Chicago Bears at Green Bay Packers
Simulation · experimental · 10,000 coherent game paths
Simulation V2 · experimental · how to read this page
Each run is one internally consistent possible game: drives, plays, player stats and points all add up inside that run. The numbers below summarise all 10,000 simulated games.
This is a separate, experimental engine, not our main forecast. It is not independent of it: each team's scoring level is set so the simulated average total and margin match the Game Time Forecast's expected total and margin. It has not been shown to be more accurate than the Game Time Forecast: on held-out past games its win chances scored slightly worse. It is shown for exploration, takes no betting-market input, and feeds no pick or product. It was frozen before kickoff and is never re-run with live information.
Game Time Forecast · our main model · separate from this simulation
CHI 22 — 26 GB · win chance CHI 40.8% · GB 56.5% · total 48
A different engine, anchored to the Game Time Forecast's expected total and margin. Open the Game Time Forecast.
Game outcome · Simulation V2
Score distribution
Each team's score
| Team | Low (10th) | Median | High (90th) | Average |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CHI | 10 | 22 | 34 | 22.17 |
| GB | 13 | 26 | 38 | 25.94 |
Quarters and halves
From the same simulated games, so the quarters add up to each game's final. Overtime is shown above.
| Period | CHI median (80%) | GB median (80%) | Both teams (80%) | CHI wins it | GB wins it | Level |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 | 3 (0–10) | 6 (0–13) | 10 (3–19) | 36.9% | 45.9% | 17.2% |
| Q2 | 7 (0–14) | 7 (0–14) | 14 (6–24) | 38.5% | 49.3% | 12.2% |
| Q3 | 3 (0–10) | 7 (0–13) | 10 (3–20) | 35.6% | 46.6% | 17.8% |
| Q4 | 7 (0–14) | 7 (0–14) | 13 (3–22) | 36.7% | 47.5% | 15.8% |
| 1st half | 10 (3–20) | 13 (3–23) | 24 (13–37) | 39.6% | 54.2% | 6.2% |
| 2nd half | 10 (3–20) | 13 (3–21) | 23 (12–35) | 38.1% | 54.2% | 7.7% |
Team box · median (80% range)
| Stat | CHI | GB |
|---|---|---|
| Drives | 11 (9–13) | 11 (9–13) |
| Plays | 62 (50–75) | 63 (51–76) |
| Pass attempts | 34 (25–44) | 33 (25–43) |
| Completions | 23 (17–31) | 22 (15–29) |
| Passing yards | 213 (129–309) | 229 (141–326) |
| Passing TDs | 1 (0–3) | 2 (0–3) |
| Interceptions | 1 (0–2) | 0 (0–2) |
| Sacks taken | 2 (0–4) | 2 (0–4) |
| Rush attempts | 25 (17–34) | 26 (18–36) |
| Rushing yards | 118 (56–198) | 124 (61–206) |
| Rushing TDs | 1 (0–2) | 1 (0–2) |
| Field goals made | 1 (0–3) | 2 (0–3) |
Touchdowns per team
| Touchdowns | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5+ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CHI | 6.3% | 20.3% | 29.3% | 24.8% | 13.4% | 5.8% |
| GB | 3.3% | 13.3% | 25.8% | 27.5% | 18.4% | 11.7% |
Players · median (80% range)
Player lines are slices of the same simulated games: in every run, receivers' catches and yards add up to their passer's, and carries add up to the team's. Volume a named player does not get goes to "Other", so nothing is forced onto a starter. Players ruled out before the simulation get no snaps.
CHI passing
| Player | Attempts | Completions | Yards | TDs (avg) | INTs (avg) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Caleb Williams QB | 34 (25–44) | 23 (17–31) | 213 (129–309) | 1.5 | 0.8 |
CHI rushing
| Player | Carries | Yards | Rush TDs (avg) |
|---|---|---|---|
| D'Andre Swift RB | 12 (8–18) | 53 (19–108) | 0.5 |
| Caleb Williams QB | 10 (6–15) | 47 (15–98) | 0.3 |
| Brittain Brown RB | 1 (0–2) | 0 (0–14) | 0.0 |
| Roschon Johnson RB | 1 (0–2) | 0 (0–13) | 0.0 |
CHI receiving
| Player | Targets | Catches | Yards | Rec TDs (avg) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Luther Burden III WR | 7 (4–11) | 5 (2–8) | 38 (8–88) | 0.3 |
| Kalif Raymond WR | 5 (2–9) | 4 (2–7) | 32 (6–77) | 0.2 |
| Rome Odunze WR | 5 (3–9) | 3 (1–6) | 30 (4–77) | 0.2 |
| Colston Loveland TE | 5 (3–9) | 3 (1–6) | 27 (3–69) | 0.2 |
| D'Andre Swift RB | 3 (1–5) | 2 (0–4) | 12 (0–44) | 0.1 |
| Cole Kmet TE | 2 (0–4) | 1 (0–3) | 6 (0–35) | 0.1 |
GB passing
| Player | Attempts | Completions | Yards | TDs (avg) | INTs (avg) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jordan Love QB | 29 (21–38) | 19 (13–26) | 198 (117–293) | 1.6 | 0.6 |
GB rushing
| Player | Carries | Yards | Rush TDs (avg) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Josh Jacobs RB | 9 (5–14) | 39 (12–88) | 0.4 |
| MarShawn Lloyd RB | 7 (4–12) | 28 (6–71) | 0.3 |
| Kaleb Johnson RB | 6 (3–10) | 25 (5–66) | 0.3 |
| Jordan Love QB | 3 (1–6) | 12 (0–41) | 0.1 |
GB receiving
| Player | Targets | Catches | Yards | Rec TDs (avg) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Christian Watson WR | 6 (3–9) | 4 (1–7) | 40 (7–92) | 0.3 |
| Matthew Golden WR | 6 (3–10) | 4 (1–6) | 37 (6–87) | 0.3 |
| Tucker Kraft TE | 5 (2–8) | 3 (1–6) | 28 (4–74) | 0.3 |
| MarShawn Lloyd RB | 2 (1–5) | 2 (0–4) | 11 (0–44) | 0.1 |
| Luke Musgrave TE | 2 (0–4) | 1 (0–3) | 10 (0–44) | 0.1 |
| Skyy Moore WR | 2 (1–5) | 1 (0–3) | 8 (0–41) | 0.1 |
Touchdown scorers
Share of simulated games in which the player scored; the first-TD scorer is the first touchdown of that same game.
| Player | Team | Anytime TD | 2+ TDs | First TD of the game |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| D'Andre Swift RB | CHI | 46.4% | 11.4% | 11.3% |
| Josh Jacobs RB | GB | 39.2% | 8.0% | 9.6% |
| MarShawn Lloyd RB | GB | 37.2% | 7.5% | 8.6% |
| Matthew Golden WR | GB | 30.1% | 4.5% | 6.8% |
| Christian Watson WR | GB | 28.5% | 3.9% | 6.0% |
| Luther Burden III WR | CHI | 28.1% | 4.0% | 6.3% |
| Caleb Williams QB | CHI | 26.9% | 3.5% | 6.1% |
| Kaleb Johnson RB | GB | 24.7% | 2.9% | 5.6% |
| Tucker Kraft TE | GB | 24.6% | 3.2% | 5.4% |
| Rome Odunze WR | CHI | 22.0% | 2.3% | 4.5% |
| Colston Loveland TE | CHI | 21.9% | 2.1% | 4.6% |
| Kalif Raymond WR | CHI | 21.8% | 2.2% | 4.4% |
| Luke Musgrave TE | GB | 12.4% | 0.6% | 2.6% |
| Skyy Moore WR | GB | 12.2% | 0.7% | 2.5% |
| Cole Kmet TE | CHI | 8.3% | 0.5% | 1.6% |
| Mark Redman TE | GB | 7.8% | 0.3% | 1.6% |
First touchdown by team: CHI 44.9% · GB 54.9% · no offensive touchdown 0.3%. Defensive and special-teams touchdowns are not credited to a player.
Representative simulated games
Real runs from this batch, picked by a fixed rule and replayed from their seed. Each is one possible game, not the forecast.
Representative simulation — not the forecast median like: CHI 22 – 26 GB
By quarter: CHI 6 / 3 / 7 / 6 · GB 3 / 3 / 0 / 20
| Qtr | Offense | Start (yds to goal) | Result | Plays | Yards | Score after (CHI–GB) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GB | 69 | fg | 7 | 48 | 0–3 |
| 1 | CHI | 65 | punt | 6 | 23 | 0–3 |
| 1 | GB | 87 | punt | 3 | 20 | 0–3 |
| 1 | CHI | 72 | punt | 3 | 21 | 0–3 |
| 1 | GB | 98 | punt | 3 | 9 | 0–3 |
| 1 | CHI | 57 | td | 2 | 57 | 6–3 |
| 1 | GB | 64 | punt | 6 | 9 | 6–3 |
| 2 | CHI | 83 | punt | 3 | 1 | 6–3 |
| 2 | GB | 61 | punt | 5 | 22 | 6–3 |
| 2 | CHI | 99 | fg | 9 | 89 | 9–3 |
| 2 | GB | 76 | fg | 6 | 54 | 9–6 |
| 2 | CHI | 77 | punt | 6 | 25 | 9–6 |
| 3 | GB | 82 | punt | 10 | -5 | 9–6 |
| 3 | CHI | 33 | td | 5 | 33 | 16–6 |
| 3 | GB | 14 | td | 8 | 14 | 16–13 |
| 4 | CHI | 68 | punt | 3 | -1 | 16–13 |
| 4 | GB | 73 | punt | 3 | 19 | 16–13 |
| 4 | CHI | 99 | turnover | 5 | 30 | 16–13 |
| 4 | GB | 31 | fg | 12 | 19 | 16–16 |
| 4 | CHI | 72 | fg | 12 | 41 | 19–16 |
| 4 | GB | 77 | fg | 5 | 46 | 19–19 |
| 4 | CHI | 65 | fg | 5 | 62 | 22–19 |
| 4 | GB | 70 | td | 5 | 70 | 22–26 |
| 4 | CHI | 71 | end half | 3 | 43 | 22–26 |
Representative simulation — not the forecast high scoring: CHI 30 – 34 GB
By quarter: CHI 10 / 10 / 7 / 3 · GB 7 / 14 / 10 / 3
| Qtr | Offense | Start (yds to goal) | Result | Plays | Yards | Score after (CHI–GB) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | CHI | 43 | fg | 4 | 42 | 3–0 |
| 1 | GB | 48 | td | 8 | 48 | 3–7 |
| 1 | CHI | 70 | turnover | 4 | -5 | 3–7 |
| 1 | GB | 42 | punt | 3 | 6 | 3–7 |
| 1 | CHI | 99 | td | 12 | 99 | 10–7 |
| 1 | GB | 65 | td | 10 | 65 | 10–14 |
| 2 | CHI | 55 | turnover | 2 | 13 | 10–14 |
| 2 | GB | 49 | td | 8 | 49 | 10–21 |
| 2 | CHI | 71 | td | 2 | 71 | 17–21 |
| 2 | GB | 75 | punt | 3 | 9 | 17–21 |
| 2 | CHI | 68 | fg | 5 | 47 | 20–21 |
| 2 | GB | 71 | end half | 4 | 48 | 20–21 |
| 2 | GB | 80 | punt | 3 | 9 | 20–21 |
| 3 | CHI | 94 | punt | 3 | 49 | 20–21 |
| 3 | GB | 79 | fg | 8 | 77 | 20–24 |
| 3 | CHI | 76 | td | 8 | 76 | 27–24 |
| 3 | GB | 80 | td | 3 | 80 | 27–31 |
| 3 | CHI | 69 | punt | 3 | -1 | 27–31 |
| 4 | GB | 88 | fg | 4 | 69 | 27–34 |
| 4 | CHI | 65 | fg | 10 | 31 | 30–34 |
| 4 | GB | 63 | fg miss | 10 | 19 | 30–34 |
| 4 | CHI | 48 | end half | 1 | -3 | 30–34 |
Representative simulation — not the forecast low scoring: CHI 14 – 18 GB
By quarter: CHI 0 / 0 / 7 / 7 · GB 3 / 12 / 3 / 0
| Qtr | Offense | Start (yds to goal) | Result | Plays | Yards | Score after (CHI–GB) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GB | 65 | fg | 13 | 55 | 0–3 |
| 1 | CHI | 70 | punt | 8 | 0 | 0–3 |
| 1 | GB | 87 | punt | 3 | 1 | 0–3 |
| 1 | CHI | 69 | turnover | 1 | 0 | 0–3 |
| 1 | GB | 41 | td | 16 | 41 | 0–10 |
| 2 | CHI | 65 | turnover | 2 | 12 | 0–10 |
| 2 | GB | 58 | punt | 3 | 27 | 0–10 |
| 2 | CHI | 99 | safety | 1 | -1 | 0–12 |
| 2 | GB | 57 | fg | 13 | 49 | 0–15 |
| 2 | CHI | 69 | end half | 5 | 14 | 0–15 |
| 2 | CHI | 73 | td | 5 | 73 | 7–15 |
| 3 | GB | 70 | fg | 5 | 67 | 7–18 |
| 3 | CHI | 65 | punt | 4 | 46 | 7–18 |
| 3 | GB | 99 | punt | 7 | 2 | 7–18 |
| 3 | CHI | 32 | turnover | 3 | 23 | 7–18 |
| 3 | GB | 64 | punt | 8 | 9 | 7–18 |
| 4 | CHI | 78 | punt | 6 | 9 | 7–18 |
| 4 | GB | 78 | fg miss | 6 | 44 | 7–18 |
| 4 | CHI | 58 | td | 12 | 58 | 14–18 |
Provenance
| Engine | nfl-drive-sim-v2 2.0.0-shadow |
|---|---|
| Status | Research only · experimental · not promoted · not our main forecast |
| Runs | 10,000 · incoherent runs 0 of 10,000 |
| Generated | 2026-10-09 20:06 UTC · before kickoff 2026-10-11 17:00 UTC |
| Seed | 3a784291 · per-run mulberry32 seeded by splitmix(baseSeed, runIndex); baseSeed = fnv1a64(engine|eventId|inputHash) |
| Team strength | forecast receipt total.median 48 / margin.median 4 (nfl-regular-season-public-v1@v2) · calibrated means GB 25.99 / CHI 21.95 |
| Availability | injuries@2026-10-09T20:03:58Z+rosters@2026-10-09T20:03:58Z |
| Market | Not used as an input |
| Receipt | nfl-sim-v2:401872990:850f153dd52d9d18 |
Not modelled: downs and distance, penalties, timeouts, weather, kickers as players, defensive player stats, and exact final-score frequencies. Those are absent here rather than estimated. Educational and paper-only; not betting advice.
