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.
connecting · reading the slate
Game Center
2026 Week 4 · Sun, Oct 4, 2026 · Tottenham Hotspur Stadium
FinalThe verdict · 2026 Week 4
It turned at Q1 14:38, 1st and 10, on Jacory Croskey-Merritt — 10.4 win-probability points to the Commanders on one snap, the largest move of the game, and it still was not enough.
Indianapolis Colts 30–13 — never really in doubt late. Biggest swing: Q1 14:38, Commanders +10.4% win probability on one snap.
The snaps that bent it
The biggest swing of the game · Q1 14:38 · 1st and 10
Jacory Croskey-Merritt
Commanders
(14:38) 22-J.Croskey-Merritt right tackle to IND 18 for 3 yards (98-A.Key; 99-D.Buckner).
10.4
win-probability points on one snap
The largest move of the game. The two below are drawn against it.
What separated them
Red zone
Colts won this one — 3 touchdowns on 3 trips, against Commanders at 0 touchdowns on 3 trips.
Coltsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Running the ball
Colts won this one — +0.28 expected points per carry, against Commanders at -0.27 expected points per carry.
Coltsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Staying on schedule
Colts won this one — 42% of snaps stayed on schedule, against Commanders at 28% of snaps stayed on schedule.
Coltsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Third down
Colts won this one — 5 of 15 on third down, against Commanders at 2 of 15 on third down.
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 13.5 win-probability points apart on the average play, and 29 apart at the widest — with the model the more convinced about Commanders.
(14:38) 22-J.Croskey-Merritt right tackle to IND 18 for 3 yards (98-A.Key; 99-D.Buckner).
The modelled figures are the league play-by-play model's, not ours.
How the points landed
Jonathan Taylor's 5-yard rushing touchdown with 3:29 left in the 2nd put Indianapolis Colts ahead for good. The lead never changed over the 6 scores that followed.
9 scores · bar length is the lead after each one
Down-to-down truth
Coltscategory by categoryCommanders
Colts ahead 4–3 on categories, including the biggest gap of the duel — red-zone touchdowns.
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, ±0.37 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: Colts ran 64 snaps at a 56% dropback rate against Commanders’s 61 at 67%. Red-zone trips: Colts 3, Commanders 3.
Colts won the down-to-down efficiency fight: -0.09 expected points added per play vs -0.25.
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.
1 of 12 readings cleared their snap floor in this game, which is under the three this column needs before it will draw the rule. The readings themselves stand.
IND's fourth-and-short go rate turned over: 66.7% in week 3 against 20.0% here — they went for it then and took the kick now, a turn of 2.6 of their own weekly swings across the two.
5 fourth-and-short calls this game, floor 3 — 5 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 17.9 points. · −1.3σ 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 -15 pts to 9 pts
Over Expected room →Colts-2.1 ptsright on their number · +0.9 vs their -3.0 pts, and they swing ±4.6 week to week (+0.20× that swing) · 64 snaps
Commanders-2.8 ptsright on their number · −1.1 vs their -1.7 pts, and they swing ±4.3 week to week (−0.27× that swing) · 61 snaps
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale 37% to 78%
Tendencies room →Colts54.2%right on their number · −1.7 vs their 55.9%, and they swing ±6.2 week to week (−0.28× that swing) · 48 early downs
Commanders54.8%right on their number · −2.8 vs their 57.6%, and they swing ±8.1 week to week (−0.35× that swing) · 42 early downs
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale 2% to 57%
Tendencies room →Colts22.2%inside their normal wobble · −7.3 vs their 29.5%, and they swing ±10.8 week to week (−0.67× that swing) · 36 dropbacks
Commanders19.5%inside their normal wobble · −2.7 vs their 22.2%, and they swing ±3.5 week to week (−0.76× that swing) · 41 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -8% to 111%
Fourth Down room →Colts20.0%leaned — took the kick · −24.0 vs their 44.0%, and they swing ±17.9 week to week (−1.34× that swing) · 5 fourth-and-short calls
Commanders60.0%right on their number · +8.8 vs their 51.3%, and they swing ±23.2 week to week (+0.38× that swing) · 5 fourth-and-short calls
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -2% to 60%
Tendencies room →Colts14.6%inside their normal wobble · −7.1 vs their 21.8%, and they swing ±8.9 week to week (−0.81× that swing) · 41 dropbacks
Commanders50.0%inside their normal wobble · +4.4 vs their 45.6%, and they swing ±4.6 week to week (+0.95× that swing) · 36 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -8% to 33%
Tendencies room →Colts24.4%leaned — got home · +12.3 vs their 12.1%, and they swing ±8.0 week to week (+1.54× that swing) · 41 dropbacks
Commanders13.9%right on their number · +0.5 vs their 13.4%, and they swing ±2.7 week to week (+0.17× that swing) · 36 dropbacks
IND's sack or hit rate was the night's one real departure: 24.4%, 12.3 points above their season mean of 12.1% and 1.5 times their own 8.0-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.
Indianapolis Colts
48 dressed · 6 inactive · 2 never used
Inactive · 6
Dressed, never took a snap · 2
Washington Commanders
48 dressed · 7 inactive · 1 never used
Inactive · 7
Dressed, never took a snap · 1
Who moved the needle
Passing · WAS
15/33, 186 yds, 1 TD, 1 INT
-10.2 expected points added · -11.8% completion over expected
Passing · IND
19/34, 143 yds, 0 TD, 1 INT
-13.4 expected points added · -5.2% completion over expected
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.
Treylon Burks banked 6.0 more points than his own workload asked for.
| Player | Full PPR | Vs expected | Snap share | Routes | Targets | Air yards | Line |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jonathan TaylorRB · Bell Cow Back | 22.7 | +5.2 | 71% | — | 14% | 0% | 20 car, 95 yd, 2 TD · 1/4, 2 yd |
| Treylon BurksWR · Rotational Receiver | 11.7 | +6.0 | 59% | — | 8% | 21% | 1/3, 47 yd, 1 TD |
| Athan KaliakmanisQB · Starter QB | 11.0 | −1.4 | 84% | — | 0% | — | 15/33, 186 yd, 1 TD, 1 INT · 3 car, 16 yd |
| Dyami BrownWR · Rotational Receiver | 9.5 | +2.2 | 56% | — | 11% | 24% | 3/4, 65 yd |
| Laquon TreadwellWR · Featured Receiver | 9.2 | 0.0 | 85% | — | 21% | 36% | 5/6, 42 yd |
| Tyler WarrenTE · Rotational Receiver | 9.1 | +1.2 | 85% | — | 17% | 16% | 5/5, 41 yd |
| Stefon DiggsWR · Alpha Receiver | 8.5 | −4.2 | 66% | — | 25% | 22% | 5/9, 35 yd |
| Daniel JonesQB · Starter QB | 7.9 | −4.0 | 100% | — | 0% | — | 19/34, 143 yd, 1 INT · 4 car, 2 yd, 1 TD |
| Jacory Croskey-MerrittRB · Committee Back | 7.0 | −3.7 | 45% | — | 11% | 2% | 9 car, 15 yd · 2/4, 35 yd |
| Ashton DulinWR · Featured Receiver | 5.9 | −3.1 | 35% | — | 21% | 29% | 3/6, 29 yd |
| Marcus MariotaQB | 5.3 | +2.5 | 16% | — | 0% | — | 3/4, 46 yd · 1 car, 35 yd |
| Antonio WilliamsWR · Featured Receiver | 5.1 | −6.9 | 69% | — | 22% | 23% | 3/8, 21 yd |
| Austin EkelerRB | 5.0 | +0.6 | 27% | — | 6% | 0% | 4 car, 29 yd · 1/2, 11 yd |
| Seth McGowanRB | 4.8 | −1.2 | 29% | — | 7% | 4% | 6 car, 31 yd · 1/2, 7 yd |
| Josh DownsWR · Rotational Receiver | 4.6 | −0.6 | 77% | — | 14% | 0% | 3/4, 16 yd |
| Chig OkonkwoTE · Rotational Receiver | 2.5 | −3.0 | 58% | — | 11% | 5% | 2/4, 5 yd |
| Deion BurksWR · Rotational Receiver | 1.6 | −1.4 | 23% | — | 7% | 25% | 1/2, 6 yd |
| Craig ReynoldsRB | 0.4 | −0.3 | — | — | — | — | 6 snaps — too few to rate. |
| Kaytron AllenRB | 0.1 | −1.9 | 19% | — | 0% | — | 3 car, 1 yd |
| Anthony GouldWR | 0.0 | — | — | — | — | — | Did not take a snap. |
| Andrew OgletreeTE · Rotational Receiver | 0.0 | — | 29% | — | 0% | — | No touches. |
| Nick Westbrook-IkhineWR · Rotational Receiver | 0.0 | — | 17% | — | 0% | — | No touches. |
| Colson YankoffTE · Rotational Receiver | 0.0 | −1.8 | — | — | — | — | 7 snaps — too few to rate. |
| Jaylin LaneWR · Rotational Receiver | 0.0 | — | — | — | — | — | 1 snap — too few to rate. |
4 players played under 8 snaps, so their shares read as a dash rather than a number. 4 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 Commanders attack right, the Colts 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.
(10:47) (Shotgun) 16-A.Kaliakmanis pass deep left to 13-T.Burks for 47 yards, TOUCHDOWN.
Q3 10:47 · Commanders · 1st & 10 at IND 47 · gained 47 · +4.24 EP · +13.0% win probability
161 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: 171 plays across 25 drives, manual charting on 166. 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.
9 of 25 drives ended in points. The longest march was WAS moving 70 yards from the WAS 19 for a field goal. Each bar is the ground a drive actually covered; WAS attacks right, IND attacks left. Hatching marks a trip inside the twenty.
No personnel grouping was recorded for this game, so the film shows the play detail without a groupings breakdown rather than a column of dashes.
171 plays · ranked by the win probability each one moved
171 plays
Bar length is win probability the play moved
Colts0
Commanders3Colts0Commanders6Colts6Commanders6Colts7Commanders6Colts10Commanders6Colts16Commanders6Colts17Commanders6How the play was built
Shotgun, two in the backfield, play action, a man in motion.
Four rushed the passer, eight in the box.
Thrown on the first read.
Colts17Commanders12Colts17Commanders13Colts20Commanders13Colts26Commanders13Colts27Commanders13Colts30Commanders13Win 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: Colts at Commanders, every play.
Full stat lines
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Daniel Jones | 19/34 | 143 | 0 | 1 | 2 | −13.4 |
| Player | Att | Yds | Avg | TD | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jonathan Taylor | 20 | 95 | 4.8 | 2 | +3.6 |
| Seth McGowan | 6 | 31 | 5.2 | 0 | +1.6 |
| Daniel Jones |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Laquon Treadwell | 5 | 6 | 42 | 0 | 21% | +2.3 |
| Tyler Warren | 5 | 5 | 41 | 0 | 17% |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Justin Walley | 5 | 3 | 1.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Akeem Davis-Gaither | 5 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jaylon Carlies |
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Athan Kaliakmanis | 15/33 | 186 | 1 | 1 | 1 | −10.2 |
| Marcus Mariota | 3/4 | 46 | 0 |
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/2026_04_IND_WAS
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 -4.5 and covered, winning by 17.
Total closed 46.5; the game landed 43 — under by 3.5.
Conditions and crew
| 4 |
| 2 |
| 0.5 |
| 1 |
| +2.7 |
| +2.3 |
| Ashton Dulin | 3 | 6 | 29 | 0 | 21% | −5.0 |
| Josh Downs | 3 | 4 | 16 | 0 | 14% | +0.5 |
| Seth McGowan | 1 | 2 | 7 | 0 | 7% | +0.0 |
| Deion Burks | 1 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 7% | −1.9 |
| Jonathan Taylor | 1 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 14% | −2.1 |
| 3 |
| 2 |
| 0.0 |
| 1 |
| 1 |
| Bryce Boettcher | 2 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Austin Ajiake | 2 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Caden Curry | 2 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| DeForest Buckner | 2 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Laiatu Latu | 1 | 2 | 0.5 | 0 | 0 |
| A.J. Haulcy | 2 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Sauce Gardner | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| 0 |
| 1 |
| +0.7 |
| Player | Att | Yds | Avg | TD | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Marcus Mariota | 1 | 35 | 35.0 | 0 | +2.4 |
| Austin Ekeler | 4 | 29 | 7.3 | 0 | +1.7 |
| Athan Kaliakmanis | 3 | 16 | 5.3 | 0 | −1.3 |
| Jacory Croskey-Merritt | 9 | 15 | 1.7 | 0 | −3.7 |
| Craig Reynolds | 2 | 4 | 2.0 | 0 | −3.0 |
| Kaytron Allen | 3 | 1 | 0.3 | 0 | −1.9 |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dyami Brown | 3 | 4 | 65 | 0 | 11% | +6.0 |
| Treylon Burks | 1 | 3 | 47 | 1 | 8% | +1.7 |
| Jacory Croskey-Merritt | 2 | 4 | 35 | 0 | 11% | −0.5 |
| Stefon Diggs | 5 | 9 | 35 | 0 | 25% | −3.7 |
| Antonio Williams | 3 | 8 | 21 | 0 | 22% | −6.7 |
| Brandon Coleman | 1 | 1 | 13 | 0 | 3% | +0.8 |
| Austin Ekeler | 1 | 2 | 11 | 0 | 6% | +0.7 |
| Chig Okonkwo | 2 | 4 | 5 | 0 | 11% | −2.4 |
| Colson Yankoff | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3% | −0.5 |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Amik Robertson | 7 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Sonny Styles | 4 | 4 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jeremy Reaves | 4 | 4 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Rasul Douglas | 5 | 1 | 0.0 | 1 | 1 |
| Quan Martin | 3 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Frankie Luvu | 1 | 4 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| K'Lavon Chaisson | 0 | 4 | 0.5 | 0 | 0 |
| Daron Payne | 3 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Javon Kinlaw | 3 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 2 |
| Percy Butler | 1 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
