Miami dolphins vs Indianapolis colts match player stats
The miami dolphins vs indianapolis colts match player stats provide a useful snapshot of the matchup between two AFC teams, including passing, rushing, receiving, tackles, sacks, injuries, team records, recent results, and betting information. The available game data lists Miami and Indianapolis meeting at Lucas Oil Stadium in Indianapolis on November 15, 2026, with Malik Willis and Daniel Jones listed as the respective passing leaders, while Jonathan Taylor leads Indianapolis on the ground. Because the supplied ESPN data is associated with a game dated November 15, 2026, and the current date is September 16, 2026, these figures should be treated carefully as the available matchup data rather than as a completed-game box score.
Miami Dolphins vs Indianapolis Colts Match Player Stats
For readers searching for miami dolphins vs indianapolis colts match player stats, the most important starting point is understanding what the available numbers actually represent.
The supplied ESPN data identifies the matchup as Miami Dolphins vs. Indianapolis Colts, scheduled for November 15, 2026, at Lucas Oil Stadium in Indianapolis, Indiana. CBS is listed as the television network, and the ESPN game ID is 401873059.
The available player figures include passing, rushing, receiving, tackles, and sacks. They also provide injury information and recent team results, which can help put individual numbers into context.
Key Player Statistics
| Category | Miami Dolphins | Indianapolis Colts |
| Passing leader | Malik Willis | Daniel Jones |
| Passing yards | 220 | 166 |
| Passing attempts/completions | 27/15 | 31/19 |
| Passing touchdowns | Not listed | 1 |
| Interceptions | 1 | 1 |
| Rushing leader | Malik Willis | Jonathan Taylor |
| Rushing attempts | 6 | 19 |
| Rushing yards | 39 | 98 |
| Rushing touchdowns | 1 | 2 |
| Receiving leader | Caleb Douglas | Alec Pierce |
| Receptions | 5 | 4 |
| Receiving yards | 94 | 61 |
| Sack leader | None listed | DeForest Buckner, 0.5 |
| Tackles leader | Jacob Rodriguez, 14 | Akeem Davis-Gaither, 8 |
One important point is that these numbers should not automatically be described as final statistics from a completed November 15 game. The supplied source data labels the page as a live-score page for November 15, 2026, while that date is still in the future relative to September 16, 2026. That creates a timing issue in the supplied dataset.
For that reason, the figures are best presented as the player data supplied for the matchup rather than claiming that these were produced during a completed game.
Malik Willis Passing and Rushing Numbers
Malik Willis is listed as Miami’s passing leader in the supplied data.
His listed passing line is:
- 15 completions
- 27 attempts
- 220 passing yards
- 1 interception
That works out to a completion percentage of approximately 55.6%.
Willis is also listed as Miami’s rushing leader, with:
- 6 rushing attempts
- 39 rushing yards
- 1 rushing touchdown
His rushing production is therefore an important part of the overall statistical picture.
Combining the listed passing and rushing figures gives Willis 259 yards of total offense, consisting of 220 passing yards and 39 rushing yards.
The numbers also illustrate why quarterback statistics should not be judged from passing yards alone. A quarterback who contributes on the ground can add another dimension to an offense, particularly when designed runs, scrambles, or quarterback keepers are part of the offensive approach.
At the same time, the supplied information does not provide enough detail to calculate every advanced quarterback metric. For example, it does not list passing touchdowns for Willis, sacks taken, rushing first downs, or individual drive results.
Daniel Jones Passing Statistics
Daniel Jones is listed as Indianapolis’ passing leader.
His supplied statistics are:
- 19 completions
- 31 attempts
- 166 passing yards
- 1 passing touchdown
- 1 interception
His completion percentage is approximately 61.3%.
The listed numbers show a different statistical profile from Willis. Jones has more completions and attempts but fewer passing yards.
The difference in passing volume is significant. Jones is listed with 31 attempts compared with Willis’s 27. That means Indianapolis has four more listed pass attempts in the supplied data, while Miami has 54 more passing yards.
The raw yardage difference is therefore substantial, but it should not be interpreted in isolation. Passing yards can be influenced by completion depth, play selection, yards after catch, game situation, and the number of rushing opportunities available to the offense.
Jones also has one touchdown and one interception in the supplied information. That produces a 1:1 touchdown-to-interception ratio.
Jonathan Taylor Rushing Statistics
Jonathan Taylor is the leading Indianapolis rusher in the supplied data.
His listed line is:
- 19 carries
- 98 rushing yards
- 2 rushing touchdowns
Taylor’s average yards per carry can be calculated from those figures:
98 rushing yards ÷ 19 carries = 5.16 yards per carry
That is an important number when examining the rushing profile.
Taylor’s two listed rushing touchdowns also give Indianapolis a major source of scoring production on the ground.
Compared with Miami’s listed rushing leader, Taylor has considerably more rushing volume. Willis has six carries for 39 yards, while Taylor has 19 carries for 98 yards.
The difference is 13 carries and 59 rushing yards.
This makes the rushing comparison one of the clearest statistical contrasts in the supplied matchup data.
Taylor’s Efficiency
Taylor’s 5.16 yards per carry is calculated directly from the provided numbers.
However, average yards per carry does not explain everything about a running back’s performance. A complete evaluation would ideally include rushing first downs, explosive runs, red-zone attempts, fumbles, broken tackles, and rushing success by down and distance.
Those additional statistics are not included in the supplied data, so they should not be invented or assumed.
Caleb Douglas and Alec Pierce as Receiving Leaders
Caleb Douglas is listed as Miami’s receiving leader with:
- 5 receptions
- 94 receiving yards
That produces an average of 18.8 yards per reception.
Alec Pierce is listed as Indianapolis’ receiving leader with:
- 4 receptions
- 61 receiving yards
His average is 15.25 yards per reception.
The comparison shows that Douglas has 33 more receiving yards despite having only one more reception.
That difference is largely explained by the average gain per reception. Douglas’s listed average is 18.8 yards, while Pierce’s is 15.25 yards.
These figures suggest that both players are contributing meaningful yardage per catch, but the available data does not identify targets, longest reception, receiving touchdowns, yards after catch, or first downs.
Those missing figures matter because receptions alone do not show how heavily a receiver was involved in an offense.
Miami’s Defensive Leaders
Jacob Rodriguez is listed as Miami’s tackle leader with 14 tackles.
That is the highest individual tackle figure shown in the supplied matchup data.
The Miami defensive information does not list a sack leader. Instead, the supplied field states that no Miami sacks leader is listed.
This distinction matters. It would be inaccurate to conclude that Miami recorded no sacks based solely on this field. The correct statement is that the supplied data does not identify a Miami sack leader.
Rodriguez’s 14 tackles also should not automatically be interpreted as evidence of superior or inferior defensive performance. Tackles depend on defensive role, snap count, opponent play volume, and the location of plays on the field.
A linebacker or safety can accumulate tackles because an opponent runs frequently or completes many short passes.
Indianapolis Defensive Leaders
Akeem Davis-Gaither is listed as Indianapolis’ tackle leader with 8 tackles.
DeForest Buckner is listed as the Colts’ sack leader with 0.5 sacks.
The half-sack is particularly notable because sacks are frequently divided between two defenders when both receive statistical credit.
The supplied data only identifies Buckner with 0.5 sacks. It does not provide a second player who shares the other half of a sack.
Therefore, the safest presentation is simply to report the listed figure rather than infer additional defensive statistics.
Miami Dolphins vs Indianapolis Colts Team Context
Individual player numbers make more sense when they are considered alongside team-level results.
The supplied records list both teams at 0-1.
Miami is listed with:
- 0-1 overall
- 0-1 away
- 13 points scored
- 27 points allowed
Indianapolis is listed with:
- 0-1 overall
- 0-1 home
- 23 points scored
- 41 points allowed
The figures indicate that both teams enter the listed matchup with one loss in the supplied record.
The context is different, however. Miami’s listed point differential is minus 14, while Indianapolis’ is minus 18.
Miami’s Recent Results
The supplied recent results for Miami are:
| Date | Result | Opponent | Score |
| September 14, 2026 | Loss | Raiders | 27-13 |
| August 29, 2026 | Loss | Falcons | 17-12 |
| August 23, 2026 | Loss | Giants | 26-3 |
| August 15, 2026 | Loss | Commanders | 20-7 |
| January 5, 2026 | Loss | Patriots | 38-10 |
The five listed results show Miami losing each of the five games included in the supplied dataset.
The scores also show a range of offensive production. Miami scored 13 points against the Raiders, 12 against Atlanta, 3 against New York, 7 against Washington, and 10 against New England.
That makes offensive consistency an important statistical area to watch when interpreting the matchup.
Indianapolis’ Recent Results
The supplied Colts results are:
| Date | Result | Opponent | Score |
| September 13, 2026 | Loss | Ravens | 41-23 |
| August 29, 2026 | Loss | Lions | 25-16 |
| August 22, 2026 | Loss | Falcons | 34-6 |
| August 14, 2026 | Tie | Patriots | 13-13 |
| January 4, 2026 | Loss | Texans | 38-30 |
Indianapolis is therefore listed with four losses and one tie across those five results.
The Colts allowed at least 25 points in four of the five listed games.
The most recent listed result was a 41-23 loss to Baltimore, in which Indianapolis scored 23 points but allowed 41.
Again, these figures are useful context, but they should not be treated as a substitute for the actual November 15 game box score.
Comparing the Offensive Profiles
The available player numbers create an interesting contrast.
Miami’s listed passing leader has more passing yards, while Indianapolis’ listed quarterback has more completions and attempts.
Miami’s listed rushing leader is its quarterback, while Indianapolis’ leader is a traditional running back in Jonathan Taylor.
The receiving comparison also favors Miami in the supplied individual totals, with Douglas listed at 94 yards compared with Pierce at 61.
Here is the direct comparison:
| Statistic | Miami | Indianapolis |
| Passing yards | 220 | 166 |
| Passing completions | 15 | 19 |
| Passing attempts | 27 | 31 |
| Rushing yards by listed leader | 39 | 98 |
| Rushing attempts by listed leader | 6 | 19 |
| Rushing TDs by listed leader | 1 | 2 |
| Receiving yards by listed leader | 94 | 61 |
| Receptions by listed leader | 5 | 4 |
This table should be read as a comparison of the supplied player figures, not as a complete team statistical summary.
For example, it does not tell us Miami’s total rushing yards, Indianapolis’ total receiving yards, total offensive plays, time of possession, turnovers by all players, or third-down efficiency.
Defensive Statistics That Matter
Defensive player statistics can be especially useful when analyzing a matchup because the same offensive yardage total can be produced in very different ways.
Miami’s listed tackle leader is Jacob Rodriguez with 14 tackles.
Indianapolis’ listed tackle leader is Akeem Davis-Gaither with 8 tackles.
The difference is six tackles.
Indianapolis also has DeForest Buckner listed with 0.5 sacks, while no Miami sack leader is listed in the supplied data.
However, tackle totals and sacks should be combined with team defensive statistics before drawing broad conclusions.
Useful defensive metrics include:
- Total sacks
- Tackles for loss
- Interceptions
- Forced fumbles
- Defensive touchdowns
- Third-down conversion rate allowed
- Red-zone touchdown rate
- Passing yards allowed
- Rushing yards allowed
- Explosive plays allowed
Those numbers are not all included in the supplied information.
Injury Report Context
Injuries can have a direct effect on how player statistics should be interpreted.
The supplied Miami injury information lists:
- Kyle Louis: Out, knee
- Ronnie Harrison Jr.: Questionable, hamstring
- Trey Moore: Injured reserve return, ankle
- Kenneth Grant: Injured reserve return, leg
- Storm Duck: PUP return, knee
The Indianapolis list includes:
- Austin Ajiake: Questionable, hamstring
- Alec Pierce: Questionable, wrist
- Carson Towt: Injured reserve, undisclosed
- Sean McKeon: Questionable, undisclosed
- D.J. Montgomery: Injured reserve, abdomen
These statuses are important because availability can change before kickoff.
A player listed as questionable is not necessarily ruled out. Likewise, a player designated for a return from injured reserve or the physically unable to perform list may have a different status by game day.
A particularly relevant name in the supplied Indianapolis data is Alec Pierce because he is also listed as the Colts’ receiving leader.
That means his availability could be important when evaluating Indianapolis’ listed receiving production.
What the Player Numbers Reveal
The supplied statistics provide several useful observations without requiring unsupported assumptions.
First, the Miami passing leader has more passing yards than the Indianapolis passing leader.
Second, Indianapolis’ listed quarterback has more completions despite attempting only four more passes.
Third, Jonathan Taylor has considerably more rushing volume than Malik Willis.
Fourth, Taylor’s listed 98 rushing yards come with two touchdowns, giving Indianapolis a significant amount of production from its leading rusher.
Fifth, Caleb Douglas has the highest receiving-yard total among the two listed receiving leaders.
Sixth, Miami’s leading tackler has six more tackles than Indianapolis’ leading tackler in the supplied data.
These are direct comparisons based on the provided figures.
They do not establish which team will perform better in the future, nor do they replace a completed box score.
Understanding the Matchup Data Correctly
One of the most important parts of reading sports statistics is distinguishing between confirmed historical results and information associated with an upcoming game.
The supplied page title says “Dolphins vs. Colts (Nov 15, 2026) Live Score – ESPN.”
The listed game date is November 15, 2026.
The current date is September 16, 2026.
Therefore, November 15 has not yet occurred.
This creates an important limitation for anyone publishing the data.
A page should not describe the listed player figures as though they are confirmed final statistics from the November 15 game. Doing so would create a factual problem.
Instead, the numbers can be presented as the available matchup data supplied for the game, while clearly distinguishing them from final postgame statistics.
This is particularly important for sports content because readers commonly search for a final box score after a game. A useful article needs to tell readers whether the figures are pregame, live, projected, or final.
Game Information
The supplied matchup information lists the following details:
| Item | Information |
| Teams | Miami Dolphins vs. Indianapolis Colts |
| Date | November 15, 2026 |
| Venue | Lucas Oil Stadium |
| Location | Indianapolis, Indiana |
| Television | CBS |
| ESPN Game ID | 401873059 |
The supplied odds are also listed as:
| Team | Spread | Moneyline |
| Miami Dolphins | +6.5 (-110) | +245 |
| Indianapolis Colts | -6.5 (-110) | -305 |
The listed total is 47.5 points, with Miami associated with an over price of -110 and Indianapolis associated with an under price of -110 in the supplied data.
These betting figures are market information, not player statistics, and they should be kept separate from the factual statistical analysis.
ESPN Pick’em and Matchup Predictor
The supplied data lists an ESPN Matchup Predictor figure of:
- Miami Dolphins: 24.5%
- Indianapolis Colts: 75.3%
It also lists ESPN Pick’em selections of:
- Dolphins: 11%
- Colts: 89%
These numbers measure different things and should not be treated as interchangeable.
A matchup predictor is a model-based estimate, while Pick’em percentages reflect selections made by participants.
Neither figure is a player statistic.
They are better used as contextual information alongside the statistical data rather than as evidence about individual player performance.
How to Read the Passing Numbers
When evaluating the passing side of this matchup, several figures should be considered together.
For Miami, Willis is listed with 220 yards on 27 attempts.
His yards per attempt, based on those figures, is approximately 8.15 yards per attempt.
For Indianapolis, Jones is listed with 166 yards on 31 attempts.
His yards per attempt is approximately 5.35.
That creates a difference of about 2.8 yards per attempt between the two listed quarterbacks.
However, this calculation should not be interpreted as a complete measure of quarterback quality. Yards per attempt can be affected by offensive design, receiver performance, defensive coverage, game conditions, and the type of passes attempted.
The interception count also matters. Both quarterbacks are listed with one interception.
Jones additionally has one listed passing touchdown.
How to Read the Rushing Numbers
The rushing comparison is more straightforward.
Willis:
39 yards ÷ 6 carries = 6.5 yards per carry
Taylor:
98 yards ÷ 19 carries = 5.16 yards per carry
Willis has the higher average in the supplied numbers, while Taylor has the greater total volume and more rushing yards.
This is a useful example of why efficiency and volume should be separated.
A player can have a higher average while another player has more total production because of a larger workload.
Taylor’s 19 carries also provide a much larger sample of rushing attempts than Willis’s six.
How to Read the Receiving Numbers
Douglas has 94 yards on five receptions.
Pierce has 61 yards on four receptions.
Douglas therefore has:
18.8 yards per reception
Pierce has:
15.25 yards per reception
The supplied figures indicate that both listed receivers generate significant yardage per catch.
But without target totals, it is impossible to know which receiver had the larger overall share of the passing offense.
For example, five receptions on five targets and five receptions on ten targets represent very different levels of opportunity.
That is why a complete receiving analysis normally includes targets, catch rate, yards after catch, first downs, touchdowns, and air-yard information.
Why Recent Form Matters
Player statistics do not exist in isolation.
A quarterback’s numbers can be influenced by offensive line play, receiver availability, game script, and rushing efficiency.
A running back’s workload can change because of score differential or offensive philosophy.
A receiver’s production can change because of coverage assignments and quarterback decision-making.
The supplied recent results show both teams coming from difficult stretches, but the data alone does not explain all the reasons behind those results.
For a deeper analysis, game-by-game offensive and defensive statistics would be needed.
A Practical Way to Track the Final Box Score
Once a game is actually completed, readers looking for miami dolphins vs indianapolis colts match player stats should focus on the official final box score rather than live or pregame information.
The most useful categories to check are:
- Passing completions and attempts
- Passing yards
- Passing touchdowns
- Interceptions
- Rushing attempts and yards
- Rushing touchdowns
- Receptions and targets
- Receiving yards
- Receiving touchdowns
- Tackles
- Sacks
- Interceptions
- Fumbles
- Team turnovers
- Total offensive yards
This provides a more complete statistical picture than looking at one player category.
Important Data Limitation
There is a clear date issue in the supplied information.
The matchup is listed for November 15, 2026, but the current date is September 16, 2026.
At the same time, the dataset contains player leader statistics and a live-score page title.
Because of that conflict, this article deliberately does not label the supplied player figures as the final statistics of the November 15 game.
That distinction protects the accuracy of the article and prevents readers from confusing matchup information with a completed-game box score.
When a final official box score becomes available after the game, the article should be updated with confirmed statistics and the relevant game result.
Frequently Asked Questions
What are the Miami Dolphins vs Indianapolis Colts match player stats?
The supplied matchup data lists Malik Willis as Miami’s passing and rushing leader, Caleb Douglas as the receiving leader, and Jacob Rodriguez as the tackle leader. For Indianapolis, Daniel Jones is the passing leader, Jonathan Taylor is the rushing leader, Alec Pierce is the receiving leader, and Akeem Davis-Gaither leads in tackles.
How many passing yards is Malik Willis listed with?
Malik Willis is listed with 220 passing yards on 15 completions from 27 attempts, along with one interception.
How many rushing yards does Jonathan Taylor have in the supplied data?
Jonathan Taylor is listed with 98 rushing yards on 19 carries and two rushing touchdowns.
Who is listed as Miami’s leading receiver?
Caleb Douglas is listed as Miami’s receiving leader with five receptions for 94 yards.
Who leads Indianapolis in receiving?
Alec Pierce is listed as Indianapolis’ receiving leader with four receptions for 61 yards.
Are these final statistics from the November 15, 2026 game?
Not based on the supplied information. The listed game date is November 15, 2026, while the current date is September 16, 2026. Therefore, these figures should not be presented as confirmed final postgame statistics.
Conclusion
The available miami dolphins vs indianapolis colts match player stats offer a detailed look at the individual figures associated with the listed matchup. Malik Willis is shown with 220 passing yards and 39 rushing yards, while Daniel Jones is listed with 166 passing yards, one touchdown, and one interception. Jonathan Taylor leads the supplied rushing figures with 98 yards and two touchdowns, while Caleb Douglas and Alec Pierce are listed as the respective receiving leaders.
The defensive data lists Jacob Rodriguez with 14 tackles for Miami, Akeem Davis-Gaither with eight tackles for Indianapolis, and DeForest Buckner with 0.5 sacks for the Colts.
The most important publishing consideration is the date discrepancy. Since the supplied matchup is dated November 15, 2026, while the current date is September 16, 2026, these numbers should not be described as a completed-game box score. Keeping that distinction clear makes the statistical presentation more accurate and useful.
For readers analyzing the matchup, the strongest approach is to consider passing efficiency, rushing workload, receiving production, defensive activity, injuries, recent results, and team context together. Individual numbers provide valuable detail, but they become much more meaningful when the surrounding game and data limitations are also understood.
