geno Smith | 14/21 | 117 | 2 | 3 | 0 | −9.6 |
| 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/2025_04_CHI_LV
The cards are drawn from the charted play-by-play, not live, and each one says so on its face.
Closing number vs result
Raiders closed -1.5 and lost outright — an upset against the closing number.
Total closed 47.5; the game landed 49 — over by 1.5.
Conditions and crew
| 8 |
| 13 |
| 1.6 |
| 0 |
| −5.6 |
| −1.3 |
| Olamide Zaccheaus | 5 | 6 | 41 | 0 | 17% | +4.3 |
| DJ Moore | 4 | 5 | 38 | 0 | 14% | +0.9 |
| D'Andre Swift | 4 | 6 | 22 | 0 | 17% | +0.1 |
| Luther Burden III | 2 | 2 | -4 | 0 | 6% | −2.4 |
| 4 |
| 2 |
| 0.0 |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| Noah Sewell | 1 | 4 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jaquan Brisker | 1 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Nick McCloud | 2 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Nahshon Wright | 3 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Daniel Hardy | 1 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Shemar Turner | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Andrew Billings | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Ashton Jeanty | 21 | 138 | 6.6 | 1 | −1.7 |
| Raheem Mostert | 4 | 62 | 15.5 | 0 | +2.1 |
| Geno Smith | 4 | 31 | 7.8 | 0 | +0.1 |
| Tre Tucker | 2 | 9 | 4.5 | 0 | −1.0 |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Brock Bowers | 5 | 6 | 46 | 0 | 30% | +1.8 |
| Jakobi Meyers | 4 | 7 | 30 | 0 | 35% | −15.0 |
| Ashton Jeanty | 2 | 2 | 17 | 2 | 10% | +4.1 |
| Tre Tucker | 2 | 2 | 13 | 0 | 10% | +0.8 |
| Raheem Mostert | 1 | 1 | 11 | 0 | 5% | −0.0 |
| Dont'e Thornton Jr. | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 10% | −1.2 |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Devin White | 8 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Jeremy Chinn | 3 | 4 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kyu Blu Kelly | 4 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Germaine Pratt | 3 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Maxx Crosby | 5 | 0 | 0.0 | 1 | 3 |
| Isaiah Pola-Mao | 1 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jamal Adams | 4 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Malcolm Koonce | 2 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Darnay Holmes | 1 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Dylan Laube | 1 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
