THE LINE · WEEK REPLAY

2025, week 4.Assessed before it was played.

We rebuilt the model from weeks 1–3 only — 48 completed games, nothing after — wrote down what it had to say about each week-4 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.

Week 4 games

Games the model saw

Statements checked

54.6%

Held, full season

Read this before the results

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.

Did the descriptions hold?

Week 4 alone

66.7%

32 of 48 statements

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.

All 14 weeks, 2025

54.6%

341 of 624 statements · 95% CI 50.7–58.5%

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.

How often each kind of statement holds

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.

By claim

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%

By how strong the claim was

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.

Week by week — tap one to open it

Bars measured from 50%. Week 4 is open below — tap any bar to read that week in full. The default is week 6, one of the worst of the season, on purpose.

Every week-4 game

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).

BAL20@

KC37

Final

BAL · 57% pass · 0.189 EPA/play

62% pass · 0.081 EPA/play · KC

BAL had allowed the 1st-most rushing yards to RBs — good news for KC.
through week 3 · 3 games · 128.7 rush yds/gm (league median 83.3)
Week 4: 78 allowed · league median 109
BAL had allowed the 3rd-most receiving yards to TEs — good news for KC.
through week 3 · 3 games · 72.7 rec yds/gm (league median 48)
Week 4: 49 allowed · league median 46
KC had allowed the 5th-fewest receiving yards to TEs — good news for BAL.
through week 3 · 3 games · 34 rec yds/gm (league median 48)
Week 4: 30 allowed · league median 46

CAR13@

NE42

Final

CAR · 62% pass · -0.090 EPA/play

62% pass · 0.013 EPA/play · NE

NE had allowed the 1st-most receiving yards to TEs — good news for CAR.
through week 3 · 2 games · 85 rec yds/gm (league median 48)
Week 4: 82 allowed · league median 46
CAR had allowed the 2nd-most receiving yards to TEs — good news for NE.
through week 3 · 3 games · 74 rec yds/gm (league median 48)
Week 4: 63 allowed · league median 46
CAR had allowed the 4th-most rushing yards to RBs — good news for NE.
through week 3 · 3 games · 114.3 rush yds/gm (league median 83.3)
Week 4: 97 allowed · league median 109
NE had allowed the 8th-most receiving yards to WRs — good news for CAR.
through week 3 · 3 games · 163.3 rec yds/gm (league median 147.3)
Week 4: 108 allowed · league median 128
NE had allowed the 2nd-fewest rushing yards to RBs — good news for CAR.
through week 3 · 3 games · 49 rush yds/gm (league median 83.3)
Week 4: 114 allowed · league median 109
CAR had allowed the 1st-fewest receiving yards to WRs — good news for NE.
through week 3 · 3 games · 91 rec yds/gm (league median 147.3)
Week 4: 123 allowed · league median 128

CHI25@

LV24

Final

CHI · 56% pass · 0.008 EPA/play

62% pass · -0.083 EPA/play · LV

CHI had allowed the 2nd-most rushing yards to RBs — good news for LV.
through week 3 · 3 games · 121 rush yds/gm (league median 83.3)
Week 4: 200 allowed · league median 109
LV had allowed the 3rd-most receiving yards to WRs — good news for CHI.
through week 3 · 3 games · 183.7 rec yds/gm (league median 147.3)
Week 4: 144 allowed · league median 128
CHI had allowed the 5th-most receiving yards to WRs — good news for LV.
through week 3 · 3 games · 171.7 rec yds/gm (league median 147.3)
Week 4: 43 allowed · league median 128

CIN3@

DEN28

Final

CIN · 63% pass · -0.282 EPA/play

58% pass · -0.012 EPA/play · DEN

CIN had allowed the 6th-most rushing yards to RBs — good news for DEN.
through week 3 · 3 games · 110.3 rush yds/gm (league median 83.3)
Week 4: 163 allowed · league median 109
DEN had allowed the 8th-most rushing yards to RBs — good news for CIN.
through week 3 · 3 games · 108.3 rush yds/gm (league median 83.3)
Week 4: 44 allowed · league median 109

CLE10@

DET34

Final

CLE · 67% pass · -0.156 EPA/play

53% pass · 0.242 EPA/play · DET

CLE had allowed the 3rd-fewest receiving yards to TEs — good news for DET.
through week 3 · 3 games · 27.7 rec yds/gm (league median 48)
Week 4: 39 allowed · league median 46
CLE had allowed the 1st-fewest rushing yards to RBs — good news for DET.
through week 3 · 3 games · 42.7 rush yds/gm (league median 83.3)
Week 4: 114 allowed · league median 109

GB40@

DAL40

Final

GB · 51% pass · 0.085 EPA/play

66% pass · 0.050 EPA/play · DAL

DAL had allowed the 1st-most receiving yards to WRs — good news for GB.
through week 3 · 3 games · 220.3 rec yds/gm (league median 147.3)
Week 4: 166 allowed · league median 128
GB had allowed the 4th-most receiving yards to TEs — good news for DAL.
through week 3 · 3 games · 71.7 rec yds/gm (league median 48)
Week 4: 48 allowed · league median 46
GB had allowed the 5th-fewest rushing yards to RBs — good news for DAL.
through week 3 · 3 games · 58 rush yds/gm (league median 83.3)
Week 4: 99 allowed · league median 109
GB had allowed the 3rd-fewest receiving yards to WRs — good news for DAL.
through week 3 · 3 games · 95 rec yds/gm (league median 147.3)
Week 4: 239 allowed · league median 128

IND20@

LA27

Final

IND · 48% pass · 0.258 EPA/play

56% pass · 0.086 EPA/play · LA

IND had allowed the 8th-fewest receiving yards to WRs — good news for LA.
through week 3 · 3 games · 119.3 rec yds/gm (league median 147.3)
Week 4: 321 allowed · league median 128

JAX26@

SF21

Final

JAX · 59% pass · 0.026 EPA/play

61% pass · 0.039 EPA/play · SF

SF had allowed the 6th-fewest receiving yards to WRs — good news for JAX.
through week 3 · 3 games · 117 rec yds/gm (league median 147.3)
Week 4: 90 allowed · league median 128
JAX had allowed the 6th-fewest rushing yards to RBs — good news for SF.
through week 3 · 3 games · 61.7 rush yds/gm (league median 83.3)
Week 4: 70 allowed · league median 109

LAC18@

NYG21

Final

LAC · 62% pass · 0.077 EPA/play

62% pass · -0.084 EPA/play · NYG

NYG had allowed the 2nd-most receiving yards to WRs — good news for LAC.
through week 3 · 3 games · 195.7 rec yds/gm (league median 147.3)
Week 4: 146 allowed · league median 128
NYG had allowed the 5th-most rushing yards to RBs — good news for LAC.
through week 3 · 3 games · 112.3 rush yds/gm (league median 83.3)
Week 4: 128 allowed · league median 109
LAC had allowed the 7th-fewest receiving yards to TEs — good news for NYG.
through week 3 · 3 games · 35.3 rec yds/gm (league median 48)
Week 4: 30 allowed · league median 46
LAC had allowed the 4th-fewest rushing yards to RBs — good news for NYG.
through week 3 · 3 games · 55.7 rush yds/gm (league median 83.3)
Week 4: 109 allowed · league median 109

MIN21@

PIT24

Final

MIN · 51% pass · -0.146 EPA/play

60% pass · -0.033 EPA/play · PIT

PIT had allowed the 7th-most receiving yards to TEs — good news for MIN.
through week 3 · 3 games · 70.3 rec yds/gm (league median 48)
Week 4: 39 allowed · league median 46
MIN had allowed the 2nd-fewest receiving yards to WRs — good news for PIT.
through week 3 · 3 games · 92.7 rec yds/gm (league median 147.3)
Week 4: 139 allowed · league median 128

NO19@

BUF31

Final

NO · 61% pass · -0.080 EPA/play

53% pass · 0.235 EPA/play · BUF

BUF had allowed the 7th-fewest receiving yards to WRs — good news for NO.
through week 3 · 3 games · 117.7 rec yds/gm (league median 147.3)
Week 4: 89 allowed · league median 128
BUF had allowed the 1st-fewest receiving yards to TEs — good news for NO.
through week 3 · 3 games · 10.7 rec yds/gm (league median 48)
Week 4: 35 allowed · league median 46

NYJ21@

MIA27

Final

NYJ · 52% pass · -0.068 EPA/play

67% pass · -0.001 EPA/play · MIA

MIA had allowed the 5th-most receiving yards to TEs — good news for NYJ.
through week 3 · 3 games · 71.3 rec yds/gm (league median 48)
Week 4: 77 allowed · league median 46
MIA had allowed the 7th-most rushing yards to RBs — good news for NYJ.
through week 3 · 3 games · 108.7 rush yds/gm (league median 83.3)
Week 4: 116 allowed · league median 109
MIA had allowed the 5th-fewest receiving yards to WRs — good news for NYJ.
through week 3 · 3 games · 112.3 rec yds/gm (league median 147.3)
Week 4: 84 allowed · league median 128

PHI31@

TB25

Final

PHI · 48% pass · 0.058 EPA/play

56% pass · 0.090 EPA/play · TB

TB had allowed the 6th-fewest receiving yards to TEs — good news for PHI.
through week 3 · 3 games · 35.3 rec yds/gm (league median 48)
Week 4: 53 allowed · league median 46
PHI had allowed the 4th-fewest receiving yards to TEs — good news for TB.
through week 3 · 3 games · 29.3 rec yds/gm (league median 48)
Week 4: 9 allowed · league median 46
TB had allowed the 3rd-fewest rushing yards to RBs — good news for PHI.
through week 3 · 3 games · 52 rush yds/gm (league median 83.3)
Week 4: 60 allowed · league median 109

SEA23@

ARI20

Final

SEA · 48% pass · -0.005 EPA/play

56% pass · 0.046 EPA/play · ARI

ARI had allowed the 6th-most receiving yards to WRs — good news for SEA.
through week 3 · 3 games · 164.7 rec yds/gm (league median 147.3)
Week 4: 132 allowed · league median 128
ARI had allowed the 8th-most receiving yards to TEs — good news for SEA.
through week 3 · 3 games · 60 rec yds/gm (league median 48)
Week 4: 76 allowed · league median 46
ARI had allowed the 8th-fewest rushing yards to RBs — good news for SEA.
through week 3 · 3 games · 66.3 rush yds/gm (league median 83.3)
Week 4: 120 allowed · league median 109
SEA had allowed the 4th-fewest receiving yards to WRs — good news for ARI.
through week 3 · 3 games · 98.7 rec yds/gm (league median 147.3)
Week 4: 116 allowed · league median 128

TEN0@

HOU26

Final

TEN · 62% pass · -0.227 EPA/play

61% pass · -0.140 EPA/play · HOU

TEN had allowed the 3rd-most rushing yards to RBs — good news for HOU.
through week 3 · 3 games · 118 rush yds/gm (league median 83.3)
Week 4: 116 allowed · league median 109
TEN had allowed the 4th-most receiving yards to WRs — good news for HOU.
through week 3 · 3 games · 177.7 rec yds/gm (league median 147.3)
Week 4: 138 allowed · league median 128
HOU had allowed the 7th-most receiving yards to WRs — good news for TEN.
through week 3 · 3 games · 164.3 rec yds/gm (league median 147.3)
Week 4: 80 allowed · league median 128
HOU had allowed the 8th-fewest receiving yards to TEs — good news for TEN.
through week 3 · 3 games · 37.3 rec yds/gm (league median 48)
Week 4: 16 allowed · league median 46

WAS27@

ATL34

Final

WAS · 55% pass · 0.083 EPA/play

56% pass · -0.102 EPA/play · ATL

WAS had allowed the 6th-most receiving yards to TEs — good news for ATL.
through week 3 · 3 games · 71 rec yds/gm (league median 48)
Week 4: 70 allowed · league median 46
WAS had allowed the 7th-fewest rushing yards to RBs — good news for ATL.
through week 3 · 3 games · 66 rush yds/gm (league median 83.3)
Week 4: 126 allowed · league median 109
ATL had allowed the 2nd-fewest receiving yards to TEs — good news for WAS.
through week 3 · 3 games · 16 rec yds/gm (league median 48)
Week 4: 21 allowed · league median 46

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

Read this before the results

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.

Did the descriptions hold?

Week 4 alone

66.7%

32 of 48 statements

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.

All 14 weeks, 2025

54.6%

341 of 624 statements · 95% CI 50.7–58.5%

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.

How often each kind of statement holds

By claim

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%

By how strong the claim was

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.

Week by week — tap one to open it

Bars measured from 50%. Week 4 is open below — tap any bar to read that week in full. The default is week 6, one of the worst of the season, on purpose.

Every week-4 game

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).

BAL20@

KC37

Final

BAL · 57% pass · 0.189 EPA/play

62% pass · 0.081 EPA/play · KC

BAL had allowed the 1st-most rushing yards to RBs — good news for KC.
through week 3 · 3 games · 128.7 rush yds/gm (league median 83.3)
Week 4: 78 allowed · league median 109
BAL had allowed the 3rd-most receiving yards to TEs — good news for KC.
through week 3 · 3 games · 72.7 rec yds/gm (league median 48)
Week 4: 49 allowed · league median 46
KC had allowed the 5th-fewest receiving yards to TEs — good news for BAL.
through week 3 · 3 games · 34 rec yds/gm (league median 48)
Week 4: 30 allowed · league median 46

CAR13@

NE42

Final

CAR · 62% pass · -0.090 EPA/play

62% pass · 0.013 EPA/play · NE

NE had allowed the 1st-most receiving yards to TEs — good news for CAR.
through week 3 · 2 games · 85 rec yds/gm (league median 48)
Week 4: 82 allowed · league median 46
CAR had allowed the 2nd-most receiving yards to TEs — good news for NE.
through week 3 · 3 games · 74 rec yds/gm (league median 48)
Week 4: 63 allowed · league median 46
CAR had allowed the 4th-most rushing yards to RBs — good news for NE.
through week 3 · 3 games · 114.3 rush yds/gm (league median 83.3)
Week 4: 97 allowed · league median 109
NE had allowed the 8th-most receiving yards to WRs — good news for CAR.
through week 3 · 3 games · 163.3 rec yds/gm (league median 147.3)
Week 4: 108 allowed · league median 128
NE had allowed the 2nd-fewest rushing yards to RBs — good news for CAR.
through week 3 · 3 games · 49 rush yds/gm (league median 83.3)
Week 4: 114 allowed · league median 109
CAR had allowed the 1st-fewest receiving yards to WRs — good news for NE.
through week 3 · 3 games · 91 rec yds/gm (league median 147.3)
Week 4: 123 allowed · league median 128

CHI25@

LV24

Final

CHI · 56% pass · 0.008 EPA/play

62% pass · -0.083 EPA/play · LV

CHI had allowed the 2nd-most rushing yards to RBs — good news for LV.
through week 3 · 3 games · 121 rush yds/gm (league median 83.3)
Week 4: 200 allowed · league median 109
LV had allowed the 3rd-most receiving yards to WRs — good news for CHI.
through week 3 · 3 games · 183.7 rec yds/gm (league median 147.3)
Week 4: 144 allowed · league median 128
CHI had allowed the 5th-most receiving yards to WRs — good news for LV.
through week 3 · 3 games · 171.7 rec yds/gm (league median 147.3)
Week 4: 43 allowed · league median 128

CIN3@

DEN28

Final

CIN · 63% pass · -0.282 EPA/play

58% pass · -0.012 EPA/play · DEN

CIN had allowed the 6th-most rushing yards to RBs — good news for DEN.
through week 3 · 3 games · 110.3 rush yds/gm (league median 83.3)
Week 4: 163 allowed · league median 109
DEN had allowed the 8th-most rushing yards to RBs — good news for CIN.
through week 3 · 3 games · 108.3 rush yds/gm (league median 83.3)
Week 4: 44 allowed · league median 109

CLE10@

DET34

Final

CLE · 67% pass · -0.156 EPA/play

53% pass · 0.242 EPA/play · DET

CLE had allowed the 3rd-fewest receiving yards to TEs — good news for DET.
through week 3 · 3 games · 27.7 rec yds/gm (league median 48)
Week 4: 39 allowed · league median 46
CLE had allowed the 1st-fewest rushing yards to RBs — good news for DET.
through week 3 · 3 games · 42.7 rush yds/gm (league median 83.3)
Week 4: 114 allowed · league median 109

GB40@

DAL40

Final

GB · 51% pass · 0.085 EPA/play

66% pass · 0.050 EPA/play · DAL

DAL had allowed the 1st-most receiving yards to WRs — good news for GB.
through week 3 · 3 games · 220.3 rec yds/gm (league median 147.3)
Week 4: 166 allowed · league median 128
GB had allowed the 4th-most receiving yards to TEs — good news for DAL.
through week 3 · 3 games · 71.7 rec yds/gm (league median 48)
Week 4: 48 allowed · league median 46
GB had allowed the 5th-fewest rushing yards to RBs — good news for DAL.
through week 3 · 3 games · 58 rush yds/gm (league median 83.3)
Week 4: 99 allowed · league median 109
GB had allowed the 3rd-fewest receiving yards to WRs — good news for DAL.
through week 3 · 3 games · 95 rec yds/gm (league median 147.3)
Week 4: 239 allowed · league median 128

IND20@

LA27

Final

IND · 48% pass · 0.258 EPA/play

56% pass · 0.086 EPA/play · LA

IND had allowed the 8th-fewest receiving yards to WRs — good news for LA.
through week 3 · 3 games · 119.3 rec yds/gm (league median 147.3)
Week 4: 321 allowed · league median 128

JAX26@

SF21

Final

JAX · 59% pass · 0.026 EPA/play

61% pass · 0.039 EPA/play · SF

SF had allowed the 6th-fewest receiving yards to WRs — good news for JAX.
through week 3 · 3 games · 117 rec yds/gm (league median 147.3)
Week 4: 90 allowed · league median 128
JAX had allowed the 6th-fewest rushing yards to RBs — good news for SF.
through week 3 · 3 games · 61.7 rush yds/gm (league median 83.3)
Week 4: 70 allowed · league median 109

LAC18@

NYG21

Final

LAC · 62% pass · 0.077 EPA/play

62% pass · -0.084 EPA/play · NYG

NYG had allowed the 2nd-most receiving yards to WRs — good news for LAC.
through week 3 · 3 games · 195.7 rec yds/gm (league median 147.3)
Week 4: 146 allowed · league median 128
NYG had allowed the 5th-most rushing yards to RBs — good news for LAC.
through week 3 · 3 games · 112.3 rush yds/gm (league median 83.3)
Week 4: 128 allowed · league median 109
LAC had allowed the 7th-fewest receiving yards to TEs — good news for NYG.
through week 3 · 3 games · 35.3 rec yds/gm (league median 48)
Week 4: 30 allowed · league median 46
LAC had allowed the 4th-fewest rushing yards to RBs — good news for NYG.
through week 3 · 3 games · 55.7 rush yds/gm (league median 83.3)
Week 4: 109 allowed · league median 109

MIN21@

PIT24

Final

MIN · 51% pass · -0.146 EPA/play

60% pass · -0.033 EPA/play · PIT

PIT had allowed the 7th-most receiving yards to TEs — good news for MIN.
through week 3 · 3 games · 70.3 rec yds/gm (league median 48)
Week 4: 39 allowed · league median 46
MIN had allowed the 2nd-fewest receiving yards to WRs — good news for PIT.
through week 3 · 3 games · 92.7 rec yds/gm (league median 147.3)
Week 4: 139 allowed · league median 128

NO19@

BUF31

Final

NO · 61% pass · -0.080 EPA/play

53% pass · 0.235 EPA/play · BUF

BUF had allowed the 7th-fewest receiving yards to WRs — good news for NO.
through week 3 · 3 games · 117.7 rec yds/gm (league median 147.3)
Week 4: 89 allowed · league median 128
BUF had allowed the 1st-fewest receiving yards to TEs — good news for NO.
through week 3 · 3 games · 10.7 rec yds/gm (league median 48)
Week 4: 35 allowed · league median 46

NYJ21@

MIA27

Final

NYJ · 52% pass · -0.068 EPA/play

67% pass · -0.001 EPA/play · MIA

MIA had allowed the 5th-most receiving yards to TEs — good news for NYJ.
through week 3 · 3 games · 71.3 rec yds/gm (league median 48)
Week 4: 77 allowed · league median 46
MIA had allowed the 7th-most rushing yards to RBs — good news for NYJ.
through week 3 · 3 games · 108.7 rush yds/gm (league median 83.3)
Week 4: 116 allowed · league median 109
MIA had allowed the 5th-fewest receiving yards to WRs — good news for NYJ.
through week 3 · 3 games · 112.3 rec yds/gm (league median 147.3)
Week 4: 84 allowed · league median 128

PHI31@

TB25

Final

PHI · 48% pass · 0.058 EPA/play

56% pass · 0.090 EPA/play · TB

TB had allowed the 6th-fewest receiving yards to TEs — good news for PHI.
through week 3 · 3 games · 35.3 rec yds/gm (league median 48)
Week 4: 53 allowed · league median 46
PHI had allowed the 4th-fewest receiving yards to TEs — good news for TB.
through week 3 · 3 games · 29.3 rec yds/gm (league median 48)
Week 4: 9 allowed · league median 46
TB had allowed the 3rd-fewest rushing yards to RBs — good news for PHI.
through week 3 · 3 games · 52 rush yds/gm (league median 83.3)
Week 4: 60 allowed · league median 109

SEA23@

ARI20

Final

SEA · 48% pass · -0.005 EPA/play

56% pass · 0.046 EPA/play · ARI

ARI had allowed the 6th-most receiving yards to WRs — good news for SEA.
through week 3 · 3 games · 164.7 rec yds/gm (league median 147.3)
Week 4: 132 allowed · league median 128
ARI had allowed the 8th-most receiving yards to TEs — good news for SEA.
through week 3 · 3 games · 60 rec yds/gm (league median 48)
Week 4: 76 allowed · league median 46
ARI had allowed the 8th-fewest rushing yards to RBs — good news for SEA.
through week 3 · 3 games · 66.3 rush yds/gm (league median 83.3)
Week 4: 120 allowed · league median 109
SEA had allowed the 4th-fewest receiving yards to WRs — good news for ARI.
through week 3 · 3 games · 98.7 rec yds/gm (league median 147.3)
Week 4: 116 allowed · league median 128

TEN0@

HOU26

Final

TEN · 62% pass · -0.227 EPA/play

61% pass · -0.140 EPA/play · HOU

TEN had allowed the 3rd-most rushing yards to RBs — good news for HOU.
through week 3 · 3 games · 118 rush yds/gm (league median 83.3)
Week 4: 116 allowed · league median 109
TEN had allowed the 4th-most receiving yards to WRs — good news for HOU.
through week 3 · 3 games · 177.7 rec yds/gm (league median 147.3)
Week 4: 138 allowed · league median 128
HOU had allowed the 7th-most receiving yards to WRs — good news for TEN.
through week 3 · 3 games · 164.3 rec yds/gm (league median 147.3)
Week 4: 80 allowed · league median 128
HOU had allowed the 8th-fewest receiving yards to TEs — good news for TEN.
through week 3 · 3 games · 37.3 rec yds/gm (league median 48)
Week 4: 16 allowed · league median 46

WAS27@

ATL34

Final

WAS · 55% pass · 0.083 EPA/play

56% pass · -0.102 EPA/play · ATL

WAS had allowed the 6th-most receiving yards to TEs — good news for ATL.
through week 3 · 3 games · 71 rec yds/gm (league median 48)
Week 4: 70 allowed · league median 46
WAS had allowed the 7th-fewest rushing yards to RBs — good news for ATL.
through week 3 · 3 games · 66 rush yds/gm (league median 83.3)
Week 4: 126 allowed · league median 109
ATL had allowed the 2nd-fewest receiving yards to TEs — good news for WAS.
through week 3 · 3 games · 16 rec yds/gm (league median 48)
Week 4: 21 allowed · league median 46