Las Vegas Raiders vs Colts Match Player Stats
The las vegas raiders vs colts match player stats from October 5, 2025 tell a much clearer story than the final score alone. The Indianapolis Colts defeated the Las Vegas Raiders 40-6 at Lucas Oil Stadium, turning a competitive opening quarter into a dominant performance during the second and third quarters. Daniel Jones delivered an efficient passing performance, Jonathan Taylor scored three rushing touchdowns, and Indianapolis created two interceptions while keeping Geno Smith and the Raiders offense out of the end zone. The official NFL game record confirms the 40-6 result and the major individual statistics from the contest.
For anyone researching this matchup, the important point is that the numbers explain how Indianapolis won. The Colts did not simply benefit from one explosive play or one statistical category. They combined efficient quarterback play, four rushing touchdowns, two takeaways, four sacks, and sustained pressure to control the game after halftime.
This breakdown covers the key quarterback, rushing, receiving, defensive, kicking, and team statistics from the game. It also looks beyond the basic box score to identify which performances actually influenced the result.
Las Vegas Raiders vs Colts Match Player Stats
The game finished with Indianapolis ahead 40-6, but the scoring pattern is especially revealing.
| Team | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | Final |
| Las Vegas Raiders | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 6 |
| Indianapolis Colts | 0 | 20 | 20 | 0 | 40 |
The Raiders scored first through a field goal and were within one possession after the opening quarter. From there, however, Indianapolis scored 40 unanswered points before Las Vegas added its final three points in the fourth quarter.
The Colts’ 20-point second quarter and 20-point third quarter were the defining stretches of the game. That scoring distribution matters because it shows that Indianapolis did not merely protect an early advantage. The Colts built their lead through sustained offensive and defensive execution.
The official NFL game center lists the contest as Week 5 of the 2025 season, played October 5 at Lucas Oil Stadium.
Game Overview and What the Score Reveals
Indianapolis entered the game with a 3-1 record and improved to 4-1 after the victory. Las Vegas fell to 1-4.
The final margin was 34 points, but several statistical differences explain why the gap became so large.
The Raiders produced:
- 228 passing yards
- 106 rushing yards
- 25 completions
- 25 rushing attempts
- 0 offensive touchdowns
- 2 interceptions thrown
- 4 sacks allowed
- 0 defensive sacks
- 0 takeaways
The Colts produced:
- 221 passing yards
- 96 rushing yards
- 21 completions
- 25 rushing attempts
- 6 total touchdowns
- 0 interceptions thrown
- 4 sacks
- 2 interceptions
- 0 sacks allowed
One of the most interesting aspects is that the Raiders actually gained slightly more total offensive yards through their passing and rushing combination, based on the supplied team figures. Yet Indianapolis scored 40 points while Las Vegas scored only 6.
That is a useful reminder when evaluating player statistics: yardage alone does not determine game control.
The Colts were far more efficient at turning possessions into points. They also avoided the costly turnovers that hurt Las Vegas.
Daniel Jones Controlled the Passing Game
Daniel Jones was one of the most important individual performers in the matchup.
He completed 20 of 29 passes for 212 yards, averaging 7.3 yards per attempt. He threw two touchdown passes and no interceptions. And he was not sacked and finished with a 113.0 passer rating and an 80.6 QBR according to the supplied game data.
Those numbers are significant because Jones did not need a high-volume passing performance to control the game.
His completion rate was:
20 completions ÷ 29 attempts = approximately 69.0%
His average of 7.3 yards per attempt also shows that Indianapolis was not relying exclusively on short, low-risk throws.
Most importantly, Jones protected the football.
Against a Raiders offense that eventually threw two interceptions, the Colts quarterback finished without a passing turnover. That difference became even more important as Indianapolis built a large lead.
Daniel Jones vs Geno Smith
The quarterback comparison provides one of the clearest explanations for the result.
| Statistic | Daniel Jones | Geno Smith |
| Completions | 20 | 25 |
| Attempts | 29 | 36 |
| Completion Rate | 69.0% | 69.4% |
| Passing Yards | 212 | 228 |
| Yards/Attempt | 7.3 | 6.3 |
| TD Passes | 2 | 0 |
| Interceptions | 0 | 2 |
| Sacks | 0 | 4 |
| Sack Yards | 0 | 38 |
| Passer Rating | 113.0 | 63.2 |
| QBR | 80.6 | 15.2 |
At first glance, Geno Smith’s 228 passing yards and 25 completions may look better than Jones’ 212 yards and 20 completions.
The deeper numbers say otherwise.
Jones produced two touchdowns without throwing an interception. Smith produced no touchdown passes and threw two interceptions while taking four sacks for 38 yards.
That difference in efficiency and ball security was much more important than the 16-yard advantage Smith had in passing yardage.
Geno Smith Faced Constant Pressure
Geno Smith completed 25 of 36 attempts for 228 yards.
That gave him a 69.4 percent completion rate, almost identical to Jones’ 69.0 percent.
The major difference came in what happened after the snap.
Smith was sacked four times for a combined loss of 38 yards. Indianapolis also recorded two interceptions.
His final passing line was:
- 25 completions
- 36 attempts
- 228 yards
- 6.3 yards per attempt
- 0 touchdowns
- 2 interceptions
- 4 sacks
- 38 sack yards
- 63.2 passer rating
- 15.2 QBR
This is an important distinction for readers studying quarterback performance. A quarterback can complete nearly 70 percent of his passes and still have a poor overall game when turnovers, sacks, and scoring efficiency work against him.
Smith’s performance is a good example.
His 228 passing yards were respectable in isolation. The problem was that the Raiders could not convert those yards into touchdowns.
Jonathan Taylor Was the Colts’ Biggest Scoring Weapon
Jonathan Taylor produced one of the most important individual performances of the afternoon.
He carried the ball 17 times for 66 yards, averaging 3.9 yards per carry. His longest run went for 16 yards.
More importantly, he scored three rushing touchdowns.
That means Taylor accounted for half of Indianapolis’ six touchdowns despite gaining only 66 rushing yards.
His rushing line:
- 17 carries
- 66 yards
- 3.9 yards per carry
- 16-yard long
- 3 touchdowns
Taylor also caught three passes for 20 yards.
The value of his performance therefore cannot be measured only by rushing efficiency. His biggest contribution came in the red zone.
A 3.9-yard average is not an explosive rushing figure. Yet three touchdowns demonstrate that Indianapolis repeatedly found ways to put Taylor in productive scoring situations.
The official NFL player log also confirms Taylor’s 17 carries, 66 yards and three touchdowns against the Raiders.
Why Taylor’s Three Touchdowns Matter
A box score can make Taylor’s 66 rushing yards look ordinary.
The touchdown total tells a different story.
Indianapolis rushed for four touchdowns as a team. Taylor scored three of them, while Ameer Abdullah scored the other.
This meant the Colts did not need their running game to produce huge yardage totals. They needed it to finish drives.
That distinction helps explain the 40-point performance.
Ashton Jeanty Led the Raiders’ Running Game
Ashton Jeanty was the Raiders’ leading rusher.
He carried 14 times for 67 yards, averaging 4.8 yards per attempt. His longest run was 12 yards.
His numbers were:
- 14 carries
- 67 yards
- 4.8 yards per carry
- 12-yard long
- 0 touchdowns
Jeanty was actually one yard ahead of Taylor in rushing yardage despite receiving three fewer carries.
That comparison is useful because it demonstrates how different the two teams’ offensive results were.
Jeanty averaged 4.8 yards per carry but never reached the end zone.
Taylor averaged 3.9 yards per carry but scored three touchdowns.
The Raiders therefore received decent rushing production without receiving the scoring efficiency that Indianapolis got from its backfield.
Jeanty also caught five passes for 42 yards on seven targets, giving him 109 total yards from rushing and receiving.
Raiders Receiving: Tre Tucker Led the Way
Tre Tucker was the Raiders’ leading receiver by yardage.
He caught four passes for 62 yards on six targets. His average was 15.5 yards per reception, and his longest reception went for 33 yards.
His receiving line:
- 4 receptions
- 62 yards
- 15.5 yards per reception
- 33-yard long
- 6 targets
- 0 touchdowns
Tucker’s average of 15.5 yards per catch stands out because the Raiders’ team passing average was only 9.1 yards per reception.
That suggests Tucker supplied some of the Raiders’ more productive individual receiving plays even though the offense could not turn them into touchdowns.
Other Important Raiders Receivers
Ashton Jeanty caught five passes for 42 yards.
Albert Okwuegbunam Jr. also recorded five receptions, finishing with 36 yards.
Jakobi Meyers caught four passes for 32 yards.
Jack Bech added three receptions for 27 yards.
Ian Thomas finished with three catches for 20 yards.
The Raiders had 25 total receptions for 228 yards and no receiving touchdowns.
That last statistic is crucial.
The passing game generated yardage, but Indianapolis consistently prevented the Raiders from finishing drives with touchdowns.
Colts Receiving: Efficient Production Without Huge Volume
The Colts finished with 21 receptions for 221 yards and two receiving touchdowns.
Ashton Dulin led Indianapolis in receiving yardage with only two catches.
He recorded:
- 2 receptions
- 55 yards
- 27.5 yards per reception
- 35-yard long
- 5 targets
- 0 touchdowns
Dulin’s 27.5 yards per catch was the highest average among the listed Colts receivers.
Josh Downs was more involved in terms of volume. He caught six passes for 54 yards on eight targets.
Tyler Warren added four receptions for 44 yards and a touchdown.
Michael Pittman Jr. caught five passes for 39 yards and a touchdown.
Jonathan Taylor added three receptions for 20 yards.
The Colts therefore had several contributors rather than relying entirely on one receiver.
Josh Downs Provided Reliable Volume
Downs’ six receptions were the most by any Colts player in the supplied statistics.
His 54 yards were also second on the team.
Although he did not score, his eight targets show that he played an important role in keeping the passing offense moving.
This is a useful example of why receiving touchdowns should not be the only measure of a receiver’s contribution.
A receiver can influence a game by repeatedly converting targets into manageable gains, while another player may have fewer catches but produce a decisive touchdown.
Indianapolis had both types of contributions.
Colts Passing Was More Efficient
The Colts completed 21 of 32 passes for 221 yards.
That produced:
- 65.6 percent completion rate
- 6.9 yards per attempt
- 2 passing touchdowns
- 0 interceptions
- 0 sacks
- 106.4 team passer rating
The Raiders completed 25 of 36 passes for 228 yards.
That produced:
- 69.4 percent completion rate
- 6.3 yards per attempt
- 0 passing touchdowns
- 2 interceptions
- 4 sacks
- 63.2 rating for Smith
The Raiders completed four more passes and gained seven more passing yards.
Yet Indianapolis scored two passing touchdowns while avoiding interceptions and sacks.
That is the central lesson from the passing statistics.
Volume did not equal effectiveness.
Defensive Player Stats Tell the Other Half of the Story
Offensive numbers explain how the Colts scored.
Defensive statistics explain why the Raiders could not respond.
Indianapolis recorded:
- 4 sacks
- 2 interceptions
- 6 tackles for loss
- 8 passes defended
- 5 quarterback hits
- 78 total tackles
- 41 solo tackles
Las Vegas recorded:
- 0 sacks
- 0 interceptions
- 2 tackles for loss
- 3 passes defended
- 3 quarterback hits
- 54 total tackles
- 36 solo tackles
The difference in quarterback pressure is especially important.
Indianapolis hit Smith five times and brought him down four times.
The Raiders did not sack Jones once.
That gave Jones a much cleaner passing environment and forced Smith to operate under significantly greater pressure.
Austin Ajiake Led the Colts in Tackles
Austin Ajiake led Indianapolis with nine total tackles, including four solo tackles.
The Colts’ defensive numbers show a broad contribution rather than dependence on one defender.
The team recorded 78 total tackles, 41 of them solo.
Eight passes were defended, while two defensive players recorded interceptions.
That combination suggests Indianapolis was successful both at creating pressure and disrupting passing lanes.
Jeremy Chinn Led the Raiders in Tackles
Jeremy Chinn led Las Vegas with 10 total tackles and five solo tackles.
His tackle production was the highest individual total listed for either team.
However, tackles alone could not offset the Raiders’ lack of sacks and interceptions.
This is another useful box-score lesson.
A defender can accumulate a high tackle count because the opposing offense is consistently sustaining plays. Team defensive success depends on more than tackling volume.
Indianapolis created the game-changing plays.
Las Vegas did not.
The Two Colts Interceptions Were Critical
Indianapolis recorded two interceptions.
Mekhi Blackmon intercepted one pass and returned it 32 yards.
Laiatu Latu recorded the other interception with no return yards.
The Raiders recorded no interceptions.
This produced a turnover margin of:
Colts +2
Turnovers are especially damaging when they occur during a game that is already moving toward one-sided scoring.
Smith’s two interceptions gave Indianapolis additional opportunities and prevented Las Vegas from completing drives that could have changed the game’s momentum.
The Colts Won the Sack Battle 4-0
The sack statistic deserves special attention.
Indianapolis: 4 sacks.
Las Vegas: 0 sacks.
Smith also lost 38 yards on those sacks.
Jones was not sacked.
This created a substantial difference in offensive efficiency.
A sack can do more than reduce passing yards. It can also:
- Put an offense behind schedule
- Eliminate a potential scoring opportunity
- Create difficult down-and-distance situations
- Increase the chance of a turnover
- Force a quarterback to speed up his decision-making
The Colts’ four sacks therefore had value beyond the 38 yards shown in the box score.
Rushing Comparison: Similar Attempts, Different Results
Both teams recorded 25 rushing attempts.
That makes the comparison particularly useful.
| Category | Raiders | Colts |
| Rushing Attempts | 25 | 25 |
| Rushing Yards | 106 | 96 |
| Average | 4.2 | 3.8 |
| Rushing TDs | 0 | 4 |
Las Vegas gained 10 more rushing yards.
Indianapolis scored four rushing touchdowns.
This is one of the clearest statistical examples of the difference between yardage and scoring efficiency.
The Raiders’ rushing attack was actually more productive on a per-carry basis.
But Indianapolis was far more effective in the red zone.
Red-Zone Efficiency Was the Defining Difference
The biggest hidden story in the game is scoring efficiency.
Indianapolis scored six touchdowns.
Las Vegas scored none.
The Colts produced four rushing touchdowns and two passing touchdowns.
The Raiders produced two field goals.
This is why the game became 40-6 despite relatively similar raw offensive yardage totals.
Indianapolis consistently finished drives.
Las Vegas did not.
The Colts’ ability to convert opportunities into touchdowns was the single biggest difference between the teams.
Kicking Statistics
Daniel Carlson was responsible for all six Raiders points.
He made two of three field-goal attempts.
His longest successful field goal was 37 yards.
His line was:
- 2 field goals made
- 3 attempts
- 66.7 percent
- 37-yard long
- 6 points
The Colts used Spencer Shrader for extra points.
Shrader converted both extra-point attempts and did not attempt a field goal.
This reflects how different the scoring patterns were.
Las Vegas needed field goals because it could not finish drives with touchdowns.
Indianapolis reached the end zone six times.
Special Teams Numbers
Las Vegas recorded four kickoff returns for 100 yards, averaging 25.0 yards per return.
The Colts had three kickoff returns for 74 yards, averaging 24.7 yards per return.
The Raiders also had one punt return by Alex Bachman for eight yards.
Indianapolis recorded no punt returns.
Colts punter Rigoberto Sanchez had two punts for 101 yards, averaging 50.5 yards per punt. Both punts were placed inside the 20-yard line, with a long of 56 yards.
Special teams did not decide the game by itself, but Indianapolis’ overall field-position management complemented its offensive and defensive performance.
What the Player Stats Say About the Game Script
The numbers suggest a very specific game script.
The Raiders opened with a 3-0 lead.
Then Indianapolis found its offensive rhythm.
The Colts scored 20 points in the second quarter and another 20 in the third.
That created a 40-3 advantage before Las Vegas added a fourth-quarter field goal.
Once Indianapolis built the large lead, the game became much more difficult for the Raiders because they had to rely increasingly on the passing game.
That created more opportunities for the Colts’ pass rush and secondary.
The four sacks and two interceptions then reinforced Indianapolis’ control.
In other words, the statistics were connected.
The Colts’ scoring created the game script.
The game script increased pressure on the Raiders.
That pressure contributed to sacks and interceptions.
Those defensive plays created additional opportunities for Indianapolis.
This feedback loop is a better explanation of the 40-6 result than any single statistic.
The Most Important Individual Performances
If the game is reduced to a few players, these are the performances that deserve the most attention.
Daniel Jones
Jones completed 20 of 29 passes for 212 yards with two touchdowns and no interceptions.
His 113.0 passer rating was one of the clearest signs of Indianapolis’ efficient quarterback play.
Jonathan Taylor
Taylor ran for 66 yards and three touchdowns.
His yardage was not spectacular, but his scoring impact was enormous.
Tre Tucker
Tucker led the Raiders with 62 receiving yards and averaged 15.5 yards per catch.
He provided some of Las Vegas’ most productive receiving plays.
Geno Smith
Smith passed for 228 yards, but his two interceptions, four sacks, and zero touchdown passes severely limited the Raiders’ ability to score.
Jeremy Chinn
Chinn led the Raiders with 10 tackles.
His tackle production was notable even though the overall defense struggled to create turnovers or sacks.
Austin Ajiake
Ajiake led the Colts with nine tackles as Indianapolis produced 78 team tackles.
Mekhi Blackmon and Laiatu Latu
Each recorded an interception, giving Indianapolis the two-takeaway advantage that helped put the Raiders in a difficult position.
A Closer Look at Offensive Efficiency
One of the most useful ways to interpret the game is to compare touchdowns with yardage.
The Raiders gained:
- 228 passing yards
- 106 rushing yards
- 334 combined offensive yards from the supplied passing and rushing figures
The Colts gained:
- 221 passing yards
- 96 rushing yards
- 317 combined offensive yards from the supplied passing and rushing figures
Yet Indianapolis scored 40 points and Las Vegas scored 6.
That is a 34-point scoring difference despite the Raiders producing more combined passing and rushing yardage.
The explanation is efficiency.
Indianapolis scored touchdowns.
Las Vegas settled for field goals.
Indianapolis protected the ball.
Las Vegas threw two interceptions.
Indianapolis protected its quarterback.
Las Vegas allowed four sacks.
The game is therefore a strong example of why total yardage should be interpreted alongside turnovers, touchdowns, sacks, and field position.
What Raiders Fans Can Take From the Numbers
The Raiders’ statistics were not completely empty.
Jeanty averaged 4.8 yards per carry.
Tucker averaged 15.5 yards per reception.
Smith completed nearly 70 percent of his passes.
The team produced 106 rushing yards and 228 passing yards.
The issue was finishing and protecting possessions.
The offense generated yardage but did not score a touchdown.
The defense recorded no sacks and no interceptions.
That combination is extremely difficult to overcome against a team that scores six touchdowns.
For Las Vegas, the most important statistical lesson is that efficiency must improve in both directions.
The offense needed to turn drives into touchdowns, while the defense needed to create negative plays and takeaways.
What Colts Fans Can Take From the Numbers
Indianapolis’ biggest strength was complementary football.
The offense scored 40 points.
The defense recorded four sacks and two interceptions.
The rushing attack produced four touchdowns.
Jones avoided turnovers and sacks.
Taylor repeatedly finished scoring opportunities.
The secondary created turnovers.
The pass rush created pressure.
Those areas supported each other.
The Colts did not need one player to produce an enormous yardage total because the team consistently won the most important moments.
Why the First Quarter Was Misleading
The opening quarter ended with the Raiders ahead 3-0.
Looking only at that period would have suggested a close defensive battle.
The second and third quarters completely changed the picture.
Indianapolis scored 40 points across those two quarters.
That is significant because it shows how quickly an NFL game can change when one team begins winning multiple phases simultaneously.
The Raiders’ first-quarter field goal ultimately became their only meaningful offensive scoring before the final minutes.
The Colts, meanwhile, went from scoreless in the first quarter to scoring 20 points in each of the next two.
A Practical Way to Read These Player Stats
When evaluating a box score from this game, a useful order is:
- Start with the final score.
- Check how points were distributed by quarter.
- Compare quarterback touchdowns and turnovers.
- Compare sacks allowed and created.
- Examine rushing touchdowns.
- Look at receiving volume and explosive plays.
- Review defensive takeaways.
- Only then use total yardage to add context.
Following this order prevents one misleading statistic from dominating the analysis.
For example, Geno Smith’s 228 passing yards look respectable until the two interceptions, four sacks, zero touchdowns, and 63.2 passer rating are considered.
Similarly, Taylor’s 66 rushing yards look modest until the three touchdowns are added.
Key Takeaways From the Matchup
The most important conclusions from the las vegas raiders vs colts match player stats are straightforward.
Indianapolis won because it was more efficient, not because it overwhelmed Las Vegas in every raw yardage category.
Daniel Jones protected the football and produced two touchdown passes.
Jonathan Taylor scored three rushing touchdowns.
The Colts defense recorded four sacks and two interceptions.
Geno Smith produced 228 passing yards but threw two interceptions and was sacked four times.
Ashton Jeanty averaged 4.8 yards per carry but did not score.
Tre Tucker supplied 62 receiving yards at 15.5 yards per reception.
The Raiders gained more combined passing and rushing yards from the supplied figures, yet scored only six points.
The Colts scored 40 points through a balanced combination of passing touchdowns, rushing touchdowns, turnovers, and defensive pressure.
The most important statistical theme is therefore conversion.
Indianapolis converted offensive opportunities into touchdowns and defensive opportunities into turnovers.
Las Vegas generated yardage but failed to convert that production into touchdowns.
Frequently Asked Questions
What was the final score of the Raiders vs Colts game?
The Indianapolis Colts defeated the Las Vegas Raiders 40-6 on October 5, 2025, at Lucas Oil Stadium.
Who was the leading passer in the game?
Daniel Jones led the Colts with 20 completions on 29 attempts for 212 yards, two touchdowns, and no interceptions. Geno Smith led Las Vegas with 228 yards but threw two interceptions.
How many touchdowns did Jonathan Taylor score?
Jonathan Taylor scored three rushing touchdowns on 17 carries for 66 yards.
Who led the Raiders in rushing?
Ashton Jeanty led Las Vegas with 14 carries for 67 yards, averaging 4.8 yards per carry.
Who led the Raiders in receiving?
Tre Tucker led the Raiders with 62 receiving yards. He caught four passes on six targets and averaged 15.5 yards per reception.
How many turnovers did the Colts force?
Indianapolis intercepted Geno Smith twice. Mekhi Blackmon and Laiatu Latu each recorded one interception.
Conclusion
The las vegas raiders vs colts match player stats show why Indianapolis won by such a wide margin.
The Colts did not need overwhelming yardage totals to produce 40 points. Instead, they combined efficient quarterback play from Daniel Jones, three rushing touchdowns from Jonathan Taylor, two receiving touchdowns, four sacks, and two interceptions.
The Raiders had respectable production in several individual categories. Geno Smith completed 25 passes for 228 yards, Ashton Jeanty averaged 4.8 yards per carry, and Tre Tucker averaged 15.5 yards per reception. But those numbers did not translate into touchdowns.
The decisive difference was efficiency in critical situations.
Indianapolis protected the football, protected its quarterback, created turnovers, finished drives, and scored touchdowns. Las Vegas failed to score an offensive touchdown, threw two interceptions, allowed four sacks, and recorded no takeaways.
That combination explains the 40-6 final score far better than total yardage alone.
The game is a useful case study in how NFL player statistics should be interpreted. The biggest number is not always the most important number. Touchdowns, turnovers, sacks, and situational efficiency often explain the result more accurately than raw yardage.
