Closing spread
TEN -5
Total
40
Model margin
+2.7est.
TEN perspective
Push chance
1.9%est.
Win probability
- Titans
- Texans
How each play moved the game.
Matchup
Where the edges are
Season-long league percentiles for both sides, mirrored. The saturated side of a lopsided row holds the edge.
- +0.037EPA / play-0.003
- 45.3%Success rate41.7%
- +0.069EPA / dropback+0.037
- -0.012EPA / rush-0.044
- 9.6%Explosive rate9.0%
- +3.93CPOE-2.44
- 42.2%Third-down rate36.7%
- 52.0%Red-zone TD rate64.5%
- 1.91Points / drive1.83
- 2.9%Turnover rate1.7%
Bar length is league percentile, already oriented so longer is better. The saturated side of a lopsided row holds the edge; rows within ~12 points are washed as even.
The rivalry
HOU lead 25–24 since 1999
HOU have won 4 straight. Meetings average 43.4 points. TEN are 19-29-1 ATS in the series.
Possession by possession
How it unfolded
Every drive: who had the ball, how far it went, how it ended, and the score as it settled.
| Ball | Start | Plays | Yards | Result | HOU–TEN |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HOU | Q1 15:00 | 3 | 1 | Punt | 0–0 |
| TEN | Q1 13:52 | 1 | 0 | Turnover | 0–0 |
| HOU | Q1 13:42 | 3 | -7 | Field goal | 3–0 |
| TEN | Q1 12:06 | 11 | 77 | Touchdown | 3–7 |
| HOU | Q1 6:33 | 1 | 0 | Turnover | 3–7 |
| TEN | Q1 6:27 | 3 | 4 | Turnover | 3–7 |
| HOU | Q1 6:06 | 6 | 53 | Field goal | 6–7 |
| TEN | Q1 3:49 | 10 | 68 | Touchdown | 6–14 |
| HOU | Q2 14:46 | 12 | 70 | Touchdown | 12–14 |
| TEN | Q2 8:31 | 7 | 74 | Touchdown | 12–21 |
| HOU | Q2 4:36 | 5 | 41 | Punt | 12–21 |
| TEN | Q2 2:08 | 6 | 32 | Punt | 12–21 |
| HOU | Q2 0:29 | 2 | 18 | End of half | 12–21 |
| TEN | Q3 15:00 | 8 | 21 | Punt | 12–21 |
| HOU | Q3 10:17 | 4 | 1 | Punt | 12–21 |
| TEN | Q3 7:45 | 4 | 34 | Field goal | 12–24 |
| HOU | Q3 6:36 | 5 | 56 | Turnover on downs | 12–24 |
| TEN | Q3 5:12 | 3 | 12 | Punt | 12–24 |
| HOU | Q3 3:11 | 3 | -1 | Punt | 12–24 |
| TEN | Q3 1:49 | 4 | 14 | Punt | 12–24 |
| HOU | Q3 0:12 | 15 | 66 | Turnover on downs | 12–24 |
| TEN | Q4 7:05 | 3 | 4 | Punt | 12–24 |
| HOU | Q4 4:47 | 4 | 0 | Turnover | 12–24 |
| TEN | Q4 4:20 | 3 | 3 | Punt | 12–24 |
| HOU | Q4 2:30 | 5 | 11 | Opp touchdown | 12–31 |
| HOU | Q4 1:03 | 2 | 8 | End of half | 12–31 |
Box score
Individual performances
Texans
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Matt Schaub | 17/37 | 188 | 0 | 3 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Steve Slaton | 18 | 116 | 6.4 | 1 |
| Chris Taylor | 6 | 15 | 2.5 | 0 |
| Matt Schaub | 3 | 12 | 4.0 | 0 |
| Kevin Walter | 1 | 3 | 3.0 | 0 |
Titans
Passing
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kerry Collins | 14/26 | 189 | 1 | 1 |
Rushing
| Player | Car | Yds | Avg | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chris Johnson | 16 | 74 | 4.6 | 0 |
| LenDale White | 16 | 49 | 3.1 | 2 |
| Kerry Collins | 3 | 30 | 10.0 | 0 |
Where this game is likely to land
- Model
- Smooth (normal)
- Betting line
Probability of each final margin. Football scoring clusters — the spikes at 3 and 7 are real, and a smooth model misses them.
Positive margins favour Titans; negative favour Texans.
Half-point at risk
1.95%
outcomes that flip if the line moves 0.5
Model home win
56.2%
Expected total
43.7est.
Model
Where the number comes from
Each component is additive, in points of expected margin.
- Team ratings (opponent-adjusted EPA)+0.74
- Home-field advantage+2.49
- Quarterback adjustment0.00
- Rest differential-0.56
- Expected margin+2.67