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.
Not startedThis page's interactive half has not started on this device. Nothing was read, and nothing was invented in its place. Reload the page.
polling · 1800s tick · as of 11:23 PM ET · 13 to play · 1 final
Game Center
Game Center
2024 Week 16 · Sun, Dec 22, 2024 · Lucas Oil Stadium
FinalThe verdict · 2024 Week 16
It turned at Q1 4:11, 1st and 10, on Amani Hooker — 17.4 win-probability points to the Titans on one snap, the largest move of the game, and it still was not enough.
Indianapolis Colts 38–30. Biggest swing: Q1 4:11, Titans +17.4% win probability on one snap.
The snaps that bent it
The biggest swing of the game · Q1 4:11 · 1st and 10
Amani Hooker
Titans
(4:11) (Shotgun) 5-A.Richardson pass deep middle intended for 85-A.Ogletree INTERCEPTED by 37-A.Hooker at TEN 6. 37-A.Hooker ran ob at TEN 25 for 19 yards (64-M.Glowinski).
17.4
win-probability points on one snap
The largest move of the game. The two below are drawn against it.
What separated them
Giveaways
Colts won this one — 1 giveaway, against Titans at 3 giveaways.
Coltsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Red zone
Titans owned this one and still lost it — 3 touchdowns on 4 trips, against Colts at 2 touchdowns on 6 trips.
Titansthe gap went the other way from the scoreboard
Running the ball
Colts won this one — +0.25 expected points per carry, against Titans at +0.04 expected points per carry.
Coltsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Every snap
Colts won this one — +0.22 expected points per snap, against Titans at +0.07 expected points per snap.
Coltsthe 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 2.9 win-probability points apart on the average play, and 10 apart at the widest — with the model the more convinced about Titans.
(4:11) (Shotgun) 5-A.Richardson pass deep middle intended for 85-A.Ogletree INTERCEPTED by 37-A.Hooker at TEN 6. 37-A.Hooker ran ob at TEN 25 for 19 yards (64-M.Glowinski).
The modelled figures are the league play-by-play model's, not ours.
How the points landed
Jonathan Taylor's 65-yard rushing touchdown with 7:36 left in the 2nd put Indianapolis Colts ahead for good. The lead never changed over the 7 scores that followed.
10 scores · bar length is the lead after each one
Down-to-down truth
Titanscategory by categoryColts
Colts ahead 7–1 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, ±0.35 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 58 snaps at a 64% dropback rate against Colts’s 62 at 23%. Red-zone trips: Titans 4, Colts 6.
Colts won the down-to-down efficiency fight: 0.22 expected points added per play vs 0.07.
Derived from the play-by-play, no model
11 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.
IND's early-down pass rate, 15.2%, was the lowest of the 32 team-games charted in week 16 — 19.0 points clear of the next team along.
46 early downs this game, floor 15 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 13.0 points. · −2.7σ from their own normal
IND's pass rate over expected, −25.5 pts, was the lowest of the 32 team-games charted in week 16 — 12.1 points clear of the next team along.
62 snaps this game, floor 20 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 7.9 points. · −2.1σ from their own normal
IND's blitz rate sent, 5.4%, was the lowest of the 32 team-games charted in week 16 — 3.4 points clear of the next team along.
37 dropbacks this game, floor 12 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 10.4 points. · −1.4σ from their own normal
The season-grain rooms, pointed at this one game
11 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 -29 pts to 15 pts
Over Expected room →Titans-2.0 ptsinside their normal wobble · +4.6 vs their -6.7 pts, and they swing ±8.3 week to week (+0.56× that swing) · 56 snaps
Colts-25.5 ptsoff script — ran more than the situation asked · −16.8 vs their -8.7 pts, and they swing ±7.9 week to week (−2.12× that swing) · 62 snaps
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale 10% to 88%
Tendencies room →Titans64.4%inside their normal wobble · +9.6 vs their 54.8%, and they swing ±12.8 week to week (+0.75× that swing) · 45 early downs
Colts15.2%off script — ran early · −35.6 vs their 50.8%, and they swing ±13.0 week to week (−2.73× that swing) · 46 early downs
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -1% to 54%
Tendencies room →Titans16.2%inside their normal wobble · −5.3 vs their 21.5%, and they swing ±8.7 week to week (−0.61× that swing) · 37 dropbacks
Colts21.4%inside their normal wobble · −8.5 vs their 29.9%, and they swing ±9.0 week to week (−0.94× that swing) · 14 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -28% to 111%
Fourth Down room →Titans—Only 2 fourth-and-short calls tonight — too few to read a tendency. Their season number is 38.0%.
Colts25.0%inside their normal wobble · −16.7 vs their 41.7%, and they swing ±27.3 week to week (−0.61× that swing) · 4 fourth-and-short calls
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -7% to 55%
Tendencies room →Titans28.6%right on their number · −0.3 vs their 28.9%, and they swing ±10.0 week to week (−0.03× that swing) · 14 dropbacks
Colts5.4%leaned — sat back · −14.6 vs their 20.0%, and they swing ±10.4 week to week (−1.41× that swing) · 37 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -7% to 32%
Tendencies room →Titans7.1%leaned — stayed blocked · −4.9 vs their 12.0%, and they swing ±4.8 week to week (−1.01× that swing) · 14 dropbacks
Colts10.8%right on their number · −1.6 vs their 12.4%, and they swing ±7.5 week to week (−0.21× that swing) · 37 dropbacks
IND's early-down pass rate was the night's one real departure: 15.2%, 35.6 points below their season mean of 50.8% and 2.7 times their own 13.0-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
Indianapolis Colts
48 dressed · 7 inactive · 1 never used
Inactive · 7
Dressed, never took a snap · 1
Who moved the needle
Passing · TEN
23/34, 252 yds, 2 TD, 3 INT
3.6 expected points added · -1.6% completion over expected
Passing · IND
7/11, 131 yds, 1 TD, 1 INT
2.4 expected points added · -6.4% completion over expected
Receiving · TEN
9/11 for 81 yds, 0 TD
33% of team targets · 4.3 expected points added
What each man’s workload was worth, against what he actually banked. Final. Usage and expected points land the morning after the game, not live.
Jonathan Taylor banked 21.0 more points than his own workload asked for.
| Player | Full PPR | Vs expected | Snap share | Routes | Targets | Air yards | Line |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jonathan TaylorRB · Committee Back | 39.8 | +21.0 | 76% | 86% | 0% | — | 29 car, 218 yd, 3 TD |
| Tyjae SpearsRB · Committee Back | 21.6 | +6.4 | 61% | 62% | 12% | 0% | 10 car, 27 yd, 2 TD · 3/4, 39 yd |
| Anthony RichardsonQB · Starter QB | 20.2 | +5.5 | 100% | — | 0% | — | 7/11, 131 yd, 1 TD, 1 INT · 9 car, 70 yd, 1 TD |
| Chigoziem OkonkwoTE | 19.1 | +1.8 | — | — | — | — | No snap count on file, so his shares read as a dash. |
| Calvin RidleyWR · Rotational Receiver | 16.8 | +6.9 | 89% | 95% | 15% | 48% | 3/5, 78 yd, 1 TD |
| Josh DownsWR · Alpha Receiver | 15.1 | +9.4 | 58% | 86% | 36% | 0% | 3/4, 61 yd, 1 TD |
| Mason RudolphQB · Starter QB | 14.4 | +0.3 | 100% | — | 0% | — | 23/34, 252 yd, 2 TD, 3 INT · 4 car, 3 yd |
| Nick Westbrook-IkhineWR · Rotational Receiver | 9.7 | +1.9 | 90% | 97% | 12% | 18% | 2/4, 17 yd, 1 TD |
| Tony PollardRB · Committee Back | 8.0 | −2.3 | 39% | 38% | 12% | 0% | 8 car, 35 yd · 2/4, 5 yd |
| Adonai MitchellWR · Rotational Receiver | 4.6 | +2.7 | 89% | 93% | 9% | 38% | 1/1, 36 yd |
| Tyler BoydWR · Rotational Receiver | 4.0 | −0.3 | 51% | 57% | 9% | 9% | 2/3, 20 yd |
| Michael PittmanWR · Alpha Receiver | 3.9 | −0.6 | 98% | 100% | 27% | 31% | 2/3, 19 yd |
| Trey SermonRB | 2.5 | −2.0 | 15% | 7% | 0% | — | 8 car, 25 yd |
| Mo Alie-CoxTE · Featured Receiver | 2.5 | −0.4 | 48% | 43% | 18% | 10% | 1/2, 15 yd |
| Tyler GoodsonRB | 2.2 | +0.2 | — | — | — | — | 6 snaps — too few to rate. |
| David Martin-RobinsonTE · Rotational Receiver | 1.6 | +0.6 | — | — | — | — | 2 snaps — too few to rate. |
| Mason KinseyWR · Rotational Receiver | 1.6 | 0.0 | 23% | 27% | 3% | 3% | 1/1, 6 yd |
| Andrew OgletreeTE · Rotational Receiver | 0.0 | −2.8 | 56% | 43% | 9% | 24% | 0/1, 0 yd |
| Ashton DulinWR · Rotational Receiver | 0.0 | — | 15% | — | 0% | — | No touches. |
| Anthony GouldWR | 0.0 | — | — | — | — | — | Did not take a snap. |
| Julius ChestnutRB | 0.0 | — | — | — | — | — | Did not take a snap. |
5 players played under 8 snaps, so their shares read as a dash rather than a number. 3 lines have no expected-points read and sit 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 Colts 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.
(4:11) (Shotgun) 5-A.Richardson pass deep middle intended for 85-A.Ogletree INTERCEPTED by 37-A.Hooker at TEN 6. 37-A.Hooker ran ob at TEN 25 for 19 yards (64-M.Glowinski).
Q1 4:11 · Colts · 1st & 10 at TEN 27 · gained nothing · -5.55 EP · −14.0% win probability
158 snaps placed · 9 without a recorded yard line, left off the map · 4 marked moments — the largest win-probability swings, one per drive.
Post-game film: 167 plays across 26 drives, personnel groupings on 158 snaps, the eleven on the field by name, manual charting on 162. Everything here paints the morning after the week's games — there is no live play-level feed in this product, so nothing on this page updates while a game is being played.
10 of 26 drives ended in points. The longest march was IND moving 80 yards from the IND 20 for a touchdown. Each bar is the ground a drive actually covered; IND 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.
167 plays · ranked by the win probability each one moved
167 plays
Bar length is win probability the play movedHow the play was built
A man in motion.
Thrown on the first read.
Titans6
Colts0Titans7Colts0How the play was built
Play action, nobody in motion.
Thrown on the first read, it should have been intercepted.
Titans7Colts6Titans7Colts7How the play was built
Two in the backfield, nobody in motion.
Titans7Colts13Titans7Colts14Titans7Colts17Titans7Colts23Titans7Colts24Titans7Colts30Titans7Colts31Titans7Colts37Titans7Colts38Titans13Colts38Titans15Colts38Titans21Colts38Titans22Colts38Titans28Colts38Titans30Colts38Win 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 Colts, every play.
Full stat lines
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mason Rudolph | 23/34 | 252 | 2 | 3 | 1 | +3.6 |
| Player | Att | Yds | Avg | TD | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tony Pollard | 8 | 35 | 4.4 | 0 | +0.6 |
| Tyjae Spears | 10 | 27 | 2.7 | 2 | +1.6 |
| Mason Rudolph |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chigoziem Okonkwo | 9 | 11 | 81 | 0 | 33% | +4.3 |
| Calvin Ridley | 3 | 5 | 78 | 1 |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cedric Gray | 6 | 6 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jeffery Simmons | 3 | 6 | 1.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Harold Landry |
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anthony Richardson | 7/11 | 131 | 1 | 1 | 1 | +2.4 |
| Player | Att | Yds | Avg | TD | EPA |
|---|
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/2024_16_TEN_IND
The cards are drawn from the charted play-by-play, not live, and each one says so on its face.
Closing number vs result
Colts closed -4 and covered, winning by 8.
Total closed 42.5; the game landed 68 — over by 25.5.
Conditions and crew
Division game — familiarity tightens these matchups; closing numbers tend to be sharper.
| 4 |
| 3 |
| 0.8 |
| 0 |
| −1.6 |
| 15% |
| +7.4 |
| Tyjae Spears | 3 | 4 | 39 | 0 | 12% | +2.3 |
| Tyler Boyd | 2 | 3 | 20 | 0 | 9% | −2.6 |
| Nick Westbrook-Ikhine | 2 | 4 | 17 | 1 | 12% | +0.9 |
| David Martin-Robinson | 1 | 1 | 6 | 0 | 3% | +0.8 |
| Mason Kinsey | 1 | 1 | 6 | 0 | 3% | +0.2 |
| Tony Pollard | 2 | 4 | 5 | 0 | 12% | −6.2 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
| 0.0 |
| 0 |
| 0 |
| Jarvis Brownlee | 3 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| James Williams | 4 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Daryl Worley | 1 | 4 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Sebastian Joseph | 3 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Otis Reese | 1 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Chidobe Awuzie | 1 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Amani Hooker | 3 | 1 | 0.0 | 1 | 1 |
| Jonathan Taylor | 29 | 218 | 7.5 | 3 | +6.1 |
| Anthony Richardson | 9 | 70 | 7.8 | 1 | +4.4 |
| Trey Sermon | 8 | 25 | 3.1 | 0 | −0.1 |
| Tyler Goodson | 4 | 22 | 5.5 | 0 | +0.7 |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Josh Downs | 3 | 4 | 61 | 1 | 36% | +4.8 |
| Adonai Mitchell | 1 | 1 | 36 | 0 | 9% | +3.4 |
| Michael Pittman | 2 | 3 | 19 | 0 | 27% | +0.8 |
| Mo Alie-Cox | 1 | 2 | 15 | 0 | 18% | +1.0 |
| Andrew Ogletree | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 9% | −5.5 |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jaylon Carlies | 6 | 4 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Zaire Franklin | 2 | 4 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| DeForest Buckner | 3 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Kwity Paye | 2 | 2 | 1.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jaylon Jones | 4 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Laiatu Latu | 2 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Grover Stewart | 2 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Julian Blackmon | 3 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Samuel Womack | 3 | 0 | 0.0 | 1 | 1 |
| Kenny Moore | 2 | 1 | 0.0 | 2 | 2 |
