We rebuilt the model from weeks 1–15 only — 224 completed games, nothing after — wrote down what it had to say about each week-16 matchup, and then opened the week to see whether those statements survived. Every scoreable week of 2025 is here; pick one from the chart below.
No prices are involved. Our line archive is append-only and begins on 29 July 2026, so there are no archived 2025 closes — and inventing them from another source would be exactly the fabricated data this product exists to refuse. Nothing here says whether a bet would have won.
This is not a third backtest. Two pre-registered attempts to beat NFL game markets both found no edge. That budget is only spent by comparing a forecast to a price, and this replay never sees one.
What it does measure: whether a statement like “this defense has allowed the 2nd-most receiving yards to receivers” was still true the following week — the defense staying on the same side of the league median.
A single week is a few dozen statements — far too few to separate a real effect from one good or bad Sunday. It is shown beside the season figure, never instead of it.
The interval clears 50, so the descriptions do carry week to week — but only just. A matchup note is a real tilt, not a reason to be confident.
Every confidence percentage on THE LINE links here. It is not a win probability and not a projection — it is how often a statement of that exact class was still true the week after we made it, measured across all 624 scoreable statements of the 2025 season.
What a chip on a row is actually quoting. The classes are not equal, and until now the site showed one average for all of them.
“generous to WRs”
63/105 held · 95% CI 50.4–68.9
60%
“stingy against WRs”
57/107 held · 95% CI 43.9–62.4includes 50 — no measured edge
53.3%
“generous to TEs”
57/102 held · 95% CI 46.2–65.1includes 50 — no measured edge
55.9%
“stingy against TEs”
62/106 held · 95% CI 49–67.4includes 50 — no measured edge
58.5%
“generous to RBs”
48/100 held · 95% CI 38.5–57.7includes 50 — no measured edge
48%
“stingy against RBs”
54/104 held · 95% CI 42.4–61.3includes 50 — no measured edge
51.9%
The calibration question: does a statement about the most extreme defense in the league hold up better than one about the eighth? Directionally yes — but read the intervals before believing it.
Top 3 in the league
135/234 held · 95% CI 51.3–63.8
57.7%
Ranked 4th–8th
206/390 held · 95% CI 47.9–57.7includes 50 — no measured edge
52.8%
The spread between our best and worst class is real: “generous to WRs” at 60% against “generous to RBs” at 48%. If you only trust one kind of matchup note here, trust the first.
Sharper claims did hold more often — 57.7% against 52.8% — but the two intervals overlap heavily, so we cannot claim that gap is real. It is reported because it is what we measured, not because it flatters the model.
A class whose 95% interval includes 50 is marked in amber and is not distinguishable from a coin flip. We leave those on the site, labelled, rather than quietly dropping the boards that produce them — a reliability table that only ever confirms the product is marketing.
Each note is what the model would have said going in, with the sample size it rested on. the description still held that week · it did not · not scoreable (bye or no qualifying plays).
ATL26@
ARI19ARI had allowed the 5th-most rushing yards to RBs — good news for ATL.
through week 15 · 14 games · 109.7 rush yds/gm (league median 94.6)
Week 16: 155 allowed · league median 109
ATL had allowed the 3rd-fewest receiving yards to TEs — good news for ARI.
through week 15 · 14 games · 35.6 rec yds/gm (league median 54.3)
Week 16: 118 allowed · league median 44
BUF23@
CLE20BUF had allowed the 3rd-most rushing yards to RBs — good news for CLE.
through week 15 · 14 games · 115.1 rush yds/gm (league median 94.6)
Week 16: 81 allowed · league median 109
CLE had allowed the 3rd-fewest receiving yards to WRs — good news for BUF.
through week 15 · 14 games · 112.3 rec yds/gm (league median 141.1)
Week 16: 57 allowed · league median 133.5
BUF had allowed the 2nd-fewest receiving yards to TEs — good news for CLE.
through week 15 · 14 games · 32.8 rec yds/gm (league median 54.3)
Week 16: 34 allowed · league median 44
CIN45@
MIA21CIN had allowed the 1st-most receiving yards to TEs — good news for MIA.
through week 15 · 14 games · 91.1 rec yds/gm (league median 54.3)
Week 16: 86 allowed · league median 44
CIN had allowed the 1st-most rushing yards to RBs — good news for MIA.
through week 15 · 14 games · 129.2 rush yds/gm (league median 94.6)
Week 16: 115 allowed · league median 109
MIA had allowed the 3rd-most receiving yards to TEs — good news for CIN.
through week 15 · 14 games · 68.1 rec yds/gm (league median 54.3)
Week 16: 71 allowed · league median 44
CIN had allowed the 4th-fewest receiving yards to WRs — good news for MIA.
through week 15 · 14 games · 118.3 rec yds/gm (league median 141.1)
Week 16: 138 allowed · league median 133.5
MIA had allowed the 2nd-fewest receiving yards to WRs — good news for CIN.
through week 15 · 14 games · 110.9 rec yds/gm (league median 141.1)
Week 16: 183 allowed · league median 133.5
GB16@
CHI22GB had allowed the 5th-fewest receiving yards to TEs — good news for CHI.
through week 15 · 14 games · 43.1 rec yds/gm (league median 54.3)
Week 16: 44 allowed · league median 44
JAX34@
DEN20DEN had allowed the 8th-most receiving yards to TEs — good news for JAX.
through week 15 · 14 games · 64.1 rec yds/gm (league median 54.3)
Week 16: 44 allowed · league median 44
DEN had allowed the 5th-fewest rushing yards to RBs — good news for JAX.
through week 15 · 14 games · 74.7 rush yds/gm (league median 94.6)
Week 16: 60 allowed · league median 109
JAX had allowed the 1st-fewest rushing yards to RBs — good news for DEN.
through week 15 · 14 games · 66.6 rush yds/gm (league median 94.6)
Week 16: 87 allowed · league median 109
KC9@
TEN26TEN had allowed the 4th-most receiving yards to WRs — good news for KC.
through week 15 · 14 games · 165.9 rec yds/gm (league median 141.1)
Week 16: 75 allowed · league median 133.5
KC had allowed the 6th-fewest rushing yards to RBs — good news for TEN.
through week 15 · 14 games · 77.3 rush yds/gm (league median 94.6)
Week 16: 155 allowed · league median 109
LAC34@
DAL17DAL had allowed the 3rd-most receiving yards to WRs — good news for LAC.
through week 15 · 14 games · 168.5 rec yds/gm (league median 141.1)
Week 16: 255 allowed · league median 133.5
LAC had allowed the 7th-fewest receiving yards to TEs — good news for DAL.
through week 15 · 14 games · 45.3 rec yds/gm (league median 54.3)
Week 16: 19 allowed · league median 44
LAC had allowed the 5th-fewest receiving yards to WRs — good news for DAL.
through week 15 · 14 games · 120.5 rec yds/gm (league median 141.1)
Week 16: 213 allowed · league median 133.5
LA37@
SEA38SEA had allowed the 4th-most receiving yards to TEs — good news for LA.
through week 15 · 14 games · 68 rec yds/gm (league median 54.3)
Week 16: 88 allowed · league median 44
LA had allowed the 6th-most receiving yards to WRs — good news for SEA.
through week 15 · 14 games · 160.9 rec yds/gm (league median 141.1)
Week 16: 135 allowed · league median 133.5
LA had allowed the 8th-fewest receiving yards to TEs — good news for SEA.
through week 15 · 13 games · 46.3 rec yds/gm (league median 54.3)
Week 16: 49 allowed · league median 44
LA had allowed the 7th-fewest rushing yards to RBs — good news for SEA.
through week 15 · 14 games · 78.2 rush yds/gm (league median 94.6)
Week 16: 134 allowed · league median 109
SEA had allowed the 3rd-fewest rushing yards to RBs — good news for LA.
through week 15 · 14 games · 72.7 rush yds/gm (league median 94.6)
Week 16: 118 allowed · league median 109
SEA had allowed the 1st-fewest receiving yards to WRs — good news for LA.
through week 15 · 14 games · 104.7 rec yds/gm (league median 141.1)
Week 16: 341 allowed · league median 133.5
LV21@
HOU23HOU had allowed the 8th-fewest receiving yards to WRs — good news for LV.
through week 15 · 14 games · 123.6 rec yds/gm (league median 141.1)
Week 16: 95 allowed · league median 133.5
HOU had allowed the 6th-fewest receiving yards to TEs — good news for LV.
through week 15 · 14 games · 45.2 rec yds/gm (league median 54.3)
Week 16: 43 allowed · league median 44
HOU had allowed the 4th-fewest rushing yards to RBs — good news for LV.
through week 15 · 14 games · 73.3 rush yds/gm (league median 94.6)
Week 16: 134 allowed · league median 109
LV had allowed the 4th-fewest receiving yards to TEs — good news for HOU.
through week 15 · 14 games · 40.1 rec yds/gm (league median 54.3)
Week 16: 42 allowed · league median 44
MIN16@
NYG13NYG had allowed the 2nd-most rushing yards to RBs — good news for MIN.
through week 15 · 14 games · 123.6 rush yds/gm (league median 94.6)
Week 16: 97 allowed · league median 109
NYG had allowed the 5th-most receiving yards to WRs — good news for MIN.
through week 15 · 14 games · 163.7 rec yds/gm (league median 141.1)
Week 16: 117 allowed · league median 133.5
MIN had allowed the 8th-most rushing yards to RBs — good news for NYG.
through week 15 · 14 games · 107 rush yds/gm (league median 94.6)
Week 16: 118 allowed · league median 109
NE28@
BAL24NE had allowed the 5th-most receiving yards to TEs — good news for BAL.
through week 15 · 13 games · 66.8 rec yds/gm (league median 54.3)
Week 16: 39 allowed · league median 44
NE had allowed the 7th-fewest receiving yards to WRs — good news for BAL.
through week 15 · 14 games · 123.5 rec yds/gm (league median 141.1)
Week 16: 125 allowed · league median 133.5
NE had allowed the 2nd-fewest rushing yards to RBs — good news for BAL.
through week 15 · 14 games · 70 rush yds/gm (league median 94.6)
Week 16: 141 allowed · league median 109
NYJ6@
NO29NO had allowed the 4th-most rushing yards to RBs — good news for NYJ.
through week 15 · 14 games · 110.4 rush yds/gm (league median 94.6)
Week 16: 62 allowed · league median 109
NYJ had allowed the 7th-most rushing yards to RBs — good news for NO.
through week 15 · 14 games · 107.9 rush yds/gm (league median 94.6)
Week 16: 22 allowed · league median 109
NO had allowed the 6th-fewest receiving yards to WRs — good news for NYJ.
through week 15 · 14 games · 121.5 rec yds/gm (league median 141.1)
Week 16: 79 allowed · league median 133.5
PHI29@
WAS18WAS had allowed the 6th-most rushing yards to RBs — good news for PHI.
through week 15 · 14 games · 109.5 rush yds/gm (league median 94.6)
Week 16: 171 allowed · league median 109
WAS had allowed the 7th-most receiving yards to TEs — good news for PHI.
through week 15 · 14 games · 64.6 rec yds/gm (league median 54.3)
Week 16: 32 allowed · league median 44
WAS had allowed the 8th-most receiving yards to WRs — good news for PHI.
through week 15 · 14 games · 159.3 rec yds/gm (league median 141.1)
Week 16: 150 allowed · league median 133.5
PHI had allowed the 1st-fewest receiving yards to TEs — good news for WAS.
through week 15 · 14 games · 32.6 rec yds/gm (league median 54.3)
Week 16: 5 allowed · league median 44
PIT29@
DET24DET had allowed the 1st-most receiving yards to WRs — good news for PIT.
through week 15 · 14 games · 172 rec yds/gm (league median 141.1)
Week 16: 124 allowed · league median 133.5
PIT had allowed the 2nd-most receiving yards to TEs — good news for DET.
through week 15 · 14 games · 68.2 rec yds/gm (league median 54.3)
Week 16: 60 allowed · league median 44
PIT had allowed the 7th-most receiving yards to WRs — good news for DET.
through week 15 · 14 games · 160.3 rec yds/gm (league median 141.1)
Week 16: 238 allowed · league median 133.5
SF48@
IND27IND had allowed the 2nd-most receiving yards to WRs — good news for SF.
through week 15 · 14 games · 171.9 rec yds/gm (league median 141.1)
Week 16: 144 allowed · league median 133.5
IND had allowed the 6th-most receiving yards to TEs — good news for SF.
through week 15 · 14 games · 66.3 rec yds/gm (league median 54.3)
Week 16: 122 allowed · league median 44
IND had allowed the 8th-fewest rushing yards to RBs — good news for SF.
through week 15 · 14 games · 80.1 rush yds/gm (league median 94.6)
Week 16: 137 allowed · league median 109
TB20@
CAR23No defense in this game stood out in either direction going in. That is a real result, not missing data — a mid-pack matchup is the null case, and saying nothing about it is more honest than dressing “16th-most” up as insight.
This is the whole product, on real football: context you can check, with its sample size attached, and no claim we haven’t measured. When the 2026 season starts, the same notes appear on the matchup pages — beside a line archive that records what the price did.
See this season’s matchups