# Chicago Bears v Minnesota Vikings — NFL Week 2 2026 AI Prediction by Alphr

## Full Time: Chicago Bears 3 – 9 Minnesota Vikings

_Minnesota Vikings pillage a gallant Chicago Bears._

Half time: 3 – 6 · Alphr AI pre-game win probability: Chicago Bears 66% / Minnesota Vikings 34% · Soldier Field · Mon, 21 Sept, 03:00 am AEST

### Match Winner — AI Prediction Market (resolved)

| Team | Pre-game AI win probability | Result |
|---|---|---|
| Chicago Bears | 66% | Lost |
| Minnesota Vikings | 34% | Won |

Model call: **Missed** · Margin: 6.6 predicted → 6 actual · Markets hit: 1/3

_AI win probability priced pre-game · Markets hit = core betting markets._

### Full-Time Report

**Chicago Bears vs Minnesota Vikings Prediction & Tips | NFL Week 2 2026**

_By Ben Dunlop · Published: 16 Sept 2026, 09:10 am · Last updated: 21 Sept 2026, 06:05 am_

Chicago Bears 3–9 Minnesota Vikings in NFL Week 2 at Soldier Field. Here's how the result stacked up against the model's call, with the win-probability story and where the value landed.

The Minnesota Vikings beat the Chicago Bears 9-3 at Soldier Field by leaning on patience and ball control while the home side chased raw metres. Both teams were kept out of the end zone for the entire game. Minnesota arrived with five wins from their last five games and an average margin of 10.8 points. Chicago brought two wins from their last five and an average margin of 3.2 points.

The Bears gained more yards overall with 326 total yards to the Vikings 262. They also had more passing yards 192 to 143 and more rushing yards 134 to 119. Chicago also picked up 16 first downs compared to Minnesota's 10. Yet the Vikings won the turnover battle forcing two turnovers while giving up none. This difference in turnovers was a key factor in the final score.

Chicago quarterback Caleb Williams completed 15 of 26 passes for 138 yards with one interception. Aaron Jones led all rushers with 105 yards on 23 carries. For the Vikings Carson Wentz completed 11 of 20 passes for 143 yards. Justin Jefferson was the top receiver in the game with 3 catches for 55 yards. The Vikings pass rush also made an impact recording four sacks to the Bears three.

At half-time the Vikings held a narrow 6-3 lead. The scoreline shifted only slightly in the second half with Minnesota adding a further three points. Their defence held firm preventing any further scoring from Chicago. The final six-point margin reflected a tight contest but one where the Vikings cleaner play proved decisive.

Looking at the positional strength ratings before the match the Bears had an advantage in quarterback rated 69 to the Vikings 50. They also had stronger receiving corps 63 to 57 a better backfield 55 to 48 and a stronger pass rush 62 to 60. The Vikings countered with a stronger secondary rated 62 to the Bears 49 and better special teams 69 to 60. These strengths played out in the statistics particularly the Vikings secondary helping to limit the Bears to three points despite Chicago's yardage advantage.

Alphr's model had the Bears as 66% favourites before the match predicting them to win by 6.6 points. The actual six-point margin was close to the predicted spread but the Vikings outright win represented a notable upset. The model also called a combined total of 46 points which was 34 points higher than the game's 12 points. The under 48.5 total call was correct. Overall the model went 1/3 on this match getting the total right but missing the winner.

**Scoring by Quarter**

| Team | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | T |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chicago Bears | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| Minnesota Vikings | 3 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 9 |

**Scoring Timeline**

| Clock | Team | Play | Scorer | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 11:03 | Minnesota Vikings | FG | — | 0-3 |
| Q1 5:03 | Chicago Bears | FG | — | 3-3 |
| Q2 8:18 | Minnesota Vikings | FG | — | 3-6 |
| Q4 1:09 | Minnesota Vikings | FG | — | 3-9 |

**Key Match Stats**

| Chicago Bears | Stat | Minnesota Vikings |
|---|---|---|
| **326** | Total Yards | 262 |
| **192** | Passing Yards | 143 |
| **134** | Rushing Yards | 119 |
| **16** | First Downs | 10 |
| 2 | Turnovers | **0** |
| 3 | Sacks Made | **4** |
| -8.9 | Offensive EPA | **-4** |

**Model Report Card**

Minnesota Vikings defied the model's 66% prediction for Chicago Bears, a notable upset. The margin model missed here, predicting 6.6 but the actual margin was 6 points. The game's 12 points came in 34 points lower than the predicted 46. The model went 1/3 on this match. The under 48.5 total call was correct.

_Official NFL box score · Generated by Alphr's model_

### Edge Analysis — the model's pre-game markets

- **Head to Head:** Chicago Bears to win @ $1.39 (edge -5.5%) — model probability 66.4% — result: LOST
- **Line / Spread:** Chicago Bears -5.5 @ $1.91 (edge -0.9%) — model probability 51.5% — result: LOST
- **Margin Band:** Chicago Bears 1-13 @ $2.10 (edge -8.0%) — model probability 39.6% — result: LOST
- **Total (Over/Under):** Under 48.5 @ $1.86 (edge -3.8%) — model probability 50.0% — result: WON
- Predicted margin: Chicago Bears by 7 · Predicted total: 46

### Match Preview (pre-match read)

The model is firm on Chicago Bears here: 66% to see off Minnesota Vikings. The ratings say otherwise: Minnesota Vikings sit 22 ELO points clear, 1574 to 1552, so the model is backing Chicago Bears against the ratings gap. Form leans Minnesota Vikings' way: 5 from their last 5, against 2 for Chicago Bears.

On paper Minnesota Vikings shade it, ahead on 3 of 6 factors including Team Rating (ELO), Secondary and Recent Form. The model still sides with Chicago Bears, which says Quarterback carry the most weight. The margin model has Chicago Bears by 6.6, with the two sides combining for about 46. Chicago Bears to win, and win clearly. The model isn't hedging.

Minnesota Vikings have won 9 of the last 12 between these two, and Chicago Bears took the most recent meeting 19-17 in 2025 Week 11.

Chicago Bears went 1-0 in 2026 so far, 0-0 at home, averaging 59.0 points for and 37.0 against.

Minnesota Vikings went 1-0 in 2026 so far, 0-0 away, averaging 39.0 points for and 22.0 against.

Caleb Williams starts under centre for Chicago Bears, Kyler Murray for Minnesota Vikings, with Ben Johnson and Kevin O'Connell calling the shots.

The market has Chicago Bears favourites, Chicago Bears $1.39 and Minnesota Vikings $3.04, with the spread at Chicago Bears -5.5 and the total at 48.5.

**By the numbers**

|  |  |
|---|---|
| H2H (last 12) | Chicago Bears 3 · Minnesota Vikings 9 |
| Last meeting | Chicago Bears 19-17 (2025) |
| Chicago Bears 2026 so far | 1-0 · 0-0 home |
| Chicago Bears scoring | 59.0 for · 37.0 against |
| Minnesota Vikings 2026 so far | 1-0 · 0-0 away |
| Minnesota Vikings scoring | 39.0 for · 22.0 against |
| Quarterbacks | Caleb Williams · Kyler Murray |
| Head coaches | Ben Johnson · Kevin O'Connell |
| Market | Chicago Bears $1.39 · Minnesota Vikings $3.04 |
| Spread | Chicago Bears -5.5 · total 48.5 |

_Pre-match read · Alphr model_

### Recent Form (Last 5)

| Chicago Bears | Stat | Minnesota Vikings |
|---|---|---|
| 2.0 | Wins (Last 5) | 5.0 |
| 32.2pts | Avg Score | 25.6pts |
| 29.0pts | Avg Conceded | 14.8pts |
| 3.2pts | Avg Margin | 10.8pts |
| 7.0d | Rest Days | 7.0d |

### Form & History

_Last 5 games, oldest → newest._

| Team | Last 5 | Avg Pts |
|---|---|---|
| Chicago Bears | W17 L · W18 L · WC W · DIV L · W1 W | 32.2 |
| Minnesota Vikings | W15 W · W16 W · W17 W · W18 W · W1 W | 25.6 |

### H2H History (Last 5) — Minnesota Vikings lead 4-1

| Season | Round | Home | Score | Away | Alphr's read |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | W2 | Chicago Bears | 3 – 9 | Minnesota Vikings | Chicago Bears 66% ✗ |
| 2025 | W11 | Minnesota Vikings | 17 – 19 | Chicago Bears | not priced |
| 2025 | W1 | Chicago Bears | 24 – 27 | Minnesota Vikings | not priced |
| 2024 | W15 | Minnesota Vikings | 30 – 12 | Chicago Bears | not priced |
| 2024 | W12 | Chicago Bears | 27 – 30 | Minnesota Vikings | not priced |

_Alphr's pre-match read was wrong in the one decided meeting it priced._

### TD Scorer History — Who Finds The End Zone

_Last 10 games, career record vs the opponent and at Soldier Field. ⚡ = our AI backs them to score; 🎯 = our AI's first-td pick. 🏉 = scored in this game. TD % = share of games with a td, last 10 weighted double vs the 30 prior — historical frequency, not a market price._

**Chicago Bears** (team sheet)

| # | Player | Pos | 2026 | Last 10 | vs opp | Venue | TD % | Alphr play | This game |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| – | D'Andre Swift | RB | 3 in 1g | 9/10g (0·1·0·2·0·2·0·1·0·3) | 3/10g | 8/20g | 44% | ⚡ Anytime TD $1.95 AI 55% ✗ No TD; 🎯 First TD $5.25 AI 12% ✗ Not first | — |
| – | Caleb Williams | QB | 2 in 1g | 2/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·2) | 1/4g | 2/18g | 13% | — | — |
| – | Cole Kmet | TE | 1 in 1g | 3/10g (0·1·0·0·0·0·0·0·1·1) | 1/12g | 11/50g | 22% | — | — |
| – | Kyle Monangai | RB | 1 in 1g | 3/10g (1·1·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·1) | 1/2g | 3/10g | 30% | ⚡ Anytime TD $3.00 AI 30% ✗ No TD; 🎯 First TD $8.50 AI 7% ✗ Not first | — |
| – | Colston Loveland | TE | 0 in 1g | 4/10g (1·0·1·0·0·1·1·0·0·0) | 0/2g | 2/10g | 31% | ⚡ Anytime TD $3.20 AI 30% ✗ No TD; 🎯 First TD $10.00 AI 7% ✗ Not first | — |
| – | Kalif Raymond | WR | 0 in 1g | 1/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·1·0·0·0) | 1/11g | 2/4g | 10% | — | — |
| – | Luther Burden III | WR | 0 in 1g | 1/10g (0·0·0·0·0·1·0·0·0·0) | 0/2g | 1/9g | 11% | — | — |
| – | Rome Odunze | WR | 0 in 1g | 1/10g (0·0·0·1·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 1/4g | 3/15g | 19% | — | — |
| – | Sam Roush | TE | no games | 0/0g | 0/0g | 0/0g | — | — | — |
| – | Tyson Bagent | QB | no games | 1/10g (0·1·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 1/2g | 1/4g | 14% | — | — |
| – | Zavion Thomas | WR | no games | 0/0g | 0/0g | 0/0g | — | — | — |

**Minnesota Vikings** (team sheet)

| # | Player | Pos | 2026 | Last 10 | vs opp | Venue | TD % | Alphr play | This game |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| – | Justin Jefferson | WR | 2 in 1g | 2/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·2) | 4/10g | 2/5g | 28% | ⚡ Anytime TD $2.40 AI 29% ✗ No TD | — |
| – | Aaron Jones | RB | 1 in 1g | 3/10g (0·1·0·0·0·0·0·0·1·1) | 14/17g | 6/9g | 32% | — | — |
| – | T.J. Hockenson | TE | 1 in 1g | 3/10g (0·1·0·0·0·0·1·0·0·1) | 3/13g | 0/7g | 22% | — | — |
| – | Carson Wentz | QB | 0 in 1g | 2/10g (1·1·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 0/4g | 0/2g | 12% | — | — |
| – | DeeJay Dallas | RB | 0 in 1g | 1/10g (0·1·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 0/2g | 0/0g | 6% | — | — |
| – | Demond Claiborne | RB | no games | 0/0g | 0/0g | 0/0g | — | — | — |
| – | Jordan Addison | WR | 0 in 1g | 2/10g (0·1·0·0·0·0·0·1·0·0) | 3/5g | 2/2g | 30% | — | — |
| – | Josh Oliver | TE | 0 in 1g | 3/10g (1·0·0·0·2·0·0·0·0·0) | 0/3g | 0/1g | 20% | — | — |
| – | Myles Price | WR | 0 in 1g | 0/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 0/2g | 0/1g | 0% | — | — |

### End Zone Map — Where Our Picks Have Been Scoring

_Real touchdowns, not predictions: every score each of our picks made in his last five games. The percentage is our model's chance he scores in this game._

**Minnesota Vikings** (3 picks)
- ⚡ Aaron Jones Sr. 🎯 — 2 TDs in last 5 (2 rush · 0 pass) · model 33% · no TD
- ⚡ Justin Jefferson — 2 TDs in last 5 (0 rush · 2 pass) · model 29% · no TD
- ⚡ Jordan Mason — 2 TDs in last 5 (2 rush · 0 pass) · model 26% · no TD
- Rest of the Vikings: 8 TDs across the team's last 5

**Chicago Bears** (3 picks)
- ⚡ D'Andre Swift 🎯 — 6 TDs in last 5 (6 rush · 0 pass) · model 55% · no TD
- ⚡ Kyle Monangai 🎯 — 1 TD in last 5 (1 rush · 0 pass) · model 30% · no TD
- ⚡ Colston Loveland 🎯 — 2 TDs in last 5 (0 rush · 2 pass) · model 30% · no TD
- Rest of the Bears: 11 TDs across the team's last 5

### Player Props — Yardage & Receptions

_Market lines vs our model's read for each player's rushing, receiving and passing numbers. ⚡ = the model sits 10+ points past the price; everything else is market intel, not a tip. Projections assume the depth-chart role the model saw at publish._

**Minnesota Vikings** (MIN)

| Player · market | Line | Price | AI read | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aaron Jones Sr. · Rush yds | U 40.5 | $1.95 | 58% (expects 42.4) | ✗ missed |
| Aaron Jones Sr. · Rec yds | U 12.5 | $1.85 | 63% (expects 10.2) | ✓ landed |
| Aaron Jones Sr. · Rec | O 1.5 | $1.52 | 57% (expects 1.9) | ✗ missed |
| Jordan Addison · Rec yds | U 35.5 | $1.87 | 71% (expects 26.3) | ✓ landed |
| Jordan Addison · Rush yds | U 0.5 | $1.20 | 58% (expects -2.0) | ✓ landed |
| Jordan Addison · Rec | U 2.5 | $1.92 | 59% (expects 2.2) | ✓ landed |
| Jordan Mason · Rush yds | U 50.5 | $1.85 | 64% (expects 44.3) | — |
| Jordan Mason · Rec yds | O 0.5 | $1.62 | 54% (expects 2.6) | — |
| Jordan Mason · Rec | O 0.5 | $2.15 | 70% (expects 1.0) | — |
| Justin Jefferson · Rec | U 5.5 | $2.15 | 68% (expects 4.5) | ✓ landed |
| Justin Jefferson · Rec yds | U 77.5 | $1.85 | 81% (expects 50.8) | ✓ landed |
| T.J. Hockenson · Rec yds | U 28.5 | $1.85 | 70% (expects 19.7) | ✗ missed |
| T.J. Hockenson · Rec | U 3.5 | $1.85 | 64% (expects 2.9) | ✓ landed |

**Chicago Bears** (CHI)

| Player · market | Line | Price | AI read | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Caleb Williams · Rush yds | U 25.5 | $1.90 | 52% (expects 24.4) | ✗ missed |
| Caleb Williams · Pass TDs | U 1.5 | $1.87 | 58% (expects 1.2) | ✓ landed |
| Caleb Williams · Pass yds | U 227.5 | $1.88 | 69% (expects 229.1) | ✓ landed |
| Cole Kmet · Rec yds | U 15.5 | $1.83 | 60% (expects 14.3) | ✓ landed |
| Cole Kmet · Rec | U 1.5 | $2.10 | 65% (expects 1.1) | ✓ landed |
| Colston Loveland · Rec | U 3.5 | $2.15 | 57% (expects 3.5) | ✓ landed |
| Colston Loveland · Rec yds | U 40.5 | $2.00 | 57% (expects 40.7) | ✓ landed |
| D'Andre Swift · Rec | U 1.5 | $1.98 | 55% (expects 1.3) | ✗ missed |
| D'Andre Swift · Rec yds | U 10.5 | $1.75 | 51% (expects 11.5) | ✗ missed |
| D'Andre Swift · Rush yds | U 66.5 | $1.85 | 62% (expects 64.7) | ✓ landed |
| Kyle Monangai · Rec yds | O 6.5 | $1.95 | 51% (expects 7.9) | ✓ landed |
| Kyle Monangai · Rec | U 1.5 | $1.48 | 62% (expects 1.2) | ✗ missed |
| Kyle Monangai · Rush yds | O 35.5 | $1.87 | 50% (expects 47.2) | ✓ landed |
| Luther Burden III · Rec yds | U 47.5 | $1.88 | 68% (expects 36.0) | ✓ landed |

### Prediction Breakdown — Pure Alpha Model

**ELO–Market Disagreement:** Minnesota Vikings hold the ELO advantage (1574 vs 1552), but the market favours Chicago Bears (@1.39). The model sides with the market, other factors override the ELO gap.

**Team ELO Ratings** — Chicago Bears 1552 · Minnesota Vikings 1574 · ELO difference: 22 in favour of Minnesota Vikings

**Positional Matchups** — unit strength index from player ratings: 50 is league average, 75+ is elite, 25 and under is a weakness

| Unit | Chicago Bears | Minnesota Vikings | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|
| Quarterback | 69 | 50 | Chicago Bears +19 |
| Receiving Corps | 63 | 57 | Chicago Bears +6 |
| Backfield | 55 | 48 | Chicago Bears +7 |
| Pass Rush | 62 | 60 | Even |
| Secondary | 49 | 62 | Minnesota Vikings +13 |
| Special Teams | 60 | 69 | Minnesota Vikings +9 |

**Key Prediction Factors** — what the model weighted most

| # | Factor | Weight | Favours |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Team Rating (ELO) | 30.0% | Minnesota Vikings |
| 2 | Quarterback | 18.0% | Chicago Bears |
| 3 | Pass Rush | 12.0% | — |
| 4 | Secondary | 10.0% | Minnesota Vikings |
| 5 | Recent Form | 10.0% | Minnesota Vikings |
| 6 | Rest Advantage | 8.0% | — |

**Model Confidence: 66%** — Chicago Bears predicted to win by 7 points · Predicted total: 46 pts

**Record:** 1/3 match predictions correct

**Prediction by Alphr** (https://alphr.com.au) — free AI predictions for every AFL, NRL & Super League match, published before kick-off and never edited. Verified track record: https://alphr.com.au/accuracy

---
Canonical URL: https://alphr.com.au/nfl/match/2026-r2-chicago-bears-v-minnesota-vikings
RSS feed: https://alphr.com.au/feed.xml
Prediction JSON API: today https://alphr.com.au/api/predictions/today · this week https://alphr.com.au/api/predictions/weekly
Markdown view for AI agents. Machine-readable index: https://alphr.com.au/llms.txt · full reference: https://alphr.com.au/llms-full.txt
All predictions are published before kick-off and verified after full time. Free, no login. 18+ gamble responsibly (AU).
Last updated: 2026-09-20 20:05 UTC (latest tip update)