American Football Intelligence · 2026 NFL · Regular season · Week 5
Chicago Bears at Green Bay Packers
Sunday, October 11 · 12:00 p.m. CDT / 17:00 UTC · Lambeau Field
Authoritative launch market · All six selections
Market reference
Draft Kings · source: ESPN web / supplied scoreboard capture [https://site.api.espn.com/apis/site/v2/sports/football/nfl/scoreboard?dates=20261011&limit=1000] · period: full_game
Retrieved 2026-10-11T07:18:05.563095Z. This attribution, retrieval time and period apply to every row below.
| Market | Selection | Signed line | American price | Exact decimal price |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moneyline | Green Bay Packers · home | None | +102 | 2.02 |
| Moneyline | Chicago Bears · away | None | -122 | 1.819672131147541 |
| Spread | Green Bay Packers · home | +1.5 | -110 | 1.9090909090909092 |
| Spread | Chicago Bears · away | -1.5 | -110 | 1.9090909090909092 |
| Total | Over | 47.5 | -102 | 1.9803921568627452 |
| Total | Under | 47.5 | -118 | 1.847457627118644 |
Bookmaker update time and overtime treatment were not supplied. Retrieval time is not quote update time. Launch prices remain the reference throughout this report; no additional odds lookup was performed.
Capture provenance
Snapshot: 98b583c4-2c31-451a-9f15-c3a475880b01 · ESPN event: 401872990 · Shared capture: c66282d4c1e40f2e7b356391d7bfc27917bfc4a13bd2512d64c053bce0f011c4. Supplied validation expiry: 2026-10-11T07:23:05.563095Z; natural aging during composition does not replace the authoritative launch capture.
Away · Chicago
3–1
Won last 2Home · Green Bay
2–2
Won last 1Betting decision
Chicago has the stronger profile.
Personnel changes limit confidence.
Leading football lean: Chicago -1.5 at -110. Chicago's offense sustains drives more effectively, and its defense has allowed fewer points per drive. Green Bay's depleted personnel adds support. Chicago's missing lead rusher and quarterback rotation, however, weaken the link between four-game averages and this matchup.
All markets: PASS at the supplied prices. Directional evidence favors Chicago; the total has a weaker under lean. No accepted matchup forecast or cover probability is available, and a positive expected return cannot be established from this sample.
Football direction: moderate confidencePriced betting edge: low confidenceNo projected score or invented probabilityCanonical evidence · Selected-season snapshot
The descriptive anchor: traditional SRS
Chicago Bears
+12.63 NFL #3
Points above average · scoring differential +11.75/game (#3)
4 games · strength of schedule +0.88
Green Bay Packers
-7.75 NFL #29
Points above average · scoring differential -8.00/game (#29)
4 games · strength of schedule +0.25
20.38-point descriptive SRS gap. This is not a predicted winning margin. Season 2026; 4 games per team; complete rating coverage; 65 league input games across a connected 32-team component; as of 2026-10-09T00:15:00Z. Traditional SRS is location-unadjusted. Reported uncertainty is 4.44 for each team, not a betting confidence interval. Matchup rating snapshots and forecasts: 0 rows; training cutoffs for a game forecast are unavailable.
Compare each offense with the opposing defense
Chicago offense → Green Bay defense
| Metric | CHI offense | GB allowed |
|---|---|---|
| EPA / play | +0.107 #9 | +0.041 |
| Success rate | 47.9% #7 | 45.7% |
| Explosive rate | 11.0% #5 | 6.6% |
| Yards / play | 6.03 | 5.31 |
| Points / drive | 2.67 #8 | 2.28 |
2026 · 4 complete games each · 292 CHI offensive plays / 42 drives; 256 GB defensive plays / 46 drives.
Green Bay offense → Chicago defense
| Metric | GB offense | CHI allowed |
|---|---|---|
| EPA / play | -0.091 #27 | -0.059 |
| Success rate | 39.2% #28 | 41.1% |
| Explosive rate | 8.2% #20 | 9.9% |
| Yards / play | 5.49 | 6.18 |
| Points / drive | 1.66 #27 | 1.67 |
2026 · 4 complete games each · 232 GB offensive plays / 44 drives; 192 CHI defensive plays / 39 drives.
Both panels: season 2026; season-metric as-of 2026-10-04T17:00:00Z; 4 complete, 0 partial, 0 box-only games per team. Ranks are supplied offensive league ranks. Defensive ranks and yards-per-play ranks are not supplied. Lower defensive EPA allowed and lower success allowed are better.
Play style and repeatability
Recorded attempt mix
Chicago: 159 carries / 132 pass attempts
Green Bay: 73 carries / 154 pass attempts
Chicago's rushing production is 196.3 yards/game; Green Bay's is 58.0. That supports a run-oriented Chicago profile and greater passing dependence for Green Bay.
Canonical player totals, 2026, through Week 4; 4 team games; attempt samples 291 CHI / 227 GB. Mix excludes sacks and is not adjusted for score, down or opponent. Kneels remain rushing attempts under the stored NFL convention. All included quarterback/rushing metric rows report no unavailable fields; style ranks are not supplied.
Quarterback continuity changes the read
| QB | Games | Dropbacks | EPA / dropback |
|---|---|---|---|
| Caleb Williams | 2 | 60 | +0.292 |
| Tyson Bagent | 2 | 45 | +0.113 |
| Case Keenum | 1 | 34 | +0.213 |
| Jordan Love | 4 | 162 | +0.028 |
Canonical 2026 player metrics; appearances can overlap within a game. Williams as-of Sep 20, 17:00 UTC; Keenum Sep 29, 00:15 UTC; Bagent/Love Oct 4, 17:00 UTC. Coverage complete for these fields; player ranks not supplied.
Chicago has produced positive passing EPA with all three quarterbacks, but Bagent's 45-dropback sample cannot establish a stable replacement level. Green Bay's passing baseline is positive while its overall offensive EPA is negative, pointing to weakness elsewhere in the offense.
QB EPA uses dropbacks; team EPA uses offensive plays. These denominators differ.
External research · 2026 regular-season results
Scoring variance is visible; averages need context
Chicago points scored
4 games · 3–59 points · 28.0 average. Week 1 supplies 52.7% of all Chicago points; the next 3 games average 17.7. The last 2 wins average 25.0 with replacement quarterbacks.
Green Bay points scored
4 games · 14–22 points · 18.25 average. Scoring is less dispersed than Chicago's, but consistently modest. The latest 17–14 win does not by itself show an offensive rebound.
Shared chart scale: 0–60 points; bars show scoring outcomes, not play-style variance. Both sequences cover Weeks 1–4 of 2026, through Oct 4; no earlier-season performance is used. Chicago game totals: 96, 12, 34, 35 (mean 44.25). Green Bay totals: 61, 37, 49, 31 (mean 44.50). These are historical scoring descriptions, not projections or historical betting records against the current 47.5 line.
External research · Dated team reports and current reserve context
Who changes the matchup?
Chicago: protect the run-control assumption
PLANNED STARTER Tyson Bagent. Caleb Williams remains questionable with a hamstring injury; returning to limited practice does not establish a full return. Oct 9 team injury update [https://www.chicagobears.com/news/injury-update-bears-rb-kyle-monangai-ruled-out-qb-caleb-williams-questionable-for-packers-game].
OUT Kyle Monangai, toe. His last game included 30 carries for 146 yards. D'Andre Swift finished Friday in full practice with no game designation after hip/knee issues; Roschon Johnson moves up, with only 4 accepted season carries. Team report [https://www.chicagobears.com/news/injury-update-bears-rb-kyle-monangai-ruled-out-qb-caleb-williams-questionable-for-packers-game].
| 2026 rushing baseline | Carries | EPA / rush |
|---|---|---|
| Monangai · 4 games | 60 | +0.097 |
| Swift · 4 games | 69 | -0.114 |
Canonical; as-of Oct 4, 17:00 UTC; no missing metric fields; ranks not supplied. This gap includes Swift's turnover cost and is not an isolated blocking or talent grade.
SATURDAY UPDATE Kyler Gordon and Shemar Turner downgraded to out; Noah Sewell activated from PUP; RB Zavier Scott elevated. Oct 10 team transaction report [https://www.chicagobears.com/news/roster-moves-chicago-bears-activate-noah-sewell-elevate-zavier-scott].
Green Bay: losses on both sides
Josh Jacobs remains on the Commissioner's Exempt list, and Micah Parsons remains on PUP. These are current availability constraints. Oct 10 official preview [https://www.chicagobears.com/news/game-preview-bears-at-packers-2026-week-5].
Edgerrin Cooper and Jayden Reed are reported out for the season. Cooper's loss occurred in the most recent game, so the four-game defensive average still includes his earlier contribution. Oct 9 team report [https://www.chicagobears.com/news/injury-update-bears-rb-kyle-monangai-ruled-out-qb-caleb-williams-questionable-for-packers-game].
Doubtful: Aaron Banks (knee/toe), Jacob Monk (quadricep). Questionable: Jager Burton (back), Javon Hargrave (toe), Anthony Campbell (ankle). Out: Chris Brooks and Savion Williams (ankle). Oct 9 Packers report [https://www.packers.com/news/packers-list-three-questionable-two-doubtful-vs-bears-week-5-injury-report].
Canonical Week 5 roster corroborates reserve/exempt context. An ACT roster label is not a game-day fitness clearance.
Canonical roster: 167 entries (84 CHI, 83 GB), updated 2026-10-11T06:51:53.045360Z. Accepted game-specific availability: 0 rows. Public reports dated Oct 9–10 supplement that gap; final game-day inactives were not verified. External research observed Oct 11, 07:18–07:23 UTC.
Special teams, venue and schedule context
Canonical · Special teams
Small difference
GB +1.93 / CHI +1.79 special-teams EPA per game. Green Bay's descriptive advantage is just 0.14 per game.
2026, 4 complete team games each; as-of Oct 4, 17:00 UTC. FG: Santos 7/8, Smack 6/7; each 4 appearances. No ranks supplied; expected field-goal value is not modeled. The small kicking samples do not establish a meaningful edge.
External · Nearby NWS forecast
Sunny · daytime high 79°F
SSW wind around 9 mph, gusts up to 20 mph. Conditions provide little support for a large weather-driven scoring reduction; gusts add uncertainty for deep passes and kicks.
Nearby point 44.51°N, 88.02°W; forecast updated Oct 11, 00:21 CDT / 05:21 UTC. Daytime high is not kickoff temperature. An exact Lambeau kickoff-hour forecast was not verified. National Weather Service [https://forecast.weather.gov/MapClick.php?lat=44.51&lon=-88.02].
Canonical · Context and rules
Equal rest · home field
7 rest days each. Lambeau is outdoor grass, non-neutral, and this is a division game. Home-field context supports Green Bay without a quantified point adjustment.
Stored 2026 NFL profile: four 15-minute regulation periods; timed 10-minute regular-season overtime; ties allowed. The supplied market's OT treatment remains unknown. Stored temperature/wind are missing; weather is external research.
Value assessment at the supplied prices
Moneyline
Chicago -122 · PASS
Case: stronger descriptive SRS and both directional phase comparisons support Chicago. Green Bay +102 needs better protection, explosive completions and a weaker Chicago rushing replacement.
Price hurdle: Chicago 54.95%; Green Bay 49.50%. These are raw price-implied thresholds, including the market margin, not forecast win probabilities.
Value limit: Chicago's injury-adjusted win probability is unavailable. Neither side has a demonstrable priced edge.
Spread · Leading football lean
Chicago -1.5 (-110) · PASS
Cover case: win by at least 2 points through sustained drives and suppressing Green Bay's weaker offense. Green Bay +1.5 (-110) covers a win, a tied settled score, or a 1-point loss.
Price hurdle: 52.38% for either side under standard win/loss settlement. The descriptive gap supports Chicago directionally, but is not a forecast margin.
Uncertainty/value: Monangai's absence, Bagent's small sample, defensive personnel losses and a narrow finish matter. No cover probability is available, so positive expected value is unproven. The -110 price is cheaper than -122 moneyline but requires more than a 1-point win.
Total · Weaker directional lean
Under 47.5 (-118) · PASS
Under case: modest Green Bay scoring, Chicago's lower-scoring recent games and disrupted rushing/line personnel. Both teams' historical mean game totals are below 47.5.
Over case: explosive passes, short fields and defensive absences. Chicago's 96-point opener shows the tail risk; the benign daytime forecast adds no strong under support.
Price hurdle: under 54.13%; over 47.5 (-102) 50.50%. No accepted total forecast or outcome distribution establishes value at either price.
Thresholds use 1 / exact supplied decimal price and assume standard settled win/loss outcomes; overtime/tie settlement terms are unprovided. These calculations do not model win, cover or total probabilities.