The plan against the game · plan Sun Oct 18, 10:03 AM · report Tue Oct 20, 12:13 PM Bijan gashes a Bears front with no pass rush. Caleb returns into Atlanta's teeth. script partly held 6 hit5 missed projection B · 71 open
Atlanta runs at a Chicago front missing Sweat, Odeyingbo and Edwards; Chicago's returning quarterback meets the league's No. 5 pressure defense. The lever is whether the Falcons get the early lead that kills their own pass rate.
Atlanta should get the matchup it wants early: Bijan Robinson and Brian Robinson running at a Bears front missing its two best edge rushers and its starting linebacker. Chicago answers with pace — it runs 72.8 plays a game and holds the ball — but its yards come between the 20s and stall inside them. Expect Atlanta's passing to be low-volume and explosive rather than long drives, and Chicago's to be short and YAC-dependent against a front that pressures at the fifth-highest rate. The likeliest shape is a possession-heavy game that scores closer to the mid-40s than the 52.5 number unless the short fields show up.
Chicago led wire to wire and won 31-23, covering -1.5 while the game went over 51.5 on 16 Atlanta points after the Bears led 31-7; the projection's team totals were close but its biggest input — 27 Atlanta carries — died the moment the Falcons trailed by 14 in the first quarter.
The plan picked the right side of the central question — it named the lever as 'whether the Falcons get the early lead that kills their own pass rate' — and the answer was no, which decided everything. But it had the mechanism pointed the wrong way: it expected Atlanta to be the team that ran and led, and it expected Chicago's passing to shrink under pressure. Chicago won by being the efficient, lead-holding team the plan's favorite path described, except the quick game produced 305 yards instead of a short-yardage grind, and the red-zone conversion the plan treated as an if came in at 4-of-5. The Bijan calls were not a bad read of the matchup, they were a bad read of script probability; the Loveland and Williams unders were read errors about where a 3.9-aDOT offense's yards go.
The script: The favorite path called for Chicago winning the snap count, moving it with the quick game and converting the red-zone trips it had been wasting, for roughly 27-20 — it won the snap count 76-53, ran a 3.9 aDOT, went 4-of-5 inside the 20 and won 31-23. But two pieces of the stated mechanism failed: Williams was not kept clean (4 sacks, 7 hits, 17.1% pressure) and Odunze was not the engine (4 targets, 39 yards) — Burden and Loveland were. Checks confirm the pace call (123 plays vs 121.5 league) and show both lean calls broke: Chicago passed at .548 against a 'balanced' call and Atlanta at .760 against a 'run' call, because it trailed on all 53 snaps.
Expected: Pass rate a touch above their .497 season mark, 32-35 attempts at a short aDOT, Swift at 15-18 carries for modest yardage with real receiving work, Odunze as the only downfield share, and points that lag the yardage.
Happened: The volume and shape were right — .548 pass rate, 36 attempts, 3.9 aDOT, Swift 16 carries for 44 with 4 catches for 26. Wrong on two counts: Odunze was not the downfield share that mattered (4 targets) and the points did not lag the yardage; Chicago scored 31 on 403 total yards with four red-zone touchdowns.
Expected: 28-30 carries, Bijan in the 18-22 band with goal-line work shared, 22-27 Penix attempts funneled to London with Dotson as the vertical complement, and touchdowns rather than field goals when they get inside the 20.
Happened: Called for 28-30 carries and 22-27 Penix attempts; Atlanta got 11 rushes and 36 pass attempts with 5 sacks. The touchdown-rather-than-field-goal part held (3 trips, 3 TDs), but it arrived in the fourth quarter down three scores.
Atlanta should get the matchup it wants early: Bijan Robinson and Brian Robinson running at a Bears front missing its two best edge rushers and its starting linebacker. Chicago answers with pace — it runs 72.8 plays a game and holds the ball — but its yards come between the 20s and stall inside them. Expect Atlanta's passing to be low-volume and explosive rather than long drives, and Chicago's to be short and YAC-dependent against a front that pressures at the fifth-highest rate. The likeliest shape is a possession-heavy game that scores closer to the mid-40s than the 52.5 number unless the short fields show up.
Chicago keeps Williams clean, wins the snap count again (90 and 70 plays in two home wins), moves it with Odunze and the quick game, and converts the red-zone trips it has been wasting. That version is 27-20 with Atlanta's carries capped near 20.
Atlanta scores on its first two possessions on the ground, leads by double digits and drops its pass rate toward .30, as it did at Green Bay and New Orleans. Bijan sees 20-plus carries, Penix throws under 25 times with a deep shot or two, and the Falcons win 31-20.
The read
Two defenses that are efficient between the 20s against two offenses that get beaten the same way, meeting on a 52.5 total that looks generous. Atlanta's path is obvious and repeatable: Chicago ranks 31st in rush EPA allowed and 29th in rush success allowed, and it plays this one without Montez Sweat (suspended), Dayo Odeyingbo (IR) and T.J. Edwards, with Tyrique Stevenson inactive. Atlanta has run for 5.9 and 5.9 yards a carry in its two wins and its pass rate falls to .29 the moment it leads. Chicago's path is volume — 72.8 plays a game, more than any offense in this dossier — but it runs into Atlanta's front: 3.78 yards per carry allowed (10th), 1.84 yards before contact, 6.22 yards per attempt allowed (5th) and an 18.9% pressure rate (5th). Caleb Williams is back from the hamstring and active (Rotowire, Sunday morning), which raises Chicago's ceiling and its variance: at 8% pressure this offense scored 59 and 27, at 20%+ it scored 3 and 7 with seven giveaways.
Why
The split at the 20 points the same way for both. Atlanta moves the ball poorly between the 20s (-0.049 field EPA) but finishes at a 66.7% red-zone rate; Chicago is the reverse (+0.080 field EPA, 43.8% red-zone, three straight weeks tagged for red-zone stalls). That argues Atlanta's points arrive as touchdowns off short fields and ground scores while Chicago piles up yardage and kicks. Atlanta's secondary gives chunk plays (explosive passes allowed every week, Henderson out), and Chicago allows 8.79 yards per attempt (31st) despite a 4th-ranked pass EPA — both passing games should be low-attempt and explosive rather than high-volume.
What would change it
If Chicago scores first and Atlanta has to throw 35 times, the Bijan carry calls shrink and London's reception line comes alive. If Williams is hit early, Chicago's whole offense collapses the way it did in weeks 2 and 5 and the total dies. Kalshi is the price here and its player markets are thin — check volume before leaning on any gap.
A pace-and-possession offense: 72.8 plays a game, 4.73 yards a carry and 2.90 yards before contact, with passing that lives on short throws and YAC (6.1 and 6.3 aDOT in weeks 3-4, 120 and 135 team YAC). Field EPA +0.080, red-zone EPA -0.13.
Long drives and ground touchdowns — six rushing scores in week 1, both week-4 touchdowns on Monangai runs. Explosive passing arrives in bursts (five 20-plus completions in weeks 1 and 4) rather than as a plan.
Pressure, full stop. 24.4% sack-or-hit vs Minnesota produced 3 points; 19.1% at Green Bay produced 7 points and five giveaways. Add red-zone stalls: 0-for-3 (wk2), 2-of-4 (wk3), 2-of-7 (wk4).
Atlanta is the blueprint on paper: 5th in pressure rate generated, 5th in yards per attempt allowed, 10th in rush EPA allowed and 4th in rush yards allowed per game, with 1.84 yards before contact conceded. What Atlanta does not do is take the ball away (0.5% opponent INT rate) or avoid flags — 28th in pre-snap penalties and 28th in DPI yards, which extends drives for a team that already wins the snap count.
Williams is active and starting after a hamstring absence (Rotowire, Sunday morning). Kyle Monangai is out (thumb/toe), handing the backfield to Swift with Roschon Johnson behind him. Left tackle Braxton Jones is on IR — not a number in the projection, but a reason to hold confidence down on protection against Atlanta's front. On Atlanta's side C.J. Henderson is out and A.J. Terrell on IR, leaving Avieon Terrell opposite Mike Hughes.
Pass rate a touch above their .497 season mark, 32-35 attempts at a short aDOT, Swift at 15-18 carries for modest yardage with real receiving work, Odunze as the only downfield share, and points that lag the yardage.
A run-identity offense: .464 pass rate, 5.06 yards a carry, 205 and 242 rushing yards in its two wins. Poor between the 20s (-0.049 field EPA) and excellent inside them (66.7% touchdowns per trip, +0.116 red-zone EPA).
Bijan and Brian Robinson in short yardage — five rushing touchdowns at New Orleans — plus one or two explosive throws to London or Dotson in a 20-25 attempt game.
Its own giveaways (seven in weeks 1-2) and pressure when it has to drop back: four sacks and 19.2% pressure at Pittsburgh produced 13 points. Both bad games came with a backup at quarterback.
Chicago is 31st in rush EPA allowed and 29th in rush success allowed, and it plays without Sweat (suspended), Odeyingbo (IR) and Edwards (hamstring) — the exact front-seven depletion that preceded Atlanta's 242- and 205-yard rushing games. Chicago's pass defense is genuinely good on efficiency (4th in pass EPA, 2nd in success allowed) but 31st in yards per attempt: the way through it is one chunk, not sustained volume.
Penix has no designation after full practices (Rotowire, Friday) despite the ribs. London was limited with a hip but is expected to play (RotoBaller, Saturday). Jake Matthews limited (groin) and Jawaan Taylor rested. Against them, Chicago is down Sweat, Odeyingbo, Edwards and Stevenson, with Gordon activated off PUP.
28-30 carries, Bijan in the 18-22 band with goal-line work shared, 22-27 Penix attempts funneled to London with Dotson as the vertical complement, and touchdowns rather than field goals when they get inside the 20.
Each call is one player, one market, one side of the line Kalshi quoted when the plan was written; graded off the box score, with the report's read of whether the reason given showed up. The rungs are the same call down the Kalshi ladder, Edge halfway to its last rung and Edge+ the last, at Kalshi's last pregame price.
In the game: Exactly the stated mechanism: 5 targets on 1 total air yard, 32 YAC, against a front that hit Williams 7 times. 26 receiving yards on a 14.5 line.
Atlanta pressures at the fifth-highest rate, and every time this line leaks the ball goes to the back underneath. With the other back out, Swift owns the checkdowns.
5-54 receiving vs MIN under a 24.4% pressure rate and 4-30 at GB under 19.1%; Monangai ruled out (Rotowire, Friday), leaving Swift and Roschon Johnson.
vs #7 pass EPA allowed, a rank built on success rate rather than denying underneath throws; backs' receiving is the one area opponent strength barely moves. The model's mean is well clear of the line and the market's price is not.
In the game: The air-yards premise held — Odunze led the team with 38 air yards and a 31.7% air-yards share and produced +6.63 EPA — but only 4 targets came, and the line missed by one yard at 39.0. The quick game sent the volume to Burden (8) and Loveland (7).
He is the only outside-the-numbers volume Chicago has, and his snap share has climbed to near every snap. With Williams back the downfield share goes to him first.
Snaps 48% to 99% across five weeks; targets 3-4-6-7-9; 6-94 vs NYJ with 43% of the air yards. ATL allows 261.4 pass yards a game (27th) and 14.6 DPI yards (28th).
vs #7 pass EPA allowed — the rank rests on efficiency, not volume suppression: Atlanta concedes the 27th-most passing yardage and extends drives with flags. Our week-4 review had this same read hit on his receptions.
In the game: Right that Chicago concedes the chunk (4 explosives allowed, 142 yards), wrong about the script: this was not a 'low-attempt Falcons game.' Dotson's 87 came on 33 attempts, with the 33- and 41-yarders arriving down 24 and 16 in the fourth quarter.
In a low-attempt Falcons game one deep shot is the whole number, and Chicago is the defense that gives those up with its pass rush gutted. He is the vertical complement to London.
54 yards on 3 targets (wk4, TD) and 54 on 4 (wk5); CHI allows 8.79 yards per attempt (31st) and explosive passes in every week of its log.
vs #4 pass EPA allowed — the exception is the yards-per-attempt rank (31st): this defense wins on success rate and gives up chunks. Labelled an efficiency call, the weaker kind, and our week-4 review lost the opposite side of exactly this read.
In the game: The matchup premise was never tested — 9 carries, not 20-plus, because Atlanta trailed on every snap. 61 yards, and 23 of them came on one second-quarter run (Q2 11:34).
Chicago can't stop the run and now plays without its two best edge rushers and its starting linebacker. Any Falcons lead turns this into 20-plus carries, the way it did at Green Bay and New Orleans.
CHI 31st in rush EPA allowed, 29th in rush success; Sweat suspended, Odeyingbo to IR, Edwards out. Bijan 29-194 (wk3) and 19-145 (wk4) in the two games ATL led; 17-86 vs BAL in a loss.
vs #31 rush EPA allowed. The model's own mean sits below his line because the blend splits the matchup; backs' projections systematically under-respond to a weak run defense, which is where the call lives. Rushing calls are the plans' best market this season (56%).
In the game: The 'volume survives either script' claim failed outright: 9 carries and 2 targets for -8 receiving yards, 53 total. Atlanta threw 36 times and did not use him underneath at all.
Same ground edge, plus a receiving floor that reappeared last week when Atlanta had to chase. He is the one Falcon whose volume survives either script.
Weeks 3-5: 194+19, 145+2, 86+32 scrimmage yards; 7 targets vs BAL on an 81% snap share, his highest since week 1.
vs #31 rush EPA allowed, #4 pass EPA allowed. The market's price sits near a coin flip while the model's mean is well under the line — the blend is the thing understating the run matchup, not the usage.
In the game: Hit for the opposite reason: London got 11 targets and a 44% air-yards share in a 36-attempt game, not a capped look. He finished with 4 catches because Penix was 19-of-33 at -7.3 CPOE under pressure.
He is the alpha, but a low-attempt Falcons game caps catches — his yardage comes in chunks, not in volume. Seven-plus grabs needs a throwing script Atlanta avoids.
Catches by week: 2, 4, 9, 5, 7 — the two big ones came on 25 and 32 attempts. ATL projects under 30 attempts here.
vs #4 pass EPA allowed, #2 in pass success allowed. Both the model and the market sit under the line; the market is the higher of the two, and the attempt ceiling is what it is underweighting.
In the game: 225 yards came from 33 attempts and 5 sacks, not the 'under 25 attempts with a lead' script the plan described. Atlanta's pass rate was .736, the mirror image of the .30 the mechanism required.
Atlanta's attempts die whenever it can run, and this is the softest run matchup on its schedule. A lead drops their pass rate toward thirty percent.
Pass rate .368 at GB and .382 at NO with 25 and 20 attempts; .294 second-half rate in week 4. Season rate .464 against a .558 league mark.
vs #4 pass EPA allowed. The model already sits under the line; what it still misses is that the blend pulls Atlanta's pass rate toward league, the same error our week-4 review graded as a hit.
In the game: 7 targets, 6 catches, 65 yards and the opening touchdown on 88.3% snaps, with 33 air yards and 27.5% of the team's air yards — he was a downfield piece, not a traffic checkdown, and Atlanta was not stingy to him.
Full-time snaps have produced a target floor but not yardage: his catches come short and in traffic. Atlanta has been stingy to tight ends relative to what it gives receivers.
Yardage by week: 0, 3, 31, 57, 19 on snap shares of 79-92%; ATL 19th in fantasy points allowed to tight ends with its safeties playing every snap.
vs #7 pass EPA allowed. Our week-4 review lost this call when he led the team in targets — the volume read broke, so this one rests on yards per catch, not on usage, and is sized accordingly.
In the game: Zero interceptions on 36 attempts; the reasoning held precisely — Atlanta's 0.5% opponent INT rate, and Chicago led wire to wire with 33 carries, so no desperate throws existed.
Atlanta almost never intercepts the ball — its takeaways this year came from opponents' mistakes, not its coverage. A favorite leaning on the run throws fewer risky balls late.
ATL's generated interception rate is 0.5% per attempt against a 2.2% league mark; CHI projects to lead or sit within a score, and CHI's own rate is 2.9%.
vs #7 pass EPA allowed. Both the model and the market put him near a coin flip on one pick; the one-or-more rung is the weakest number of the lot and is overstated by roughly an attempt a game.
In the game: 16 carries for 44 (2.75 YPC) with 2 stuffs against the front the plan trusted. Extra volume from Monangai's absence did not fix the yards-per-carry, exactly as written.
Atlanta's front is the one thing that has held up all year: almost no yards before contact and the fourth-fewest rushing yards allowed. Volume from the backup's absence doesn't fix yards per carry.
ATL allows 3.78 YPC and 1.84 yards before contact against a 2.54 league mark; Swift at 43, 58 and 84 yards in his last three full workloads.
vs #10 rush EPA allowed, #4 in rush yards allowed per game. The model's mean sits above the line on carry volume inherited from the ruled-out back; those inherited-share legs run under projection, rushing by the widest margin.
In the game: The pressure premise was correct — 4 sacks, 7 hits, 17.1% rate, and Williams's rushing died with the hamstring (3 yards) — but the conclusion failed: 30-of-36 for 305 at +15.3 CPOE and 193 YAC. A 3.9-aDOT offense does not shrink under pressure, it gets the ball out.
First game back from the hamstring, a replacement left tackle, and the league's fifth-best pressure defense that also allows the fifth-fewest yards per attempt. This offense shrinks when the quarterback gets hit.
138 yards vs MIN at a 24.4% pressure rate; ATL generates 18.9% pressure and allows 6.22 Y/A; Braxton Jones on IR.
vs #7 pass EPA allowed. The model's mean is above the line; it carries no input for the missing tackle and prices his two clean-pocket weeks equally with the two he spent on the ground. Passing overs against top-5 pass defenses are 1-for-3 this season.
Legs the same script produces together: they move as one, which is what a same-game parlay pays for.
One mechanism: carries against a depleted Bears front put Atlanta ahead, the pass rate falls toward thirty percent, and the attempts that would feed London's catch total never get thrown.
Atlanta's pressure and its stout front push Chicago off the ground and into checkdowns: the back's yardage moves from the carries to the catches while the passing total stays short.
Both defenses are efficient on success rate and leaky on yards per attempt with thin pass rushes — the passing yardage in this game arrives as a handful of explosives to the two downfield pieces.
grade · 71
| Proj | Actual | Diff | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Points | 25.0 | 23 | -2 | |
| Pass yds | 221.4 | 225.0 | +3.6 | |
| Rush yds | 116.8 | 63.0 | -53.8 | |
| Pass att | 28.9 | 33 | +4.1 | |
| Carries | 27.1 | 12 | -15.1 |
| Proj | Actual | Diff | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Points | 26.5 | 31 | +4.5 | |
| Pass yds | 235.6 | 305.0 | +69.4 | |
| Rush yds | 113.7 | 98.0 | -15.7 | |
| Pass att | 35.1 | 36 | +0.9 | |
| Carries | 27.9 | 33 | +5.1 |
A B (0.708) that reads better on points than on shape: CHI 31 vs 26.5 projected, ATL 23 vs 25.0, and the market calls went 2-of-3 (winner and spread right, total wrong). Everything that graded badly came from one mechanism — Atlanta never led for a single snap (seconds_led ATL 0) and ran the ball 12 times against a projected 27.1, the only 0.00 component on the card. Chicago's 305 pass yards against 235.6 projected is the other miss, and it was not volume (36 attempts vs 35.1 projected) but completion efficiency: 30-of-36, CPOE +15.3, aDOT 3.9, 193 YAC. The player card was the strongest piece (0.743, 24 of 43 lines), anchored by Penix's 225 pass yards against 221.4 and Swift's 26 receiving yards against 26.6. The misses underneath were distribution misses — Burden, Loveland and Roschon Johnson absorbed volume the model gave to Odunze, Raymond and Swift.
Pattern: Chicago wins by volume and ball security, not by efficiency: it runs 72.8 plays a game, lives on short, high-CPOE throws (aDOT 3.9 today, 193 YAC) and loses when it gives the ball away or the quarterback gets hit at a 20%+ rate. Its defense holds success rate down (ATL 32.1% today) but concedes chunk plays to anyone who can hold up long enough to throw past the sticks.
This week: Atlanta had the tool — 7.77 Y/A season, 4 explosive passes — but never got to use it in a neutral script, and its field offense (-0.473 EPA/play, 3-of-13 third downs) couldn't sustain drives to get there. Three of its four explosives came in no-huddle chase mode down 24.
What an opponent needs: An opponent needs a pass rush that gets home without volume blitzing (Atlanta blitzed 52.4% and got 4 sacks and 7 hits, but Chicago still completed 83%) and a vertical passing game that can hit the chunk early, before Chicago's snap-count advantage compounds. Rushing offenses need above-league explosive-run rate; Chicago's front gave up only 2 ATL runs of 10+.
Pattern: Atlanta is a lead-dependent run offense with a passing game that only produces chunks. Take an early two-score lead and the carries vanish, Penix goes to shotgun (77.4%) and the pass rush eats him; its red-zone defense then keeps the opponent's touchdown rate high enough that the deficit never shrinks.
This week: Chicago executed it exactly — scored on its first two drives, led 14-0 by 1:10 of Q1, and Atlanta's run attempts fell to 11 rushes on 53 snaps. Chicago had the efficiency that matters here (0.247 EPA/dropback, 56.1% pass success, 83% completion) without needing explosive plays.
What an opponent needs: An offense that can score on its opening two possessions without relying on explosives — high success rate and red-zone finishing — plus any pass rush that can strip-sack a shotgun quarterback. Teams that fall behind Atlanta instead get the week-3/4 version and lose by three scores.
When a team's season carry projection is built on leading scripts, a double-digit first-quarter deficit voids it: Atlanta was projected 27.1 carries and ran 12, with Bijan at 9. Fade RB rushing overs on the team that is a touchdown-plus underdog in live markets the moment the deficit hits 14.
Trigger: A run-lean offense (season pass rate under .48) that trails by 14+ before halftime.
Garbage time pays the total, not the side. Atlanta scored 16 points and both two-point conversions after 31-7, with 18 of its 53 plays in garbage time and three of its four explosives there. The total went over by 2.5 entirely on that stretch.
Trigger: A 24-point lead with 12+ minutes left and a trailing offense that goes no-huddle (18.9% here) — buy the live over, not the comeback.
A pass rush does not suppress a sub-5 aDOT offense. Chicago faced 4 sacks, 7 hits and a 17.1% pressure rate and still threw for 305 at +15.3 CPOE with 193 YAC. Quarterback passing unders priced off pressure need the QB to actually throw downfield.
Trigger: Offense aDOT under 5.0 with completion rate over 65% — ignore the opponent pressure-rate angle on his yardage line.
Red-zone TD rate is the least persistent input in the file. Chicago entered at 43.8% with 'red zone stalls' tagged three straight weeks and went 4-of-5 with +0.558 EPA/play. Don't build team-total unders on a team's red-zone history.
Trigger: Any team whose total is being shaded down purely on a sub-45% red-zone TD rate over five or fewer games.
Snap share is not target share in a quick-game offense: Odunze played 96.1% of snaps for 4 targets, Burden played 39.0% and caught 8-of-8 for 95. Price receiving props off route usage and air-yards share (Odunze 31.7%, Loveland 27.5%) rather than snaps.
Trigger: A YAC-heavy offense (aDOT under 5) where the slot/gadget receiver has sub-50% snaps.
The short version
Chicago 31, Atlanta 23 — a one-score final that was never a one-score game. The Bears led 14-0 after eleven minutes, 31-7 at the start of the fourth quarter, and surrendered 16 points in the last ten minutes to a no-huddle offense that was already beaten. CHI -1.5 cashed, the 51.5 went over on garbage-time touchdowns and two successful two-point conversions, and the projection's single biggest error — Atlanta at 27.1 carries, actual 12 — was a script failure, not a matchup failure.
How it unfolded
Chicago's opening drive answered the pre-game question in six minutes: eleven plays, 87 yards, two third-down conversions (the Odunze catch-and-lateral on 3rd-and-11, EPA +3.01, and the 14-yard Loveland touchdown on 2nd-and-13). The second drive needed a 23-yard Odunze completion on 3rd-and-17 and ended in a Swift touchdown. Atlanta's first two possessions produced three yards on six plays.
From there the Falcons' day was a sequence of near-misses in bad field position. A 39-yard London catch set up the Dotson touchdown that made it 14-7, and then the game's biggest single swing arrived: Taylor's punt with 1:52 left in the half, Branch muffing it at the ATL 10, Blackwell recovering (+5.07 EPA), Swift scoring three plays later for 21-7. Atlanta's next five possessions: turnover on downs (the 4th-and-3 incompletion to London at the CHI 28, -3.34 EPA), punt after a Gordon strip-sack at its own 2, a Branch kickoff fumble that became a 50-yard field goal, and another turnover on downs. Three of Atlanta's four fourth-quarter touchdown drives came at 31-7 or worse; the only one that mattered followed Roschon Johnson's fumble at the ATL 45 (Q4 7:21, -5.58 EPA). Gordon's second strip-sack at 31-23 with 3:01 left ended it.
Why the game diverged from the projection
Two components: Atlanta's carries scored a flat 0.00 and its rushing yards 0.40. Atlanta trailed on all 53 of its snaps, ran a .736 pass rate against a .464 season rate, and went 77.4% shotgun with 18.9% no-huddle. That is the engine blending a lead-script pass rate into a game the team never led. Everything downstream — Bijan at 9 carries, Brian Robinson at 2, London at 11 targets instead of 8.5 — follows from it.
Chicago's 305 passing yards against 235.6 is the more interesting miss because the volume was right (36 attempts vs 35.1). The yardage came from a completion rate the inputs had no way to carry: 30-of-36, +15.3 CPOE, 3.9 aDOT, 193 of 305 yards after the catch. Atlanta's front did its job — 2.97 yards per Bears carry, 4 sacks, 7 hits — and the Bears simply threw it out of their hands. The other distortion is the red zone: a team tagged for red-zone stalls three weeks running went 4-for-5 with +0.558 EPA/play inside the 20 while posting -0.152 EPA/play on its other 59 snaps. That is the inverse of its season profile and the reason 403 total yards turned into 31 points.
The plan against the game
The plan named the right lever — whether Atlanta got the early lead that kills its own pass rate — and then bet the wrong side of it. Its favorite path (snap-count edge, quick game, red-zone conversion, roughly 27-20) is essentially what happened, but the two mechanisms it leaned on inside that path both broke: Williams was hit seven times and threw for 305 anyway, and Odunze, the designated downfield share, got four targets while Burden and Loveland took fifteen. The Bijan calls were a defensible matchup read drowned by script probability; the Loveland and Williams passing unders were read errors about where a 3.9-aDOT offense puts its yards. Checks: pace called average and played average (123 plays vs 121.5), both lean calls failed.
Player by player
Burden caught all eight targets for 95 on a 39% snap share — the clearest per-snap mispricing on the card, and repeatable in this offense. Loveland went 6-65 and a touchdown on 88.3% of snaps with 27.5% of the air yards; the under on him was built on a premise about his role that the tape contradicts. Odunze led Chicago in air yards and air-yards share (38, 31.7%) with +6.63 receiving EPA and still missed 39.5 by half a yard — a four-target alpha. Roschon Johnson's 13 carries against 2.9 projected is the Monangai vacancy landing somewhere the model didn't look.
On the Atlanta side, Penix's passing yards (225 vs 221.4) were the single best call in the file and arrived by an entirely wrong route: 33 attempts and five sacks rather than 25 attempts with a lead. His three touchdowns are red-zone-only output (3-for-3, +0.599 EPA/play) bolted onto -0.325 EPA/dropback. Pitts and Dotson both tripled their projections in the fourth quarter at 31-7 and 31-15; London took 44% of the air yards for four catches and -2.27 EPA.
The defenses
Chicago's, without Odeyingbo, held Atlanta to 32.1% success and -0.473 EPA/play between the 20s, forced 5 sacks and 3 fumbles, and stopped three of three fourth downs. Gordon, at 22% of snaps, had two strip-sacks and three tackles for loss. What it gave up were chunks: 33, 29, 41 and 39 yards — the same facet as six explosives allowed at Carolina and six at Green Bay. Charting shows Atlanta faced a 52.4% blitz rate and 4.79 average rushers, so the pressure was manufactured.
Atlanta's front held Chicago to 2.97 a carry and 5 stuffs with only a 22.2% blitz rate and 4.2 rushers against 76 snaps — and then conceded four touchdowns on five red-zone trips, which is now three straight weeks of giving up 75%+ inside the 20.
The blueprint
Beat Atlanta by scoring on your first two possessions without needing explosives; the carries disappear, Penix goes to shotgun and the strip-sacks follow. Beat Chicago by holding up in protection long enough to hit one chunk per drive, and by winning the turnover column — its own giveaways are tagged in three of five weeks. Neither team was capable of executing the other's blueprint today: Atlanta had the Y/A (7.77 season) and never got a neutral script to use it.
What the model should take from this
Treat Atlanta's run lean as conditional on the scoreboard and branch it. Model Chicago's passing off aDOT and CPOE rather than opponent pressure rate. And leave the finishing splits alone — 8 red-zone trips between the two teams is noise, and Chicago's 133 penalty yards carried only two pre-snap flags, which is the only part that persists.
Bears offenseagainst theFalcons defense
Projected CHI offense output — equivalently, what the ATL defense allows. The engine blends each offense's season-to-date rates with the defense across from it, anchored on the market's implied points.
| Backs | Car | Ru yds | Ru TD | Tgt | Rec | Rec yds | Rec TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RB | 15(16) | 65(44) | 0.9(2) | 3.6(5) | 2.7(4) | 27(26) | 0.1(0) |
| RB | 3(13) | 6(51) | 0.1(1) | 2.2(2) | 1.6(2) | 14(34) | 0.1(0) |
| RBO | no projected volume | ||||||
| Receivers | Tgt | Rec | Yds | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| WR | 7.2(8) | 5.1(8) | 54(95) | 0.3(0) |
| WR | 7.0(4) | 3.9(3) | 57(39) | 0.3(0) |
| WR | 5.5(2) | 4.0(2) | 37(18) | 0.2(0) |
| Tight ends | Tgt | Rec | Yds | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TE | 5.5(7) | 3.7(6) | 26(65) | 0.1(1) |
| TE | 2.1(2) | 1.5(2) | 10(3) | 0(0) |
| TE | 1.0(0) | 0.7(0) | 6(0) | 0(0) |
CHI offenserank of 32ATL defenseEPA / play
Expected points added per play, garbage time excluded: the one-number read of an offense, and of what a defense allows.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Success rate
Share of plays that gain enough to stay on schedule.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Points / game
Points scored per game against points allowed per game.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Plays / game
Offensive snaps per game, a pace number: more plays means more volume to go around, not a better team.
Engine 65.3: the blended per-game value the projection used for this game; the league average is 60.8.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Pass rate
Share of snaps that are dropbacks: how the volume splits between the pass and the run.
Engine 57%: the blended per-game value the projection used for this game; the league average is 56%.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Explosive plays
Share of plays that go for a chunk: 20+ passing, 10+ rushing.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Third down
The offense's third-down conversion rate against the defense's third-down stop rate.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Red-zone TD rate
Touchdowns per trip inside the 20: finishing drives against the defense that bends or breaks.
Engine 54%: the blended per-game value the projection used for this game; the league average is 58%.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Giveaways / game
Turnovers the offense gives away per game against the ones the defense takes.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Flags / game
Accepted penalties per game committed by each unit.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
CHI offenserank of 32ATL defenseRush EPA / carry
Expected points added per designed run, and per run allowed.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Rush yards / game
Rushing yards per game, gained and allowed.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Yards / carry
Rushing yards per carry: the offense's own against what the defense gives up, blended into the projection.
Engine 4.08: the blended per-game value the projection used for this game; the league average is 4.36.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Yards before contact
Yards before a defender touches the runner, per carry: the line-and-scheme share of the run game (PFR charting). Feeds each back's efficiency tilt.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
O-line grade
A composite of the line's pass protection and run blocking, offense only.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Box defenders
Average defenders the defense puts in the box on charted snaps (FTN). Ranked most to fewest with no good or bad: a heavy box crowds the run and dares the pass. Defense only; a look, not a grade.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
CHI offenserank of 32ATL defensePass EPA / play
Expected points added per dropback, and per dropback allowed.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Pass yards / game
Passing yards per game, gained and allowed.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Yards / attempt
Passing yards per attempt, blended into the projection.
Engine 6.72: the blended per-game value the projection used for this game; the league average is 7.02.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Completion rate
Completions per attempt thrown, and per attempt faced.
Engine 65%: the blended per-game value the projection used for this game; the league average is 64%.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Passer rating
The quarterback rating the offense posts against the one the defense allows.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Sack rate
Sacks per dropback: taken by the offense, generated by the defense.
Engine 6.4%: the blended per-game value the projection used for this game; the league average is 6.4%.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Pressure rate
Sacks or quarterback hits per dropback, the play-by-play pressure proxy.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
INT rate
Interceptions per attempt: thrown by the offense, forced by the defense.
Engine 1.7%: the blended per-game value the projection used for this game; the league average is 2.2%.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Blitz
Offense: its EPA per dropback when the defense sends five or more rushers, higher is better. Defense: the share of its pass snaps it sends five or more, ranked most to least with no good or bad (FTN charting). Display only, not an engine input.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Yards / catch
Receiving yards per reception, offense only: where the ball goes once it is caught.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
DPI yards / game
Pass-interference yards per game: drawn by the receivers, committed by the secondary.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Falcons offenseagainst theBears defense
Projected ATL offense output — equivalently, what the CHI defense allows. The engine blends each offense's season-to-date rates with the defense across from it, anchored on the market's implied points.
| Backs | Car | Ru yds | Ru TD | Tgt | Rec | Rec yds | Rec TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RB | 16(9) | 86(61) | 1.0(0) | 5.4(2) | 4.0(2) | 30(-8) | 0.2(0) |
| RB | 8(2) | 28(1) | 0.3(0) | 0.9(2) | 0.7(2) | 5(9) | 0(0) |
| Receivers | Tgt | Rec | Yds | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| WRLP | 8.5(10) | 5.4(4) | 88(62) | 0.6(0) |
| WR | 4.1(5) | 2.4(3) | 35(87) | 0.2(1) |
| WR | 2.0(2) | 1.4(2) | 11(9) | 0.1(0) |
| WR | 1.6(4) | 1.0(0) | 3(0) | 0(0) |
| Tight ends | Tgt | Rec | Yds | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TE | 3.6(7) | 2.3(5) | 21(60) | 0.1(2) |
| TE | 1.4(1) | 1.0(1) | 7(6) | 0(0) |
| TE | 1.1 | 0.7 | 3 | 0 |
ATL offenserank of 32CHI defenseEPA / play
Expected points added per play, garbage time excluded: the one-number read of an offense, and of what a defense allows.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Success rate
Share of plays that gain enough to stay on schedule.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Points / game
Points scored per game against points allowed per game.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Plays / game
Offensive snaps per game, a pace number: more plays means more volume to go around, not a better team.
Engine 58.0: the blended per-game value the projection used for this game; the league average is 60.8.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Pass rate
Share of snaps that are dropbacks: how the volume splits between the pass and the run.
Engine 53%: the blended per-game value the projection used for this game; the league average is 56%.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Explosive plays
Share of plays that go for a chunk: 20+ passing, 10+ rushing.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Third down
The offense's third-down conversion rate against the defense's third-down stop rate.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Red-zone TD rate
Touchdowns per trip inside the 20: finishing drives against the defense that bends or breaks.
Engine 59%: the blended per-game value the projection used for this game; the league average is 58%.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Giveaways / game
Turnovers the offense gives away per game against the ones the defense takes.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Flags / game
Accepted penalties per game committed by each unit.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
ATL offenserank of 32CHI defenseRush EPA / carry
Expected points added per designed run, and per run allowed.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Rush yards / game
Rushing yards per game, gained and allowed.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Yards / carry
Rushing yards per carry: the offense's own against what the defense gives up, blended into the projection.
Engine 4.32: the blended per-game value the projection used for this game; the league average is 4.36.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Yards before contact
Yards before a defender touches the runner, per carry: the line-and-scheme share of the run game (PFR charting). Feeds each back's efficiency tilt.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
O-line grade
A composite of the line's pass protection and run blocking, offense only.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Box defenders
Average defenders the defense puts in the box on charted snaps (FTN). Ranked most to fewest with no good or bad: a heavy box crowds the run and dares the pass. Defense only; a look, not a grade.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
ATL offenserank of 32CHI defensePass EPA / play
Expected points added per dropback, and per dropback allowed.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Pass yards / game
Passing yards per game, gained and allowed.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Yards / attempt
Passing yards per attempt, blended into the projection.
Engine 7.65: the blended per-game value the projection used for this game; the league average is 7.02.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Completion rate
Completions per attempt thrown, and per attempt faced.
Engine 63%: the blended per-game value the projection used for this game; the league average is 64%.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Passer rating
The quarterback rating the offense posts against the one the defense allows.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Sack rate
Sacks per dropback: taken by the offense, generated by the defense.
Engine 6.5%: the blended per-game value the projection used for this game; the league average is 6.4%.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Pressure rate
Sacks or quarterback hits per dropback, the play-by-play pressure proxy.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
INT rate
Interceptions per attempt: thrown by the offense, forced by the defense.
Engine 2.3%: the blended per-game value the projection used for this game; the league average is 2.2%.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Blitz
Offense: its EPA per dropback when the defense sends five or more rushers, higher is better. Defense: the share of its pass snaps it sends five or more, ranked most to least with no good or bad (FTN charting). Display only, not an engine input.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Yards / catch
Receiving yards per reception, offense only: where the ball goes once it is caught.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
DPI yards / game
Pass-interference yards per game: drawn by the receivers, committed by the secondary.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
The elevens, rated
Defenders colored by rating percentile within their position group (2026 wks 1-5 + ½·2025); the offense by production percentile among the position's starter pool. Linemen are unrated. Each defense is last game's snap leaders in a nickel base, minus this week's Out / Doubtful.
Who is listed
Everyone on the clubs' reports, the best-rated man first in his group: the designation, what is hurt, the practice line and the share of the snaps he took last game. Ratings are the same percentiles as the field above.