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 7:02 AM ET · 16 to play
Game Center
Game Center
2025 Week 5 · Sun, Oct 5, 2025 · SoFi Stadium
FinalThe verdict · 2025 Week 5
It turned at Q2 0:50, 4th and 15 — 15.1 win-probability points to the Commanders on one snap, the largest move of the game.
The snaps that bent it
The biggest swing of the game · Q2 0:50 · 4th and 15
Unnamed on the sheet
Commanders
(:50) 10-T.Way punts 55 yards to LAC 43, Center-69-T.Ott. 15-L.McConkey for 57 yards, TOUCHDOWN NULLIFIED by Penalty. PENALTY on LAC-58-M.Wax, Roughing the Kicker, 15 yards, enforced at WAS 2 - No Play.
Washington Commanders 27–10 — never really in doubt late. Biggest swing: Q2 0:50, Commanders +15.1% win probability on one snap.
15.1
win-probability points on one snap
The largest move of the game. The two below are drawn against it.
What separated them
Throwing the ball
Commanders won this one — +0.56 expected points per dropback, against Chargers at -0.24 expected points per dropback.
Commandersthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Staying on schedule
Commanders won this one — 57% of snaps stayed on schedule, against Chargers at 40% of snaps stayed on schedule.
Commandersthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Third down
Chargers owned this one and still lost it — 9 of 16 on third down, against Commanders at 2 of 7 on third down.
Chargersthe gap went the other way from the scoreboard
Every snap
Commanders won this one — +0.25 expected points per snap, against Chargers at -0.14 expected points per snap.
Commandersthe 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 1.6 win-probability points apart on the average play, and 7 apart at the widest — with the model the more convinced about Commanders.
(:50) 10-T.Way punts 55 yards to LAC 43, Center-69-T.Ott. 15-L.McConkey for 57 yards, TOUCHDOWN NULLIFIED by Penalty. PENALTY on LAC-58-M.Wax, Roughing the Kicker, 15 yards, enforced at WAS 2 - No Play.
The modelled figures are the league play-by-play model's, not ours.
How the points landed
Jacory Croskey-Merritt's 5-yard rushing touchdown with 11:02 left in the 3rd put Washington Commanders ahead for good. The lead never changed over the 2 scores that followed.
7 scores · bar length is the lead after each one
Down-to-down truth
Commanderscategory by categoryChargers
Commanders ahead 7–1 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, ±0.56 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: Commanders ran 54 snaps at a 57% dropback rate against Chargers’s 63 at 62%. Red-zone trips: Commanders 5, Chargers 2.
Commanders won the down-to-down efficiency fight: 0.25 expected points added per play vs -0.14.
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.
WAS's pass rate over expected, +10.3 pts, is past their previous high of +4.9 pts in week 2 — the highest of their 5 charted games through week 5.
54 snaps this game, floor 20 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 7.8 points.
LAC's sack or hit rate, 3.2%, is past their previous low of 10.4% in week 2 — the lowest of their 5 charted games through week 5.
31 dropbacks this game, floor 12 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 7.3 points.
WAS's play-action rate, 9.7%, is past their previous low of 13.5% in week 2 — the lowest of their 5 charted games through week 5.
31 dropbacks this game, floor 12 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 11.4 points.
WAS's sack or hit rate turned over: 7.1% in week 4 against 20.5% here — they stayed blocked then and got home now, a turn of 2.1 of their own weekly swings across the two.
39 dropbacks this game, floor 12 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 6.4 points.
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 -25 pts to 22 pts
Over Expected room →Commanders10.3 ptsleaned — threw more than the situation asked · +14.8 vs their -4.4 pts, and they swing ±7.8 week to week (+1.90× that swing) · 54 snaps
Chargers-6.5 ptsinside their normal wobble · −7.3 vs their 0.8 pts, and they swing ±8.0 week to week (−0.92× that swing) · 63 snaps
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale 23% to 90%
Tendencies room →Commanders52.2%right on their number · +0.3 vs their 51.8%, and they swing ±10.9 week to week (+0.03× that swing) · 46 early downs
Chargers53.3%right on their number · −5.3 vs their 58.6%, and they swing ±12.3 week to week (−0.43× that swing) · 45 early downs
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -2% to 56%
Tendencies room →Commanders9.7%leaned — dropped back clean · −17.2 vs their 26.8%, and they swing ±11.4 week to week (−1.51× that swing) · 31 dropbacks
Chargers23.1%right on their number · −0.3 vs their 23.4%, and they swing ±7.8 week to week (−0.04× that swing) · 39 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -31% to 99%
Fourth Down room →Commanders—Only 2 fourth-and-short calls tonight — too few to read a tendency. Their season number is 52.3%.
Chargers—Only 2 fourth-and-short calls tonight — too few to read a tendency. Their season number is 21.7%.
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -13% to 64%
Tendencies room →Commanders25.6%right on their number · −1.4 vs their 27.0%, and they swing ±8.6 week to week (−0.16× that swing) · 39 dropbacks
Chargers35.5%inside their normal wobble · +10.0 vs their 25.5%, and they swing ±15.1 week to week (+0.66× that swing) · 31 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -4% to 34%
Tendencies room →Commanders20.5%inside their normal wobble · +6.3 vs their 14.2%, and they swing ±6.4 week to week (+0.98× that swing) · 39 dropbacks
Chargers3.2%leaned — stayed blocked · −11.9 vs their 15.2%, and they swing ±7.3 week to week (−1.63× that swing) · 31 dropbacks
WAS's pass rate over expected was the night's one real departure: 10.3 pts, 14.8 points above their season mean of -4.4 pts and 1.9 times their own 7.8-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.
Washington Commanders
48 dressed · 6 inactive · 1 never used
Inactive · 6
Dressed, never took a snap · 1
Los Angeles Chargers
48 dressed · 7 inactive
Inactive · 7
Who moved the needle
Passing · WAS
15/26, 231 yds, 1 TD, 0 INT
14.0 expected points added · -0.8% completion over expected
Passing · LAC
22/29, 166 yds, 1 TD, 1 INT
-6.1 expected points added · +3.9% completion over expected
Receiving · WAS
8/11 for 96 yds, 1 TD
48% of team targets · 7.8 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.
Jacory Croskey-Merritt banked 15.3 more points than his own workload asked for.
| Player | Full PPR | Vs expected | Snap share | Routes | Targets | Air yards | Line |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jacory Croskey-MerrittRB · Committee Back | 27.0 | +15.3 | 47% | 31% | 9% | 1% | 14 car, 111 yd, 2 TD · 2/2, 39 yd |
| Deebo Samuel Sr.WR · Alpha Receiver | 23.6 | +0.9 | 78% | 78% | 48% | 44% | 8/11, 96 yd, 1 TD |
| Jayden DanielsQB · Starter QB | 17.1 | −3.8 | 100% | — | 0% | — | 15/26, 231 yd, 1 TD · 8 car, 39 yd |
| Ladd McConkeyWR · Featured Receiver | 14.9 | +0.3 | 79% | 75% | 22% | 32% | 5/7, 39 yd, 1 TD |
| Justin HerbertQB · Starter QB | 14.6 | −1.6 | 91% | — | 0% | — | 22/29, 166 yd, 1 TD, 1 INT · 4 car, 60 yd |
| Omarion HamptonRB · Committee Back | 13.0 | −2.6 | 58% | 53% | 19% | 0% | 12 car, 44 yd · 6/6, 26 yd |
| Keenan AllenWR · Alpha Receiver | 10.8 | −7.1 | 58% | 63% | 28% | 46% | 5/9, 58 yd |
| Quentin JohnstonWR · Rotational Receiver | 6.9 | −0.7 | 82% | 78% | 13% | 20% | 1 car, 9 yd · 4/4, 40 yd |
| Luke McCaffreyWR · Rotational Receiver | 6.0 | +0.4 | 39% | 34% | 9% | 28% | 1/2, 50 yd |
| Tyler ConklinTE · Rotational Receiver | 5.0 | +0.7 | 30% | 25% | 9% | 10% | 2/3, 30 yd |
| Kimani VidalRB | 2.9 | −3.1 | 21% | 20% | 3% | 0% | 4 car, 18 yd · 1/1, 1 yd |
| Trey LanceQB | 2.9 | +1.2 | — | — | — | — | 6 snaps — too few to rate. |
| Jeremy McNicholsRB | 2.8 | −0.4 | 25% | 38% | 9% | 0% | 1 car, 6 yd · 1/2, 12 yd |
| Jaylin LaneWR · Rotational Receiver | 2.6 | −0.9 | 34% | 47% | 9% | 13% | 1/2, 16 yd |
| Hassan HaskinsRB | 2.5 | −1.4 | 21% | 23% | 3% | 2% | 5 car, 13 yd · 1/1, 2 yd |
| Oronde Gadsden IITE · Rotational Receiver | 2.4 | +0.9 | 54% | 60% | 3% | 5% | 1/1, 14 yd |
| John BatesTE · Rotational Receiver | 1.9 | +0.4 | 51% | 22% | 4% | 1% | 1/1, 9 yd |
| Tay MartinWR · Rotational Receiver | 1.9 | +0.4 | 24% | 25% | 4% | 2% | 1/1, 9 yd |
| Chris Rodriguez Jr.RB | 0.7 | −3.0 | 25% | 16% | 0% | — | 5 car, 7 yd |
| KeAndre Lambert-SmithWR · Rotational Receiver | 0.0 | — | 12% | 15% | 0% | — | No touches. |
| Zach ErtzTE · Rotational Receiver | 0.0 | −1.7 | 53% | 59% | 4% | 4% | 0/1, 0 yd |
| Chris MooreWR · Rotational Receiver | 0.0 | −3.5 | 59% | 56% | 4% | 5% | 0/1, 0 yd |
| Colson YankoffTE · Rotational Receiver | 0.0 | — | — | — | — | — | 3 snaps — too few to rate. |
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 Chargers attack right, the Commanders 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.
(7:44) (Shotgun) 10-J.Herbert pass short middle intended for 13-K.Allen INTERCEPTED by 0-M.Sainristil (95-J.Newton) at WAS 1. 0-M.Sainristil to WAS 1 for no gain (13-K.Allen).
Q4 7:44 · Chargers · 3rd & goal at WAS 4 · gained nothing · -3.76 EP · −13.2% win probability
155 snaps placed · 16 without a recorded yard line, left off the map · 4 marked moments — the largest win-probability swings, one per drive.
Post-game film: 171 plays across 17 drives, personnel groupings on 155 snaps, the eleven on the field by name, manual charting on 166. 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.
7 of 17 drives ended in points. The longest march was WAS moving 99 yards from the WAS 1 for a touchdown. Each bar is the ground a drive actually covered; LAC attacks right, WAS 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.
171 plays · ranked by the win probability each one moved
171 plays
Bar length is win probability the play movedHow the play was built
A man in motion.
Thrown out of the scramble drill, from outside the pocket, the ball was not catchable.
Commanders0
Chargers6Commanders0Chargers7Commanders0Chargers10Commanders6Chargers10Commanders7Chargers10How the play was built
Nobody in motion.
Thrown on the first read, caught in traffic.
Commanders10Chargers10Commanders16Chargers10Commanders17Chargers10Commanders20Chargers10How the play was built
Nobody in motion.
How the play was built
A man in motion.
Thrown on the first read, it should have been intercepted.
Commanders26Chargers10Commanders27Chargers10Win 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: Commanders at Chargers, every play.
Full stat lines
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jayden Daniels | 15/26 | 231 | 1 | 0 | 1 | +14.0 |
| Player | Att | Yds | Avg | TD | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jacory Croskey-Merritt | 14 | 111 | 7.9 | 2 | +2.0 |
| Jayden Daniels | 8 | 39 | 4.9 | 0 | +1.3 |
| Chris Rodriguez Jr. | 5 | 7 | 1.4 | 0 | −3.4 |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Deebo Samuel Sr. | 8 | 11 | 96 | 1 | 48% | +7.8 |
| Luke McCaffrey | 1 | 2 | 50 | 0 | 9% | +1.3 |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bobby Wagner | 8 | 6 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Quan Martin | 6 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mike Sainristil | 7 | 2 | 0.0 | 1 | 2 |
| Jeremy Reaves |
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Justin Herbert | 22/29 | 166 | 1 | 1 | 4 | −6.1 |
| Trey Lance | 3/4 | 44 | 0 | 0 | 1 | −1.4 |
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_05_WAS_LAC
The cards are drawn from the play-by-play sync, not live, and each one says so on its face.
Closing number vs result
Chargers closed -2.5 and lost outright — an upset against the closing number.
Total closed 47.5; the game landed 37 — under by 10.5.
Conditions and crew
| Jeremy McNichols | 1 | 6 | 6.0 | 0 | +0.1 |
| Jacory Croskey-Merritt | 2 | 2 | 39 | 0 | 9% | +2.8 |
| Jaylin Lane | 1 | 2 | 16 | 0 | 9% | +2.0 |
| Jeremy McNichols | 1 | 2 | 12 | 0 | 9% | +0.4 |
| John Bates | 1 | 1 | 9 | 0 | 4% | +1.1 |
| Tay Martin | 1 | 1 | 9 | 0 | 4% | +0.8 |
| Zach Ertz | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 4% | −0.3 |
| Chris Moore | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 4% | −0.8 |
| 5 |
| 2 |
| 0.0 |
| 0 |
| 1 |
| Frankie Luvu | 2 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Javon Kinlaw | 3 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jacob Martin | 1 | 2 | 0.5 | 0 | 0 |
| Jordan Magee | 1 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Von Miller | 2 | 1 | 1.5 | 0 | 0 |
| Dorance Armstrong | 2 | 1 | 2.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Player | Att | Yds | Avg | TD | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Justin Herbert | 4 | 60 | 15.0 | 0 | +4.8 |
| Omarion Hampton | 12 | 44 | 3.7 | 0 | +0.3 |
| Kimani Vidal | 4 | 18 | 4.5 | 0 | −0.3 |
| Hassan Haskins | 5 | 13 | 2.6 | 0 | −1.6 |
| Trey Lance | 1 | 11 | 11.0 | 0 | +0.6 |
| Quentin Johnston | 1 | 9 | 9.0 | 0 | +0.7 |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Keenan Allen | 5 | 9 | 58 | 0 | 28% | +0.4 |
| Quentin Johnston | 4 | 4 | 40 | 0 | 13% | −1.9 |
| Ladd McConkey | 5 | 7 | 39 | 1 | 22% | +1.2 |
| Tyler Conklin | 2 | 3 | 30 | 0 | 9% | −4.0 |
| Omarion Hampton | 6 | 6 | 26 | 0 | 19% | −0.8 |
| Oronde Gadsden II | 1 | 1 | 14 | 0 | 3% | +0.7 |
| Hassan Haskins | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 3% | −0.6 |
| Kimani Vidal | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 3% | −0.6 |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Troy Dye | 6 | 4 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Daiyan Henley | 2 | 6 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Elijah Molden | 4 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Alohi Gilman | 1 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Tarheeb Still | 3 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 2 |
| Cam Hart | 2 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Justin Eboigbe | 3 | 1 | 1.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Teair Tart | 2 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Derwin James | 2 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Benjamin St-Juste | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
