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
2025 Week 9 · Sun, Nov 2, 2025 · FedExField
FinalThe verdict · 2025 Week 9
It turned at Q1 3:09, 2nd and 4, on Tory Horton — 5.6 win-probability points to the Seahawks on one snap, the largest move of the game.
The snaps that bent it
Seattle Seahawks 38–14 — never really in doubt late. Biggest swing: Q1 3:09, Seahawks +5.6% win probability on one snap.
The biggest swing of the game · Q1 3:09 · 2nd and 4
Tory Horton
Seahawks
(3:09) 14-S.Darnold pass short left to 15-T.Horton for 4 yards, TOUCHDOWN. Penalty on WAS-2-M.Lattimore, Defensive Pass Interference, declined.
5.6
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
Seahawks won this one — +0.94 expected points per dropback, against Commanders at -0.04 expected points per dropback.
Seahawksthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Explosive plays
Seahawks won this one — 10 chunk plays, against Commanders at 4 chunk plays.
Seahawksthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Every snap
Seahawks won this one — +0.45 expected points per snap, against Commanders at -0.02 expected points per snap.
Seahawksthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Red zone
Commanders owned this one and still lost it — 2 touchdowns on 2 trips, against Seahawks at 2 touchdowns on 5 trips.
Commandersthe gap went the other way from the scoreboard
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 3.9 win-probability points apart on the average play, and 15 apart at the widest — with the model the more convinced about Commanders.
(3:09) 14-S.Darnold pass short left to 15-T.Horton for 4 yards, TOUCHDOWN. Penalty on WAS-2-M.Lattimore, Defensive Pass Interference, declined.
The modelled figures are the league play-by-play model's, not ours.
How the points landed
Tory Horton's 4-yard touchdown catch with 3:09 left in the 1st put Seattle Seahawks ahead for good. The lead never changed over the 7 scores that followed.
8 scores · bar length is the lead after each one
Down-to-down truth
Seahawkscategory by categoryCommanders
Seahawks ahead 8–0 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, ±0.94 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: Seahawks ran 48 snaps at a 50% dropback rate against Commanders’s 62 at 56%. Red-zone trips: Seahawks 5, Commanders 2.
Seahawks won the down-to-down efficiency fight: 0.45 expected points added per play vs -0.02.
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.
WAS's sack or hit rate, 4.2%, was the lowest of the 28 team-games charted in week 9 — 1.1 points clear of the next team along.
24 dropbacks this game, floor 12 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 6.4 points. · −1.6σ from their own normal
WAS's pass rate over expected, −14.3 pts, is past their previous low of −9.0 pts in week 4 — the lowest of their 9 charted games through week 9.
62 snaps this game, floor 20 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 7.8 points. · −1.3σ from their own normal
WAS's play-action rate turned over: 8.6% in week 8 against 31.4% here — they dropped back clean then and faked the run now, a turn of 2.0 of their own weekly swings across the two.
35 dropbacks this game, floor 12 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 11.4 points. · +0.4σ 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 -24 pts to 15 pts
Over Expected room →Seahawks-5.3 ptsright on their number · +1.4 vs their -6.7 pts, and they swing ±6.3 week to week (+0.22× that swing) · 48 snaps
Commanders-14.3 ptsleaned — ran more than the situation asked · −9.9 vs their -4.4 pts, and they swing ±7.8 week to week (−1.27× that swing) · 62 snaps
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale 22% to 80%
Tendencies room →Seahawks45.9%right on their number · −1.9 vs their 47.8%, and they swing ±10.0 week to week (−0.19× that swing) · 37 early downs
Commanders51.1%right on their number · −0.8 vs their 51.8%, and they swing ±10.9 week to week (−0.07× that swing) · 47 early downs
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -2% to 56%
Tendencies room →Seahawks16.7%leaned — dropped back clean · −8.9 vs their 25.5%, and they swing ±8.3 week to week (−1.07× that swing) · 24 dropbacks
Commanders31.4%right on their number · +4.6 vs their 26.8%, and they swing ±11.4 week to week (+0.40× that swing) · 35 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -22% to 98%
Fourth Down room →Seahawks0.0%leaned — took the kick · −29.4 vs their 29.4%, and they swing ±19.5 week to week (−1.51× that swing) · 3 fourth-and-short calls
Commanders—Only 1 fourth-and-short call tonight — too few to read a tendency. Their season number is 52.3%.
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale 4% to 49%
Tendencies room →Seahawks37.1%leaned — sent pressure · +12.1 vs their 25.1%, and they swing ±8.3 week to week (+1.46× that swing) · 35 dropbacks
Commanders25.0%right on their number · −2.0 vs their 27.0%, and they swing ±8.6 week to week (−0.24× that swing) · 24 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -2% to 32%
Tendencies room →Seahawks14.3%right on their number · −1.8 vs their 16.0%, and they swing ±6.1 week to week (−0.29× that swing) · 35 dropbacks
Commanders4.2%leaned — stayed blocked · −10.1 vs their 14.2%, and they swing ±6.4 week to week (−1.58× that swing) · 24 dropbacks
WAS's sack or hit rate was the night's one real departure: 4.2%, 10.1 points below their season mean of 14.2% and 1.6 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.
Seattle Seahawks
48 dressed · 7 inactive
Inactive · 7
Washington Commanders
48 dressed · 7 inactive
Inactive · 7
Who moved the needle
Passing · SEA
21/24, 330 yds, 4 TD, 1 INT
22.4 expected points added · +23.5% completion over expected
Passing · WAS
16/22, 153 yds, 0 TD, 1 INT
-1.3 expected points added · +4.0% completion over expected
Receiving · SEA
8/9 for 129 yds, 0 TD
38% of team targets · 6.8 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.
Sam Darnold banked 12.5 more points than his own workload asked for.
| Player | Full PPR | Vs expected | Snap share | Routes | Targets | Air yards | Line |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sam DarnoldQB · Starter QB | 27.2 | +12.5 | 94% | — | 0% | — | 21/24, 330 yd, 4 TD, 1 INT |
| Jaxon Smith-NjigbaWR · Alpha Receiver | 22.0 | +5.5 | 67% | 96% | 38% | 45% | 1 car, 11 yd · 8/9, 129 yd |
| Tory HortonWR · Rotational Receiver | 20.8 | +11.4 | 73% | 83% | 17% | 20% | 4/4, 48 yd, 2 TD |
| Jayden DanielsQB · Starter QB | 15.2 | −2.1 | 88% | — | 0% | — | 16/22, 153 yd, 1 INT · 10 car, 51 yd, 1 TD |
| Cody WhiteWR · Rotational Receiver | 13.0 | +9.0 | 71% | 63% | 8% | 12% | 1/2, 60 yd, 1 TD |
| Chris Rodriguez Jr.RB · Committee Back | 12.5 | +4.1 | 34% | 23% | 0% | — | 12 car, 65 yd, 1 TD |
| AJ BarnerTE · Rotational Receiver | 11.5 | −0.5 | 84% | 92% | 17% | 8% | 1 car, 1 yd, 1 TD · 3/4, 24 yd |
| Elijah ArroyoTE · Rotational Receiver | 10.9 | +5.2 | 43% | 46% | 8% | 11% | 2/2, 29 yd, 1 TD |
| Deebo Samuel Sr.WR · Alpha Receiver | 9.4 | +0.1 | 68% | 80% | 29% | 4% | 1 car, 3 yd · 5/6, 41 yd |
| Zach ErtzTE · Featured Receiver | 8.6 | +2.4 | 63% | 80% | 19% | 34% | 4/4, 46 yd |
| Kenneth Walker IIIRB · Committee Back | 8.1 | −4.1 | 57% | 58% | 8% | 1% | 11 car, 42 yd · 2/2, 19 yd |
| Jaylin LaneWR · Featured Receiver | 5.9 | −1.0 | 63% | 66% | 24% | 34% | 3/5, 29 yd |
| Zach CharbonnetRB | 5.6 | +0.2 | 35% | 38% | 4% | 2% | 8 car, 25 yd · 1/1, 21 yd |
| Jacory Croskey-MerrittRB · Committee Back | 5.1 | −2.4 | 46% | 49% | 5% | 2% | 12 car, 38 yd · 1/1, 3 yd |
| John BatesTE · Featured Receiver | 4.0 | −2.1 | 49% | 31% | 19% | 15% | 2/4, 20 yd |
| Treylon BurksWR · Rotational Receiver | 2.4 | +0.6 | 51% | 40% | 5% | 11% | 1/1, 14 yd |
| George HolaniRB | 0.9 | −0.4 | — | — | — | — | 3 snaps — too few to rate. |
| Robbie OuztsRB | 0.0 | — | 25% | 13% | 0% | — | No touches. |
| Luke McCaffreyWR | 0.0 | — | — | — | — | — | Did not take a snap. |
| Jeremy McNicholsRB | 0.0 | −0.4 | 26% | 37% | 0% | — | 1 car, 0 yd |
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 Commanders attack right, the Seahawks 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.
(12:55) (No Huddle, Shotgun) 5-J.Daniels pass short right intended for 83-J.Lane INTERCEPTED by 39-T.Okada [21-D.Witherspoon] at SEA 40. 39-T.Okada pushed ob at SEA 40 for no gain (83-J.Lane).
Q2 12:55 · Commanders · 3rd & 17 at WAS 45 · gained nothing · -2.47 EP · −7.0% win probability
145 snaps placed · 10 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 19 drives, personnel groupings on 144 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.
8 of 19 drives ended in points. The longest march was SEA moving 90 yards from the SEA 10 for a touchdown. Each bar is the ground a drive actually covered; WAS attacks right, SEA 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
Seahawks6
Commanders0Seahawks7Commanders0Seahawks13Commanders0Seahawks14Commanders0Seahawks20Commanders0Seahawks21Commanders0Seahawks27Commanders0Seahawks28Commanders0Seahawks28Commanders6Seahawks28Commanders7Seahawks31Commanders7Seahawks37Commanders7Seahawks38Commanders7Seahawks38Commanders13Seahawks38Commanders14Win 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: Seahawks at Commanders, every play.
Full stat lines
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sam Darnold | 21/24 | 330 | 4 | 1 | 0 | +22.4 |
| Player | Att | Yds | Avg | TD | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kenneth Walker III | 11 | 42 | 3.8 | 0 | −1.1 |
| Zach Charbonnet | 8 | 25 | 3.1 | 0 | −0.4 |
| Jaxon Smith-Njigba |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jaxon Smith-Njigba | 8 | 9 | 129 | 0 | 38% | +6.8 |
| Cody White | 1 | 2 | 60 | 1 |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tyrice Knight | 3 | 6 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Drake Thomas | 3 | 5 | 1.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Devon Witherspoon |
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jayden Daniels | 16/22 | 153 | 0 | 1 | 4 | −1.3 |
| 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_09_SEA_WAS
The cards are drawn from the charted play-by-play, not live, and each one says so on its face.
Closing number vs result
Seahawks closed -2.5 and covered, winning by 24.
Total closed 47.5; the game landed 52 — over by 4.5.
Conditions and crew
| 1 |
| 11 |
| 11.0 |
| 0 |
| +0.6 |
| George Holani | 3 | 9 | 3.0 | 0 | −1.2 |
| AJ Barner | 1 | 1 | 1.0 | 1 | +1.2 |
| 8% |
| +1.2 |
| Tory Horton | 4 | 4 | 48 | 2 | 17% | +6.5 |
| Elijah Arroyo | 2 | 2 | 29 | 1 | 8% | +2.7 |
| AJ Barner | 3 | 4 | 24 | 0 | 17% | +2.1 |
| Zach Charbonnet | 1 | 1 | 21 | 0 | 4% | +1.4 |
| Kenneth Walker III | 2 | 2 | 19 | 0 | 8% | +1.7 |
| 5 |
| 2 |
| 0.0 |
| 0 |
| 0 |
| Ernest Jones | 1 | 5 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Ty Okada | 2 | 3 | 0.0 | 1 | 1 |
| Derick Hall | 2 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Nick Emmanwori | 4 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Leonard Williams | 3 | 2 | 1.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Byron Murphy II | 0 | 4 | 0.5 | 0 | 0 |
| Boye Mafe | 1 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Chris Rodriguez Jr. | 12 | 65 | 5.4 | 1 | +4.2 |
| Jayden Daniels | 10 | 51 | 5.1 | 1 | +0.5 |
| Jacory Croskey-Merritt | 12 | 38 | 3.2 | 0 | −2.5 |
| Deebo Samuel Sr. | 1 | 3 | 3.0 | 0 | −0.3 |
| Jeremy McNichols | 1 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | −1.7 |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zach Ertz | 4 | 4 | 46 | 0 | 19% | +1.8 |
| Deebo Samuel Sr. | 5 | 6 | 41 | 0 | 29% | +0.5 |
| Jaylin Lane | 3 | 5 | 29 | 0 | 24% | −1.0 |
| John Bates | 2 | 4 | 20 | 0 | 19% | +2.5 |
| Treylon Burks | 1 | 1 | 14 | 0 | 5% | +0.8 |
| Jacory Croskey-Merritt | 1 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 5% | +1.4 |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jeremy Reaves | 3 | 5 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Frankie Luvu | 4 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Trey Amos | 4 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Bobby Wagner | 2 | 4 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jordan Magee | 2 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Quan Martin | 3 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Eddie Goldman | 1 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jonathan Jones | 1 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Sheldon Day | 2 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Darnell Savage | 1 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
