2025 SEASON · WEEK 12 · DEMO DATA

SEA @ LAR

Sun Nov 23 · 8:20 PM ET · SoFi Stadium · Indoor · Turf

Synthetic demo data. No schedule, betting-market, injury, weather, or statistics API is connected. Every number shown is fabricated for interface demonstration and must not be used for wagering decisions.

Executive recommendation

64
Confidence
89
Edge score
Seattle SeahawksTier 2 · StrongVerified

Seattle Seahawks carries the estimated edge at the current number. Bet now.

Predicted winner
LAR
Los Angeles Rams
Win probability
62.0%
Upset probability
38%
Cover probability
59.8%
Projected score
22–25
SEA – LAR
Projected total
47.2
Market 47.5
One-score prob.
51.1%
Overtime prob.
8.9%

Decision audit

Evidence-driven

Why the pick wins
Seattle Seahawks projects ahead on road EPA per play and holds the trench advantage (60 DL grade). The market is pricing the opponent's recent record rather than underlying efficiency.
Why the pick loses
Variance in a medium-volatility game. A single turnover swing or red-zone sequence flips the projected margin.
Biggest risk
Late line movement against the recommended side would erase most of the estimated edge.
Biggest unknown
Snap-count allocation for the returning skill players.
What would change this
Confirmed inactives, a starting-quarterback change, a two-point-or-greater line move, or a wind forecast revision above 18 mph.
Confidence level
64 / 100 · Medium volatility

Model consensus

Spread across models: 12.0 probability points

Market71.0% LAR
Power Rating64.0% LAR
ELO59.0% LAR
EPA67.0% LAR
Matchup63.0% LAR
Injury62.0% LAR
Weather62.0% LAR
Game Theory65.0% LAR
Models are aligned within 12 probability points. No material conflict to reconcile.

Score construction

Every score is decomposed — no black box

Confidence Score
InputValueWeightPoints
Win probability62.0%4024.8
Model agreement12.0 pt spread2012.0
Market stability1.0 pt move1510.0
Injury certaintyNo open items1010.0
Weather certaintyverified55.0
Variance profileMedium107.0
Composite68.8
Edge Score
InputValueWeightPoints
Model vs market9.0 pts of probability3526.2
Public bias34% of tickets on rec side2013.2
Contest ownership12% projected1511.0
Matchup advantage1.3 rating gap151.9
Injury impactNone1010.0
Weather impact0 mph wind55.0
Composite67.4

Team comparison

Seattle Seahawks (6-4) vs Los Angeles Rams (6-4)

SEAMetricLAR
1.1Power rating2.4
1528ELO1560
0EPA / play0
0.03Offensive EPA0.13
0.01Defensive EPA-0.02
44Success rate44
46Early-down success46
9Explosive-play rate9
33Pressure rate33
6.5Sack rate6.5
60O-line grade60
60D-line grade60
39Third down %39
55Red zone %55
0Turnover margin0
0.5Strength of schedule0.5
3-2 L5Recent form3-2 L5
NeutralTurnover sustainabilityNeutral
neutralRegression statusneutral

Matchup analysis

  • SEA pass rush (33% pressure) vs LAR offensive line (60 grade)
  • LAR explosive-play rate 9% vs SEA defensive EPA 0.01
  • Third down: LAR 39% vs SEA 39%
  • Red zone: LAR 55% vs SEA 55%
  • Division familiarity historically compresses margins by ~1.2 points.
  • Fourth-down aggressiveness favors LAR in neutral situations.

Market analysis

Sitting on the key number 3 — half-point cost is material.

Opening spread
-2.5
Current spread
-3.5
Expected close
-4.0
Opening total
46.5
Current total
47.5
Moneyline (home)
-245
Implied probability
71.0%
Model probability
62.0%
Market disagreement
9.0 pts
Public tickets (home)
66%
Reverse line movement
None
Steam
Detected
Sharp side
SEA
Line volatility
Medium
Expected value
11.1%
CLV opportunity
Positive — take current number
Bet timing
Bet now

Player availability

Unverified items are labeled and never treated as confirmed

No unresolved availability items recorded for this game in the demo data set.

Rest
Standard week
Travel
Cross-country trip
Altitude
Sea level
Bye impact
None
Playoff implications
Moderate
Resting starters
Not applicable in Week 12

Weather

Verified
Temperature
70°F
Wind
0 mph
Gusts
0 mph
Rain
0%
Snow
0%
Humidity
40%
Field
Indoor
Surface
Turf
Roof
Indoor
Scoring impact
Negligible
Passing impact
Neutral
Kicking impact
Neutral

Bias audit

Documented for every recommendation

  • Public bias: no extreme ticket concentration.
  • Primetime bias: national-window games historically draw inflated public confidence.
  • Recency bias: last-week results were explicitly excluded from the power-rating update beyond their efficiency contribution.
  • Favorite bias: minimal.
  • Brand bias: rating inputs are efficiency-based, not reputation-based.