Indianapolis Colts Picks
2nd in AFC South
(2 - 3 - 0)
Next Game
Sun, Oct 18
13:00 ET
TEN @ IND Picks
NFL Picks
Josh Inglis
Betting Analyst
The Titans are the lowest-scoring offense in football, and the Survivor World will be backing the Colts this week. Tyler Warren added a fourth-down, one-yard TD last week, while leading the team with nine targets and pacing the Colts in receptions. His TD bets have returned a 78% ROI, with Warren scoring in three of his five games and being priced similarly in Week 4 to where he is this week. The Colts also have three starters in the secondary on the early-week injury report, with starting safety Kevin Winston Jr. doubtful. Buy this to 2.4x.
EV Model Rating
Star rating: 5 out of 5
The 9th-largest volume of plays in the NFL have been called by the Colts this year (a whopping 60.2 per game on average).. The air attacks of both teams (as it relates to both volume and efficiency) ought to benefit from the calm "weather" conditions (as in zero wind) inside this dome, while run volume may decline.. This year, the deficient Titans defense has allowed a colossal 80.5% Adjusted Completion Rate to opposing offenses: the biggest rate in football.. When it comes to cornerbacks in defending receivers, Tennessee's CB corps has been easily exploitable this year, projecting as the 3rd-worst in the NFL.
EV Model Rating
Star rating: 4 out of 5
Accounting for their underlying strategic approach and game dynamics, the Titans are anticipated by the model to call only 62.0 offensive plays in this contest: the 3rd-lowest number on the slate this week.. The 4th-lowest number of plays in the NFL have been called by the Tennessee Titans this year (just 52.4 per game on average).
EV Model Rating
Star rating: 5 out of 5
With a 7-point advantage, the Colts are overwhelmingly favored in this game, implying much more of an emphasis on rushing than their typical game plan.. The 9th-largest volume of plays in the NFL have been called by the Colts this year (a whopping 60.2 per game on average).. The Tennessee Titans linebackers grade out as the 3rd-worst unit in football this year in regard to run defense.
EV Model Rating
Star rating: 5 out of 5
The leading projections forecast Tony Pollard to accrue 17.5 rush attempts in this week's contest, on balance, ranking him in the 90th percentile among running backs.. Out of all running backs, Tony Pollard ranks in the 93rd percentile for rush attempts this year, taking on 64.7% of the workload in his offense's rushing attack.. With an exceptional rate of 43.0 adjusted yards per game on the ground (81st percentile), Tony Pollard ranks among the best running backs in football this year.. This year, the fierce Colts run defense has surrendered a measly 4.97 adjusted yards-per-carry to the opposition's running game: the 28th-lowest rate in the NFL.. As it relates to the safeties' role in run defense, Indianapolis's collection of safeties has been easily exploitable this year, ranking as the 3rd-worst in the NFL. in the NFL.
EV Model Rating
Star rating: 5 out of 5
The 9th-largest volume of plays in the NFL have been called by the Colts this year (a whopping 60.2 per game on average).. The air attacks of both teams (as it relates to both volume and efficiency) ought to benefit from the calm "weather" conditions (as in zero wind) inside this dome, while run volume may decline.. Josh Downs's 90.3% Route% this season conveys a noteable gain in his air attack usage over last season's 66.7% figure.. In this week's game, Josh Downs is projected by the predictive model to secure a spot in the 83rd percentile when it comes to WRs with 7.3 targets.. After averaging 44.0 air yards per game last year, Josh Downs has made big progress this year, now averaging 69.0 per game.
EV Model Rating
Star rating: 5 out of 5
The Titans are a big 7-point underdog in this week's contest, indicating an extreme passing game script.. Given their underlying traits and matchup dynamics, the leading projections forecast the Titans to pass on 60.0% of their plays: the 7th-greatest clip on the slate this week.. This game will be played in a dome—which means zero wind, increased pass volume, increased TD potential, and better passing efficiency.. When it comes to protecting the passer (and the positive effect it has on all pass game statistics), the O-line of the Titans profiles as the 3rd-best in football this year.. The Indianapolis Colts linebackers rank as the 2nd-worst LB corps in football this year in covering receivers.
EV Model Rating
Star rating: 4 out of 5
The Titans are a big 7-point underdog in this week's contest, indicating an extreme passing game script.. Given their underlying traits and matchup dynamics, the leading projections forecast the Titans to pass on 60.0% of their plays: the 7th-greatest clip on the slate this week.. This game will be played in a dome—which means zero wind, increased pass volume, increased TD potential, and better passing efficiency.. Tony Pollard has posted a whopping 2.0 air yards per game this year: 85th percentile when it comes to running backs. (That might not seem like very many, but most RBs have negative air yards because they are often targeted behind the line of scrimmage).. This year, the deficient Indianapolis Colts defense has surrendered a monstrous 51.0 adjusted receiving yards per game to opposing RBs: the worst in the NFL.
EV Model Rating
Star rating: 4 out of 5
The 9th-largest volume of plays in the NFL have been called by the Colts this year (a whopping 60.2 per game on average).. The air attacks of both teams (as it relates to both volume and efficiency) ought to benefit from the calm "weather" conditions (as in zero wind) inside this dome, while run volume may decline.. The Tennessee Titans defensive ends rank as the 3rd-worst DE corps in the NFL this year in regard to rushing the passer.
EV Model Rating
Star rating: 4 out of 5
The 9th-largest volume of plays in the NFL have been called by the Colts this year (a whopping 60.2 per game on average).. The air attacks of both teams (as it relates to both volume and efficiency) ought to benefit from the calm "weather" conditions (as in zero wind) inside this dome, while run volume may decline.. Josh Downs's 90.3% Route% this season conveys a noteable gain in his air attack usage over last season's 66.7% figure.. In this week's game, Josh Downs is projected by the predictive model to secure a spot in the 83rd percentile when it comes to WRs with 7.3 targets.. Josh Downs checks in as one of the best WRs in the game this year, averaging a fantastic 3.4 adjusted receptions per game while checking in at the 76th percentile.
EV Model Rating
Star rating: 4 out of 5
Accounting for the game dynamics and the underlying approaches of each team, this game is anticipated by the model to see just 125.5 total plays called: the 4th-lowest number among all games this week.. The air attacks of both teams (as it relates to both volume and efficiency) ought to benefit from the calm "weather" conditions (as in zero wind) inside this dome, while run volume may decline.
Consensus Picks
More ConsensusTEN @ IND · Props
| GAME & PLAYER PROPS | PROJECTIONS | ANALYSIS | BEST ODDS | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
SPREAD
|
|||||||
|
TOTAL
Under
44.5 Total
43.04 UNDER
PROJECTION
-1.5
DIFFERENCE
11.04%
EV
|
|||||||
|
PASSING YARDS
D. Jones
(QB)
o232.5 Passing Yards
257.94 OVER
PROJECTION
+25.4
DIFFERENCE
25.23%
EV
|
|||||||
|
PASSING YARDS
C. Ward
(QB)
u206.5 Passing Yards
197.45 UNDER
PROJECTION
-9.1
DIFFERENCE
20.74%
EV
|
|||||||
|
RUSHING YARDS
D. Jones
(QB)
o6.5 Rushing Yards
14.52 OVER
PROJECTION
+8.0
DIFFERENCE
26.33%
EV
|
|||||||
|
RUSHING YARDS
T. Pollard
(RB)
o52.5 Rushing Yards
64.46 OVER
PROJECTION
+12.0
DIFFERENCE
25.89%
EV
|
|||||||
|
RUSHING YARDS
C. Ward
(QB)
o10.5 Rushing Yards
13.88 OVER
PROJECTION
+3.4
DIFFERENCE
12.94%
EV
|
|||||||
|
RECEIVING YARDS
J. Downs
(WR)
o49.5 Receiving Yards
63.74 OVER
PROJECTION
+14.2
DIFFERENCE
26.25%
EV
|
|||||||
|
RECEIVING YARDS
G. Helm
(TE)
o17.5 Receiving Yards
23.03 OVER
PROJECTION
+5.5
DIFFERENCE
24.04%
EV
|
|||||||
|
RECEIVING YARDS
T. Pollard
(RB)
o7.5 Receiving Yards
10.43 OVER
PROJECTION
+2.9
DIFFERENCE
21.96%
EV
|
|||||||
|
RECEIVING YARDS
T. Warren
(TE)
o49.5 Receiving Yards
53.17 OVER
PROJECTION
+3.7
DIFFERENCE
16.25%
EV
|
|||||||
|
RECEIVING YARDS
C. Tate
(WR)
o51.5 Receiving Yards
53.50 OVER
PROJECTION
+2.0
DIFFERENCE
11%
EV
|
|||||||
|
RECEIVING YARDS
J. Taylor
(RB)
o16.5 Receiving Yards
19.17 OVER
PROJECTION
+2.7
DIFFERENCE
-4.29%
EV
|
|||||||
|
RECEPTIONS MADE
J. Downs
(WR)
o4.5 Receptions Made
5.05 OVER
PROJECTION
+0.5
DIFFERENCE
18.1%
EV
|
|||||||
|
RECEPTIONS MADE
J. Taylor
(RB)
u2.5 Receptions Made
2.38 UNDER
PROJECTION
-0.1
DIFFERENCE
14.29%
EV
|
|||||||
|
RECEPTIONS MADE
C. Tate
(WR)
u4.5 Receptions Made
4.21 UNDER
PROJECTION
-0.3
DIFFERENCE
9.98%
EV
|
|||||||
|
RECEPTIONS MADE
G. Helm
(TE)
u2.5 Receptions Made
2.32 UNDER
PROJECTION
-0.2
DIFFERENCE
-0.13%
EV
|
|||||||
|
RECEPTIONS MADE
T. Warren
(TE)
o5.5 Receptions Made
5.54 PUSH
PROJECTION
0.0
DIFFERENCE
-2.29%
EV
|
|||||||
|
RECEPTIONS MADE
T. Pollard
(RB)
o1.5 Receptions Made
1.56 OVER
PROJECTION
+0.1
DIFFERENCE
-20.27%
EV
|
|||||||
|
RUSHING ATTEMPTS
J. Taylor
(RB)
u19.5 Rushing Attempts
16.68 UNDER
PROJECTION
-2.8
DIFFERENCE
21.92%
EV
|
|||||||
|
RUSHING ATTEMPTS
T. Pollard
(RB)
o14.5 Rushing Attempts
16.12 OVER
PROJECTION
+1.6
DIFFERENCE
18.89%
EV
|
|||||||
|
PASSING ATTEMPTS
D. Jones
(QB)
o29.5 Passing Attempts
32.16 OVER
PROJECTION
+2.7
DIFFERENCE
13.65%
EV
|
|||||||
|
PASSING COMPLETIONS
D. Jones
(QB)
o20.5 Passing Completions
23.18 OVER
PROJECTION
+2.7
DIFFERENCE
16.01%
EV
|
|||||||
|
PASSING COMPLETIONS
C. Ward
(QB)
u19.5 Passing Completions
19.05 UNDER
PROJECTION
-0.5
DIFFERENCE
14.06%
EV
|
|||||||
|
ANYTIME TOUCHDOWN
D. Jones
(QB)
Anytime Touchdown
0.25 TDs
PROJECTION
-
DIFFERENCE
20.9%
EV
|
|||||||
|
ANYTIME TOUCHDOWN
G. Helm
(TE)
Anytime Touchdown
0.19 TDs
PROJECTION
-
DIFFERENCE
13.42%
EV
|
|||||||
|
ANYTIME TOUCHDOWN
T. Pollard
(RB)
Anytime Touchdown
0.43 TDs
PROJECTION
-
DIFFERENCE
10.99%
EV
|
|||||||
|
ANYTIME TOUCHDOWN
J. Taylor
(RB)
Anytime Touchdown
0.78 TDs
PROJECTION
-
DIFFERENCE
10.22%
EV
|
|||||||
|
ANYTIME TOUCHDOWN
C. Tate
(WR)
Anytime Touchdown
0.28 TDs
PROJECTION
-
DIFFERENCE
9.83%
EV
|
|||||||
|
ANYTIME TOUCHDOWN
J. Downs
(WR)
Anytime Touchdown
0.4 TDs
PROJECTION
-
DIFFERENCE
0%
EV
|
|||||||
|
ANYTIME TOUCHDOWN
T. Warren
(TE)
Anytime Touchdown
0.42 TDs
PROJECTION
-
DIFFERENCE
4.62%
EV
|
|||||||
|
ANYTIME TOUCHDOWN
C. Ward
(QB)
Anytime Touchdown
0.15 TDs
PROJECTION
-
DIFFERENCE
-19.7%
EV
|
|||||||
|
INTERCEPTIONS THROWN
C. Ward
(QB)
u0.5 Interceptions Thrown
0.45 UNDER
PROJECTION
-0.1
DIFFERENCE
15.54%
EV
|
|||||||
|
INTERCEPTIONS THROWN
D. Jones
(QB)
u0.5 Interceptions Thrown
0.38 UNDER
PROJECTION
-0.1
DIFFERENCE
12.71%
EV
|
|||||||
- Proj. Diff: Low to High
- Proj. Diff: High to Low
- Proj. Rating: Low to High
- Proj. Rating: High to Low
- +EV: Low to High
- +EV: High to Low
SPREAD
TOTAL
Under
44.5 Total
43.04 UNDER
PROJECTION
-1.5
DIFFERENCE
11.04%
EV
PASSING YARDS
D. Jones
(QB)
o232.5 Passing Yards
257.94 OVER
PROJECTION
+25.4
DIFFERENCE
25.23%
EV
PASSING YARDS
C. Ward
(QB)
u206.5 Passing Yards
197.45 UNDER
PROJECTION
-9.1
DIFFERENCE
20.74%
EV
RUSHING YARDS
D. Jones
(QB)
o6.5 Rushing Yards
14.52 OVER
PROJECTION
+8.0
DIFFERENCE
26.33%
EV
RUSHING YARDS
T. Pollard
(RB)
o52.5 Rushing Yards
64.46 OVER
PROJECTION
+12.0
DIFFERENCE
25.89%
EV
RUSHING YARDS
C. Ward
(QB)
o10.5 Rushing Yards
13.88 OVER
PROJECTION
+3.4
DIFFERENCE
12.94%
EV
RECEIVING YARDS
J. Downs
(WR)
o49.5 Receiving Yards
63.74 OVER
PROJECTION
+14.2
DIFFERENCE
26.25%
EV
RECEIVING YARDS
G. Helm
(TE)
o17.5 Receiving Yards
23.03 OVER
PROJECTION
+5.5
DIFFERENCE
24.04%
EV
RECEIVING YARDS
T. Pollard
(RB)
o7.5 Receiving Yards
10.43 OVER
PROJECTION
+2.9
DIFFERENCE
21.96%
EV
RECEIVING YARDS
T. Warren
(TE)
o49.5 Receiving Yards
53.17 OVER
PROJECTION
+3.7
DIFFERENCE
16.25%
EV
RECEIVING YARDS
C. Tate
(WR)
o51.5 Receiving Yards
53.50 OVER
PROJECTION
+2.0
DIFFERENCE
11%
EV
RECEIVING YARDS
J. Taylor
(RB)
o16.5 Receiving Yards
19.17 OVER
PROJECTION
+2.7
DIFFERENCE
-4.29%
EV
RECEPTIONS MADE
J. Downs
(WR)
o4.5 Receptions Made
5.05 OVER
PROJECTION
+0.5
DIFFERENCE
18.1%
EV
RECEPTIONS MADE
J. Taylor
(RB)
u2.5 Receptions Made
2.38 UNDER
PROJECTION
-0.1
DIFFERENCE
14.29%
EV
RECEPTIONS MADE
C. Tate
(WR)
u4.5 Receptions Made
4.21 UNDER
PROJECTION
-0.3
DIFFERENCE
9.98%
EV
RECEPTIONS MADE
G. Helm
(TE)
u2.5 Receptions Made
2.32 UNDER
PROJECTION
-0.2
DIFFERENCE
-0.13%
EV
RECEPTIONS MADE
T. Warren
(TE)
o5.5 Receptions Made
5.54 PUSH
PROJECTION
0.0
DIFFERENCE
-2.29%
EV
RECEPTIONS MADE
T. Pollard
(RB)
o1.5 Receptions Made
1.56 OVER
PROJECTION
+0.1
DIFFERENCE
-20.27%
EV
RUSHING ATTEMPTS
J. Taylor
(RB)
u19.5 Rushing Attempts
16.68 UNDER
PROJECTION
-2.8
DIFFERENCE
21.92%
EV
RUSHING ATTEMPTS
T. Pollard
(RB)
o14.5 Rushing Attempts
16.12 OVER
PROJECTION
+1.6
DIFFERENCE
18.89%
EV
PASSING ATTEMPTS
D. Jones
(QB)
o29.5 Passing Attempts
32.16 OVER
PROJECTION
+2.7
DIFFERENCE
13.65%
EV
PASSING COMPLETIONS
D. Jones
(QB)
o20.5 Passing Completions
23.18 OVER
PROJECTION
+2.7
DIFFERENCE
16.01%
EV
PASSING COMPLETIONS
C. Ward
(QB)
u19.5 Passing Completions
19.05 UNDER
PROJECTION
-0.5
DIFFERENCE
14.06%
EV
ANYTIME TOUCHDOWN
D. Jones
(QB)
Anytime Touchdown
0.25 TDs
PROJECTION
-
DIFFERENCE
20.9%
EV
ANYTIME TOUCHDOWN
G. Helm
(TE)
Anytime Touchdown
0.19 TDs
PROJECTION
-
DIFFERENCE
13.42%
EV
ANYTIME TOUCHDOWN
T. Pollard
(RB)
Anytime Touchdown
0.43 TDs
PROJECTION
-
DIFFERENCE
10.99%
EV
ANYTIME TOUCHDOWN
J. Taylor
(RB)
Anytime Touchdown
0.78 TDs
PROJECTION
-
DIFFERENCE
10.22%
EV
ANYTIME TOUCHDOWN
C. Tate
(WR)
Anytime Touchdown
0.28 TDs
PROJECTION
-
DIFFERENCE
9.83%
EV
ANYTIME TOUCHDOWN
J. Downs
(WR)
Anytime Touchdown
0.4 TDs
PROJECTION
-
DIFFERENCE
0%
EV
ANYTIME TOUCHDOWN
T. Warren
(TE)
Anytime Touchdown
0.42 TDs
PROJECTION
-
DIFFERENCE
4.62%
EV
ANYTIME TOUCHDOWN
C. Ward
(QB)
Anytime Touchdown
0.15 TDs
PROJECTION
-
DIFFERENCE
-19.7%
EV
INTERCEPTIONS THROWN
C. Ward
(QB)
u0.5 Interceptions Thrown
0.45 UNDER
PROJECTION
-0.1
DIFFERENCE
15.54%
EV
INTERCEPTIONS THROWN
D. Jones
(QB)
u0.5 Interceptions Thrown
0.38 UNDER
PROJECTION
-0.1
DIFFERENCE
12.71%
EV
TEN @ IND · Trends
Over
Under
TEN
IND
Over
Under
TEN
IND
Over
Under
Over
Under
TEN
IND
TEN
IND
TEN
IND
TEN
IND
TEN
IND
Over
Under
Over
Under
Over
Under
Over
Under
TEN
IND
TEN
IND
TEN
IND
TEN
IND
Over
Under
Over
Under