For the complete documentation index, see llms.txt. Markdown variants of the ranked boards (dynasty and fantasy rankings for NFL, NBA, MLB and CFB) are available by appending.mdto those URLs or by sendingAccept: text/markdown; other pages answer 404.
polling · 1800s tick · as of 7:37 AM ET · 15 to play · 1 final
Game Center
Game Center
2023 Week 11 · Sun, Nov 19, 2023 · TIAA Bank Stadium
FinalThe verdict · 2023 Week 11
It turned at Q1 7:49, 2nd and 10 — 13.3 win-probability points to the Jaguars on one snap, the largest move of the game.
The snaps that bent it
Jacksonville Jaguars 34–14 — never really in doubt late. Biggest swing: Q1 7:49, Jaguars +13.3% win probability on one snap.
The biggest swing of the game · Q1 7:49 · 2nd and 10
Unnamed on the sheet
Jaguars
(7:49) (Shotgun) 8-W.Levis FUMBLES (Aborted) at JAX 43, touched at JAX 42, RECOVERED by JAX-23-F.Oluokun at JAX 43.
13.3
win-probability points on one snap
The largest move of the game. The two below are drawn against it.
What separated them
Explosive plays
Jaguars won this one — 7 chunk plays, against Titans at 4 chunk plays.
Jaguarsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Throwing the ball
Jaguars won this one — +0.53 expected points per dropback, against Titans at +0.21 expected points per dropback.
Jaguarsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Giveaways
Jaguars won this one — no giveaways, against Titans at 1 giveaway.
Jaguarsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Every snap
Jaguars won this one — +0.19 expected points per snap, against Titans at +0.04 expected points per snap.
Jaguarsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Who won it for them
What it says about next week
Note
The model against the market, the momentum underneath, every drive — scrub to replay it
The model and the market were 5.5 win-probability points apart on the average play, and 18 apart at the widest — with the model the more convinced about Titans.
(7:49) (Shotgun) 8-W.Levis FUMBLES (Aborted) at JAX 43, touched at JAX 42, RECOVERED by JAX-23-F.Oluokun at JAX 43.
The modelled figures are the league play-by-play model's, not ours.
How the points landed
Calvin Ridley's 3-yard touchdown catch with 3:03 left in the 1st put Jacksonville Jaguars ahead for good. The lead never changed over the 7 scores that followed.
Calvin Ridley3-yd TD catch3-yard touchdown catchfrom Trevor LawrenceLead never changed again+70–78 scores · bar length is the lead after each one
Down-to-down truth
Titanscategory by categoryJaguars
Jaguars ahead 7–2 on categories, including the biggest gap of the duel — turnovers.
Expected points added, per play
The centre line is an average play. A bar to the right of it is a side that gained more than the situation was worth; a bar to the left is a side that lost ground. All six bars share one scale, ±0.53 points.
Every snapexpected points added per play, all downs
Dropping backexpected points added per dropback
Running itexpected points added per rush
Neither side “wins” volume or play-calling mix, so neither is drawn as a duel: Titans ran 36 snaps at a 56% dropback rate against Jaguars’s 69 at 51%. Red-zone trips: Titans 2, Jaguars 6.
Jaguars won the down-to-down efficiency fight: 0.19 expected points added per play vs 0.04.
Derived from the play-by-play, no model
12 of 12 readings cleared their snap floor and were tested against four comparisons: this week's whole slate, the team's own season, the week before, and the team's own ordinary spread. Every bar below is set in that team's own week-to-week swing, never in league points — one team's swing runs 1.6 to 3.1 times the entire league's spread.
TEN's play-action rate, 45.0%, was the highest of the 28 team-games charted in week 11 — 5.6 points clear of the next team along.
20 dropbacks this game, floor 12 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 10.0 points. · +1.8σ from their own normal
TEN's pass rate over expected turned over: +0.4 pts in week 10 against −12.1 pts here — they threw more than the situation asked then and ran more than the situation asked now, a turn of 2.5 of their own weekly swings across the two.
36 snaps this game, floor 20 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 5.0 points. · −1.4σ from their own normal
JAX's pass rate over expected turned over: +8.0 pts in week 10 against −4.3 pts here — they threw more than the situation asked then and ran more than the situation asked now, a turn of 2.2 of their own weekly swings across the two.
69 snaps this game, floor 20 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 5.6 points. · −1.3σ from their own normal
TEN's early-down pass rate turned over: 64.3% in week 10 against 46.4% here — they passed early then and ran early now, a turn of 2.4 of their own weekly swings across the two.
28 early downs this game, floor 15 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 7.3 points. · −0.7σ from their own normal
The season-grain rooms, pointed at this one game
12 of 12 readings cleared their snap floor. Every deviation below is measured in that team's own game-to-game swing, not in league points — because one game's swing runs from 1.6 to 3.1 times the whole league's spread.
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -19 pts to 18 pts
Over Expected room →Titans-12.1 ptsleaned — ran more than the situation asked · −6.9 vs their -5.2 pts, and they swing ±5.0 week to week (−1.39× that swing) · 36 snaps
Jaguars-4.3 ptsleaned — ran more than the situation asked · −7.2 vs their 2.8 pts, and they swing ±5.6 week to week (−1.27× that swing) · 69 snaps
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale 32% to 87%
Tendencies room →Titans46.4%inside their normal wobble · −5.0 vs their 51.4%, and they swing ±7.3 week to week (−0.69× that swing) · 28 early downs
Jaguars50.9%inside their normal wobble · −9.1 vs their 60.0%, and they swing ±10.6 week to week (−0.85× that swing) · 53 early downs
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -1% to 52%
Tendencies room →Titans45.0%leaned — faked the run · +18.6 vs their 26.4%, and they swing ±10.0 week to week (+1.85× that swing) · 20 dropbacks
Jaguars31.4%leaned — faked the run · +12.0 vs their 19.4%, and they swing ±7.8 week to week (+1.53× that swing) · 35 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -32% to 107%
Fourth Down room →Titans33.3%right on their number · −4.3 vs their 37.6%, and they swing ±27.1 week to week (−0.16× that swing) · 3 fourth-and-short calls
Jaguars42.9%right on their number · +11.4 vs their 31.5%, and they swing ±22.9 week to week (+0.50× that swing) · 7 fourth-and-short calls
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -1% to 49%
Tendencies room →Titans20.0%right on their number · −0.6 vs their 20.6%, and they swing ±8.3 week to week (−0.07× that swing) · 35 dropbacks
Jaguars35.0%inside their normal wobble · +7.8 vs their 27.2%, and they swing ±8.3 week to week (+0.94× that swing) · 20 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -5% to 32%
Tendencies room →Titans8.6%inside their normal wobble · −3.9 vs their 12.5%, and they swing ±6.7 week to week (−0.59× that swing) · 35 dropbacks
Jaguars15.0%right on their number · −0.9 vs their 15.9%, and they swing ±6.2 week to week (−0.15× that swing) · 20 dropbacks
TEN's play-action rate was the night's one real departure: 45.0%, 18.6 points above their season mean of 26.4% and 1.8 times their own 10.0-point weekly swing.
Who was out, who dressed and never took a snap, and who was on the field how much. Game-day list and snap counts from the weekly roster and snap feeds. Practice-squad and injured-reserve players are not shown — they were never on the game-day list.
Tennessee Titans
48 dressed · 7 inactive · 1 never used
Inactive · 7
Dressed, never took a snap · 1
Jacksonville Jaguars
48 dressed · 5 inactive
Inactive · 5
Who moved the needle
Passing · JAX
24/32, 262 yds, 2 TD, 0 INT
16.5 expected points added · +15.6% completion over expected
Passing · TEN
13/17, 158 yds, 2 TD, 0 INT
3.0 expected points added · +9.4% completion over expected
What each man’s workload was worth, against what he actually banked. Final. Usage and expected points land with the weekly sync, not live.
Calvin Ridley banked 9.6 more points than his own workload asked for.
| Player | Full PPR | Vs expected | Snap share | Routes | Targets | Air yards | Line |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trevor LawrenceQB · Starter QB | 32.2 | +5.1 | 89% | — | 0% | — | 24/32, 262 yd, 2 TD · 5 car, 17 yd, 2 TD |
| Calvin RidleyWR · Alpha Receiver | 31.1 | +9.6 | 80% | 80% | 29% | 36% | 1 car, 18 yd · 7/9, 103 yd, 2 TD |
| DeAndre HopkinsWR · Alpha Receiver | 15.9 | +7.3 | 63% | 75% | 29% | 47% | 4/5, 59 yd, 1 TD |
| Will LevisQB · Starter QB | 12.5 | +5.1 | 100% | — | 0% | — | 13/17, 158 yd, 2 TD · 4 car, 2 yd |
| Chris MooreWR · Rotational Receiver | 9.7 | +7.0 | 75% | 70% | 6% | 37% | 1 car, 38 yd · 1/1, 49 yd |
| Travis EtienneRB · Committee Back | 8.9 | −4.0 | 66% | 74% | 10% | 0% | 14 car, 52 yd · 3/3, 7 yd |
| Christian KirkWR · Featured Receiver | 7.8 | −3.6 | 76% | 83% | 19% | 27% | 3/6, 48 yd |
| Evan EngramTE · Featured Receiver | 6.9 | −4.1 | 63% | 77% | 19% | 25% | 4/6, 29 yd |
| D'Ernest JohnsonRB | 6.4 | −0.6 | 24% | 26% | 3% | 3% | 7 car, 20 yd · 1/1, 34 yd |
| Zay JonesWR · Rotational Receiver | 6.0 | +0.4 | 63% | 71% | 13% | 6% | 4/4, 20 yd |
| Derrick HenryRB · Committee Back | 5.4 | −1.4 | 63% | 60% | 12% | 0% | 10 car, 38 yd · 1/2, 6 yd |
| Tyjae SpearsRB · Receiving Back | 4.6 | −1.2 | 45% | 45% | 12% | 0% | 4 car, 14 yd · 2/2, 12 yd |
| Luke FarrellTE · Rotational Receiver | 4.1 | +1.2 | 39% | 26% | 6% | 2% | 2/2, 21 yd |
| Tank BigsbyRB | 2.1 | −1.9 | 14% | — | 0% | — | 9 car, 21 yd |
| Kyle PhilipsWR · Rotational Receiver | 2.0 | +0.7 | 28% | 30% | 6% | 0% | 1/1, 10 yd |
| Josh WhyleTE · Rotational Receiver | 1.7 | −1.2 | 43% | 50% | 12% | 8% | 1/2, 7 yd |
| Nick Westbrook-IkhineWR · Rotational Receiver | 1.7 | +0.3 | 55% | 45% | 6% | 4% | 1/1, 7 yd |
| Chigoziem OkonkwoTE | 1.6 | −1.4 | — | — | — | — | No snap count on file, so his shares read as a dash. |
| Trevon WescoTE · Rotational Receiver | 0.0 | — | 40% | 25% | 0% | — | No touches. |
1 player played under 8 snaps, so their shares read as a dash rather than a number. 1 line has no expected-points read and sits off the plane.
Expected points are modelled in full PPR, so the “vs expected” column stays in that unit whichever format the pills are set to. Switching the pills changes the points column, not the plane.
The whole game as one hundred yards. The Jaguars attack right, the Titans attack left, so a change of possession is a reversal you can see. Reading down is the order the snaps were played — not the clock, so a two-minute drill gets the same room as any other fourteen snaps. This game is final.
(7:49) (Shotgun) 8-W.Levis FUMBLES (Aborted) at JAX 43, touched at JAX 42, RECOVERED by JAX-23-F.Oluokun at JAX 43.
Q1 7:49 · Titans · 2nd & 10 at JAX 38 · gained nothing · -5.36 EP · −16.4% win probability
141 snaps placed · 10 without a recorded yard line, left off the map · 4 marked moments — the largest win-probability swings, one per drive.
Post-game film: 151 plays across 18 drives, personnel groupings on 141 snaps, the eleven on the field by name, manual charting on 146. Everything here paints once the weekly sync ingests the game — there is no live play-level feed in this product, so nothing on this page updates while a game is being played.
8 of 18 drives ended in points. The longest march was JAX moving 80 yards from the JAX 20 for a touchdown. Each bar is the ground a drive actually covered; JAX attacks right, TEN attacks left. Hatching marks a trip inside the twenty.
Offensive grouping on every pass and run. A group needs five snaps in this game before it gets a number — under that the sample is a coin flip and the cell reads a dash instead. Open any play above to see the eleven men who were actually on the field for it.
151 plays · ranked by the win probability each one moved
151 plays
Bar length is win probability the play movedHow the play was built
Nobody in motion.
Titans0
Jaguars6Titans0Jaguars7Titans0Jaguars10Titans0Jaguars13Titans0Jaguars19Titans0Jaguars20Titans0Jaguars26Titans0Jaguars27Titans6Jaguars27Titans7Jaguars27Titans7Jaguars33Titans7Jaguars34Titans13Jaguars34Titans14Jaguars34Win probability is the league play-by-play model, 98.5% of plays · a dash means none was published
Just the plays, on their own page: Titans at Jaguars, every play.
Full stat lines
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Will Levis | 13/17 | 158 | 2 | 0 | 2 | +3.0 |
| Player | Att | Yds | Avg | TD | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chris Moore | 1 | 38 | 38.0 | 0 | +2.7 |
| Derrick Henry | 10 | 38 | 3.8 | 0 | +0.6 |
| Tyjae Spears | 4 | 14 | 3.5 | 0 | −0.7 |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DeAndre Hopkins | 4 | 5 | 59 | 1 | 29% | +3.4 |
| Chris Moore | 1 | 1 | 49 | 0 | 6% | +3.0 |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Monty Rice | 4 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| K'Von Wallace | 5 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kristian Fulton | 5 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Elijah Molden |
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trevor Lawrence | 24/32 | 262 | 2 | 0 | 1 | +16.5 |
| Player | Att | Yds | Avg | TD | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Travis Etienne |
Every number on them comes from the same read as this page, and each one says in words where it came from.
How the win probability moved, the three snaps that bent it, and every drive in order.
/football/games/2023_11_TEN_JAX
The cards are drawn from the play-by-play sync, not live, and each one says so on its face.
Closing number vs result
Jaguars closed -6.5 and covered, winning by 20.
Total closed 40; the game landed 48 — over by 8.0.
Conditions and crew
Division game — familiarity tightens these matchups; closing numbers tend to be sharper.
| Will Levis | 4 | 2 | 0.5 | 0 | −4.2 |
| Tyjae Spears | 2 | 2 | 12 | 0 | 12% | −0.2 |
| Kyle Philips | 1 | 1 | 10 | 0 | 6% | +2.0 |
| Nick Westbrook-Ikhine | 1 | 1 | 7 | 0 | 6% | +0.7 |
| Josh Whyle | 1 | 2 | 7 | 0 | 12% | −1.1 |
| Derrick Henry | 1 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 12% | −0.0 |
| Chigoziem Okonkwo | 1 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 12% | −0.8 |
| Jeffery Simmons | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 6% | +1.2 |
| 3 |
| 2 |
| 0.0 |
| 0 |
| 0 |
| Harold Landry | 2 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Terrell Edmunds | 4 | 1 | 1.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Azeez Al-Shaair | 3 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Amani Hooker | 3 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jack Gibbens | 1 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Roger McCreary | 3 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| 14 |
| 52 |
| 3.7 |
| 0 |
| −2.7 |
| Tank Bigsby | 9 | 21 | 2.3 | 0 | −1.0 |
| D'Ernest Johnson | 7 | 20 | 2.9 | 0 | −2.7 |
| Calvin Ridley | 1 | 18 | 18.0 | 0 | +0.9 |
| Trevor Lawrence | 5 | 17 | 3.4 | 2 | +2.3 |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Calvin Ridley | 7 | 9 | 103 | 2 | 29% | +9.4 |
| Christian Kirk | 3 | 6 | 48 | 0 | 19% | +1.8 |
| D'Ernest Johnson | 1 | 1 | 34 | 0 | 3% | +5.1 |
| Evan Engram | 4 | 6 | 29 | 0 | 19% | +0.9 |
| Luke Farrell | 2 | 2 | 21 | 0 | 6% | +1.2 |
| Zay Jones | 4 | 4 | 20 | 0 | 13% | −0.7 |
| Travis Etienne | 3 | 3 | 7 | 0 | 10% | −0.2 |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Devin Lloyd | 3 | 6 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Foyesade Oluokun | 1 | 5 | 0.5 | 0 | 0 |
| Andre Cisco | 1 | 4 | 0.5 | 0 | 0 |
| Montaric Brown | 2 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Andrew Wingard | 2 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Travon Walker | 0 | 3 | 0.5 | 0 | 1 |
| Josh Hines-Allen | 0 | 2 | 0.5 | 0 | 0 |
| Darious Williams | 1 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Folorunso Fatukasi | 1 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Tre Herndon | 1 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
