Green Bay Packers vs Pittsburgh Steelers Match Player Stats
The Green Bay Packers vs Pittsburgh Steelers Match Player Stats from August 13, 2026, tell the story of a game controlled by Pittsburgh from start to finish. The Steelers earned a convincing 28-9 victory at home, producing a far more efficient passing attack, scoring two touchdowns through the air and two on the ground.
While the final score shows a comfortable Pittsburgh win, the individual and team statistics reveal why the game developed that way. Green Bay struggled to create explosive offense, averaged just 2.6 yards per rushing attempt, and allowed five sacks. Pittsburgh, meanwhile, averaged an impressive 10.1 yards per passing attempt and generated several game-changing plays.
This detailed breakdown examines the most important player performances, offensive production, defensive pressure, special teams contributions, and the key numbers that decided the matchup.
Match Overview
| Match Detail | Result |
| Game | Green Bay Packers vs. Pittsburgh Steelers |
| Date | August 13, 2026 |
| Final Score | Pittsburgh Steelers 28, Green Bay Packers 9 |
| Green Bay Record | 0-1, 0-1 Away |
| Pittsburgh Record | 1-0, 1-0 Home |
The Steelers opened their campaign with a strong home victory, while Green Bay left the game looking for answers after struggling to establish offensive consistency.
The most significant difference between the two teams was not simply total scoring. Pittsburgh consistently gained more value from its passing opportunities. The Steelers completed 27 of 33 passes for 313 yards and two touchdowns, while Green Bay’s overall passing numbers were far less productive.
That difference in efficiency created a major advantage throughout the contest.
Green Bay Packers vs Pittsburgh Steelers Match Player Stats Overview
A quick comparison makes Pittsburgh’s advantage easy to understand.
| Category | Green Bay Packers | Pittsburgh Steelers |
| Passing Yards | 97 | 313 |
| Passing Touchdowns | 0 | 2 |
| Passing Average | 4.7 | 10.1 |
| Rushing Yards | 63 | 72 |
| Rushing Touchdowns | 0 | 2 |
| Receiving Yards | 141 | 332 |
| Receiving Touchdowns | 0 | 2 |
| Sacks Made | 3 | 5 |
| Total Tackles | 72 | 67 |
| Field Goals Made | 3 | 0 |
| Extra Points Made | 0 | 4 |
The numbers show a fascinating contrast.
Green Bay actually produced more total tackles, which indicates that its defense spent considerable time responding to Pittsburgh’s offensive possessions. However, Pittsburgh’s offense was much more explosive and efficient when moving the football.
The Steelers did not dominate the rushing game in terms of yards per carry. Both teams averaged 2.6 yards per rushing attempt. Instead, Pittsburgh separated itself through passing efficiency and finishing drives with touchdowns.
That is an important distinction when analyzing this game.
A team does not always need a dominant running game to control a matchup. Efficient quarterback play, explosive receptions, protection, and strong red-zone execution can create a decisive advantage.
Pittsburgh Steelers Passing Performance
Pittsburgh’s passing attack was the clearest offensive strength of the game.
The Steelers finished with:
- 27 completions on 33 attempts
- 313 passing yards
- 10.1 yards per attempt
- 2 passing touchdowns
- 0 interceptions
- 3 sacks allowed for 19 yards
- 128.8 team passer rating
These numbers represent an extremely efficient passing performance.
Completing 27 of 33 passes means Pittsburgh connected on approximately 82 percent of its attempts. More importantly, those completions were not simply short, low-risk throws.
The Steelers averaged 10.1 yards per passing attempt.
That figure demonstrates how effectively Pittsburgh moved the ball through the air. The offense combined accuracy with meaningful yardage, creating a much stronger overall passing attack than Green Bay.
Drew Allar Led the Passing Attack
Drew Allar delivered the most impressive quarterback performance for Pittsburgh.
His statistics were:
- 10 completions
- 13 attempts
- 153 passing yards
- 2 touchdowns
- 0 interceptions
- 154.8 passer rating
Allar’s performance was highly efficient.
He completed a large percentage of his passes and produced two touchdowns without turning the ball over. A passer rating of 154.8 highlights just how productive his opportunities were.
The most important part of his performance was not simply the yardage total. It was the combination of efficiency and scoring.
Pittsburgh did not need an excessive number of passing attempts to create offense. Allar made his opportunities count.
Why Pittsburgh’s Passing Game Was So Effective
The Steelers succeeded because their passing attack produced three things Green Bay could not consistently match:
- High completion efficiency
- Explosive yardage
- Touchdown production
Pittsburgh’s 10.1 yards per attempt was more than double Green Bay’s 4.7 average.
That gap explains much of the final result.
When one offense consistently gains significant yardage through the air while the other struggles to move beyond short gains, the pressure on the trailing team quickly increases.
Green Bay needed longer, more difficult drives to score.
Pittsburgh was able to create bigger gains and reach scoring opportunities more efficiently.
Kyle McCord’s Performance for Green Bay
Kyle McCord was Green Bay’s passing leader.
His numbers were:
- 12 completions
- 16 attempts
- 102 passing yards
- 0 touchdowns
- 0 interceptions
- 91.1 passer rating
McCord’s completion percentage was respectable, and he avoided interceptions. However, the offense struggled to generate enough explosive production.
The key issue was the lack of touchdowns.
Quarterback statistics should never be judged only by completion percentage. A passer can complete a high percentage of short throws while the offense still struggles to score.
That was one of the major lessons from Green Bay’s offensive performance.
McCord completed 12 of 16 passes, but the Packers were unable to turn their passing production into touchdowns.
Pittsburgh, on the other hand, paired efficiency with scoring.
That difference had a major impact on the game.
Green Bay’s Overall Passing Struggles
Green Bay’s overall passing statistics were:
- 19 completions
- 30 attempts
- 97 yards
- 4.7 yards per attempt
- 0 touchdowns
- 0 interceptions
- 5 sacks for 44 yards
- 74.4 passer rating
The five sacks were particularly important.
Sacks do more than reduce passing yardage. They can disrupt offensive rhythm, create long down-and-distance situations, and make drives significantly harder to sustain.
Green Bay lost 44 yards through sacks.
Pittsburgh’s defense consistently created pressure and finished plays in the backfield.
The Steelers recorded:
- 5 sacks
- 7 tackles for loss
- 5 passes defended
- 7 quarterback hits
Those numbers show that Pittsburgh’s defensive success was not limited to one area.
The defense pressured the quarterback, stopped plays behind the line of scrimmage, and disrupted passing attempts.
Rushing Statistics: Neither Team Dominated the Ground Game
The rushing statistics were surprisingly similar in terms of average production.
Green Bay Rushing
Green Bay recorded:
- 24 carries
- 63 yards
- 2.6 yards per carry
- 0 touchdowns
- Long run of 9 yards
Damien Martinez led the Packers with:
- 8 carries
- 20 yards
- 2.5 yards per carry
Green Bay struggled to establish momentum on the ground.
A 2.6-yard average makes it difficult to consistently create manageable situations on second and third down.
The Packers also failed to score a rushing touchdown.
Without strong rushing production, Green Bay became increasingly dependent on a passing attack that was already struggling with pressure and limited explosive plays.
Pittsburgh Rushing
Pittsburgh finished with:
- 28 carries
- 72 yards
- 2.6 yards per carry
- 2 touchdowns
- Long run of 11 yards
Lew Nichols led the Steelers in rushing:
- 10 carries
- 36 yards
- 3.6 yards per carry
- 1 touchdown
Although Pittsburgh’s rushing average was not dominant, the Steelers were much more effective at converting rushing opportunities into points.
That was a crucial difference.
The Steelers scored two rushing touchdowns, while Green Bay scored none.
This shows why raw yardage alone does not tell the complete story.
Pittsburgh had only nine more rushing yards than Green Bay, but its rushing offense contributed directly to the scoreboard.
Why Touchdown Efficiency Mattered More Than Yardage
One of the strongest insights from this matchup is the difference between moving the ball and finishing possessions.
Green Bay produced some offensive yardage, but its scoring output was limited to three field goals.
Pittsburgh finished drives with touchdowns.
The Steelers scored:
- 2 passing touchdowns
- 2 rushing touchdowns
- 4 successful extra points
Green Bay’s points came entirely from kicker Trey Smack.
He finished:
- 3 of 3 on field goals
- 100 percent accuracy
- Long field goal of 58 yards
- 9 total points
Trey Smack was one of Green Bay’s most productive contributors because he accounted for every Packers point.
His 58-yard field goal was particularly notable. Long-distance kicking requires power, accuracy, and confidence, and his perfect three-for-three performance ensured Green Bay took advantage of the scoring opportunities it did create.
However, field goals alone were not enough to keep pace with Pittsburgh’s touchdowns.
That is one of football’s simplest but most important statistical realities.
Three field goals produce nine points.
Four touchdowns with successful extra points produce 28.
Pittsburgh Receiving Leaders
Pittsburgh’s receiving unit played a major role in the victory.
The Steelers recorded:
- 27 receptions
- 332 yards
- 12.3 yards per reception
- 2 touchdowns
- Long reception of 74 yards
- 32 targets
The 12.3-yard receiving average demonstrates Pittsburgh’s ability to gain meaningful yardage after connecting through the air.
Kaden Wetjen Delivered the Biggest Explosive Play
Kaden Wetjen was Pittsburgh’s receiving leader in yardage.
His performance included:
- 2 receptions
- 79 yards
- 39.5 yards per reception
- 1 touchdown
Those numbers are especially impressive because they came on only two catches.
Wetjen averaged 39.5 yards per reception, demonstrating the explosive nature of his contribution.
His performance represents an important principle in football statistics.
A player does not need ten receptions to have a major impact.
Two explosive receptions can dramatically change field position, momentum, and scoring opportunities.
Wetjen’s 79 yards and touchdown made him one of the most influential offensive players in the game.
Green Bay’s Receiving Production
Green Bay recorded:
- 19 receptions
- 141 yards
- 7.4 yards per reception
- 0 touchdowns
- Long reception of 19 yards
- 28 targets
Isaiah Neyor led the Packers with:
- 4 receptions
- 34 yards
- 8.5 yards per reception
Neyor provided Green Bay with its highest receiving yardage total, but the Packers lacked the explosive plays Pittsburgh created.
The difference between the longest receptions tells an important story.
Green Bay’s longest reception was 19 yards.
Pittsburgh’s longest reception was 74 yards.
Explosive plays can completely change a game.
A long reception can move an offense from its own territory into scoring range almost immediately. It reduces the number of successful plays required to reach the end zone.
Green Bay had to work much harder for its yardage.
Pittsburgh created larger chunks of offense.
The Explosive Play Difference
The biggest statistical contrast in this matchup may have been the difference in explosive plays.
Pittsburgh’s passing and receiving numbers show an offense capable of creating major gains.
The Steelers had:
- 313 passing yards
- 332 receiving yards
- A 74-yard long reception
- 12.3 yards per reception
Green Bay had:
- 97 passing yards in the team passing summary
- 141 receiving yards
- A 19-yard long reception
- 7.4 yards per reception
The Steelers consistently gained more yards per successful play.
This allowed Pittsburgh to play with greater flexibility.
When an offense can create explosive gains, the defense must respect more areas of the field. That can create additional space for shorter passes and rushing attempts.
Green Bay never established the same level of explosive threat.
Defensive Player and Team Impact
Defense played a major role in determining the outcome.
Green Bay Defensive Statistics
The Packers recorded:
- 72 total tackles
- 43 solo tackles
- 3 sacks
- 6 tackles for loss
- 2 passes defended
- 4 quarterback hits
Green Bay’s defense made plenty of tackles and generated three sacks.
However, Pittsburgh’s passing attack still produced 313 yards and two touchdowns.
This demonstrates an important point about defensive statistics.
A high tackle total does not automatically mean defensive dominance.
Sometimes, a defense records many tackles because the opposing offense is successfully moving the football and creating many opportunities.
The Packers were active defensively, but Pittsburgh’s offensive efficiency proved difficult to contain.
Pittsburgh Defensive Statistics
The Steelers recorded:
- 67 total tackles
- 37 solo tackles
- 5 sacks
- 7 tackles for loss
- 5 passes defended
- 7 quarterback hits
Pittsburgh produced more sacks, more tackles for loss, more passes defended, and more quarterback hits.
The pressure advantage was significant.
The Steelers repeatedly disrupted Green Bay’s offense before plays could develop.
Five sacks and seven quarterback hits show that Pittsburgh’s defensive front consistently affected the passing game.
That pressure likely contributed to Green Bay’s low 4.7-yard passing average and inability to score a touchdown.
The Battle in the Trenches
Football games are often decided by the players fans notice least.
Offensive linemen, defensive linemen, and edge rushers can determine whether a quarterback has time to throw or must react under pressure.
In this game, Pittsburgh won that battle.
The Steelers allowed:
- 3 sacks for 19 yards
Green Bay allowed:
- 5 sacks for 44 yards
The difference is substantial.
Pittsburgh protected its quarterbacks more effectively while creating more pressure against Green Bay.
This gave the Steelers a major structural advantage.
Their quarterbacks had better opportunities to attack downfield.
Green Bay’s quarterbacks faced more disruption and lost significant yardage through sacks.
When analyzing the Green Bay Packers vs Pittsburgh Steelers Match Player Stats, the sack differential is one of the most meaningful indicators of why the game became so one-sided.
Special Teams Performance
Special teams often receive less attention than quarterbacks and receivers, but they can have a major influence on field position and scoring.
Trey Smack Was Perfect for Green Bay
Trey Smack delivered an excellent kicking performance.
His statistics were:
- 3 field goals made
- 3 field goals attempted
- 100 percent accuracy
- Long of 58 yards
- 9 points
Smack scored every Green Bay point.
His long field goal demonstrated impressive range, while his perfect accuracy ensured the Packers did not waste their scoring chances.
Pittsburgh’s Extra Point Unit
Chris Boswell finished:
- 0 field goals attempted
- 4 of 4 extra points
- 4 total points
The fact that Pittsburgh did not need a field goal attempt also reflects its red-zone success.
The Steelers repeatedly finished scoring opportunities with touchdowns.
Punting Comparison
Daniel Whelan handled punting duties for Green Bay.
He recorded:
- 6 punts
- 274 yards
- 45.7-yard average
- 2 touchbacks
- 1 punt inside the 20
- Long of 51 yards
Cameron Johnston handled Pittsburgh’s punting.
His numbers were:
- 3 punts
- 147 yards
- 49.0-yard average
- 0 touchbacks
- 1 punt inside the 20
- Long of 52 yards
Green Bay punted twice as often as Pittsburgh.
That is another indicator of offensive possession efficiency.
Pittsburgh was able to sustain drives or score more frequently, reducing the need to punt.
Kick and Punt Return Statistics
Green Bay’s kick return unit recorded:
- 3 returns
- 77 yards
- 25.7-yard average
- Long return of 27 yards
Pittsburgh recorded:
- 3 kick returns
- 61 yards
- 20.3-yard average
- Long return of 25 yards
Green Bay had the advantage in kick return average.
However, that advantage did not translate into enough offensive scoring.
On punt returns, Green Bay recorded:
- 2 returns
- 14 yards
- 7.0-yard average
- Long of 14 yards
Pittsburgh recorded:
- 4 returns
- 10 yards
- 2.5-yard average
- Long of 6 yards
These numbers show that neither team gained a major scoring advantage through punt returns.
The game was primarily decided by offensive efficiency and defensive pressure.
Turnover Battle: A Clean Game
Neither team recorded a fumble.
Neither team recorded an interception.
That makes this matchup particularly interesting.
Many lopsided games are decided by turnovers.
This one was not.
Pittsburgh won 28-9 without relying on interceptions or fumble recoveries.
Instead, the Steelers created separation through better execution.
They passed more efficiently.
They generated explosive plays.
They protected the football.
They pressured Green Bay’s offense.
They finished drives with touchdowns.
This makes Pittsburgh’s victory even more statistically impressive because the team did not require turnover advantages to dominate the scoreboard.
Top Performers From the Game
Drew Allar, Pittsburgh Quarterback
10/13, 153 yards, 2 touchdowns, 0 interceptions, 154.8 rating
Allar delivered the standout quarterback performance. His accuracy, efficiency, and touchdown production gave Pittsburgh a major offensive advantage.
Kaden Wetjen, Pittsburgh Receiver
2 receptions, 79 yards, 1 touchdown
Wetjen created explosive offense despite having only two receptions. His 39.5 yards per catch average shows how damaging his plays were.
Lew Nichols, Pittsburgh Running Back
10 carries, 36 yards, 1 touchdown
Nichols led Pittsburgh in rushing yards and added a touchdown, helping the Steelers finish drives successfully.
Kyle McCord, Green Bay Quarterback
12/16, 102 yards, 0 touchdowns, 0 interceptions, 91.1 rating
McCord completed a strong percentage of his passes and protected the football, but Green Bay could not turn that efficiency into touchdowns.
Isaiah Neyor, Green Bay Receiver
4 receptions, 34 yards
Neyor led Green Bay’s receiving production, although the Packers struggled to create major gains through the air.
Trey Smack, Green Bay Kicker
3/3 field goals, 58-yard long, 9 points
Smack was perfect and accounted for all nine Green Bay points.
What Decided the Game?
Several key factors separated Pittsburgh from Green Bay.
1. Pittsburgh Won the Passing Battle
The Steelers produced 313 passing yards and two touchdowns.
Green Bay’s passing offense averaged only 4.7 yards per attempt and failed to score through the air.
Pittsburgh’s 10.1-yard average per attempt was one of the clearest statistical advantages of the game.
2. Pittsburgh Created Explosive Plays
Kaden Wetjen’s 79 receiving yards on two catches demonstrated Pittsburgh’s ability to change the game with big plays.
The Steelers recorded a longest reception of 74 yards.
Green Bay’s longest reception was 19 yards.
That explosive-play gap was enormous.
3. The Steelers Generated More Pressure
Pittsburgh recorded:
- 5 sacks
- 7 quarterback hits
- 7 tackles for loss
Green Bay allowed significant disruption throughout the game.
4. Pittsburgh Scored Touchdowns
The Steelers scored four touchdowns.
Green Bay scored three field goals.
This was ultimately the biggest scoreboard difference.
5. Pittsburgh Did Not Need Turnovers
Neither team recorded an interception or fumble.
Pittsburgh simply executed better across the most important phases of the game.
Key Statistical Lessons From This Match
The game provides several useful lessons for anyone learning how to read football statistics.
Passing Percentage Is Not Enough
A quarterback can complete a high percentage of passes but still struggle to generate enough scoring offense.
Green Bay’s passing leaders were accurate, but the team lacked touchdowns and explosive production.
Pittsburgh combined accuracy with downfield success.
That made the difference.
Yards Per Attempt Can Reveal Offensive Efficiency
Pittsburgh averaged 10.1 yards per passing attempt.
Green Bay averaged 4.7.
This statistic provides a clear picture of how productive each passing opportunity was.
Higher averages generally indicate that an offense is gaining more value from each attempt.
Touchdowns Matter More Than Small Yardage Differences
The rushing totals were relatively close.
Pittsburgh had 72 rushing yards.
Green Bay had 63.
However, Pittsburgh scored two rushing touchdowns.
Green Bay scored none.
The difference in finishing ability mattered more than the small difference in rushing yardage.
Sacks Can Change an Entire Offensive Game
Green Bay allowed five sacks for 44 yards.
Those lost plays placed additional pressure on the offense and contributed to difficult down-and-distance situations.
Pittsburgh’s pass rush consistently influenced the game.
A Deeper Look at Pittsburgh’s Winning Formula
Pittsburgh’s 28-9 victory can be explained through a simple formula.
Efficient quarterback play + explosive receiving + defensive pressure + touchdown finishing = victory.
The Steelers did not need overwhelming rushing production.
They averaged only 2.6 yards per carry, the same as Green Bay.
Instead, they used the passing game to create major advantages.
This is what makes the Steelers’ offensive performance particularly interesting.
The team was balanced enough to score rushing touchdowns, but its biggest statistical advantage came through the air.
That combination made Pittsburgh difficult to defend.
A Deeper Look at Green Bay’s Challenges
Green Bay’s biggest problem was not one catastrophic mistake.
The Packers did not lose the turnover battle.
They did not throw interceptions.
They did not fumble.
Instead, they faced several smaller problems that combined into a major offensive struggle.
These included:
- Limited passing efficiency
- Lack of explosive plays
- Five sacks allowed
- Low rushing production
- No offensive touchdowns
This is often how difficult games develop.
A team does not always collapse because of one mistake.
Sometimes the problem is that almost every important phase of the offense performs slightly below the level required to win.
Green Bay’s statistics reflect that type of performance.
The Packers moved the ball at times but could not consistently create big gains or finish drives in the end zone.
Complete Offensive Comparison
| Offensive Category | Green Bay | Pittsburgh |
| Passing Attempts | 30 | 33 |
| Completions | 19 | 27 |
| Passing Yards | 97 | 313 |
| Passing TDs | 0 | 2 |
| Passing Average | 4.7 | 10.1 |
| Rushing Attempts | 24 | 28 |
| Rushing Yards | 63 | 72 |
| Rushing Average | 2.6 | 2.6 |
| Rushing TDs | 0 | 2 |
| Receptions | 19 | 27 |
| Receiving Yards | 141 | 332 |
| Receiving TDs | 0 | 2 |
The comparison clearly highlights Pittsburgh’s dominance through the air.
The rushing battle was close.
The passing and receiving battles were not.
What Fans Should Take Away From the Match
The most important takeaway from this game is that Pittsburgh won through efficiency rather than turnovers.
The Steelers played clean football.
They avoided interceptions.
They avoided fumbles.
They created explosive plays.
They protected their quarterbacks relatively well.
They pressured Green Bay’s quarterbacks.
And most importantly, they turned scoring opportunities into touchdowns.
For Green Bay, the biggest lesson is the importance of offensive finishing.
Trey Smack’s perfect kicking performance prevented the Packers from being shut out, but relying entirely on field goals makes it difficult to defeat an opponent scoring touchdowns.
The Packers will need to improve their ability to:
- Create explosive plays
- Protect the quarterback
- Increase rushing efficiency
- Convert drives into touchdowns
Frequently Asked Questions
Who won the Green Bay Packers vs Pittsburgh Steelers game?
The Pittsburgh Steelers defeated the Green Bay Packers 28-9 on August 13, 2026.
Who was the leading passer for Pittsburgh?
Drew Allar led Pittsburgh with 10 completions on 13 attempts for 153 yards, two touchdowns, and no interceptions.
Who led Green Bay in passing?
Kyle McCord led Green Bay with 12 completions on 16 attempts for 102 yards, with no touchdowns or interceptions.
Who was the leading receiver for Pittsburgh?
Kaden Wetjen led Pittsburgh with 79 receiving yards on two receptions and scored one touchdown.
Who led Green Bay in rushing?
Damien Martinez led Green Bay with eight carries for 20 yards.
How many sacks did Pittsburgh record?
The Pittsburgh Steelers recorded five sacks and seven quarterback hits during the game.
Conclusion
The Green Bay Packers vs Pittsburgh Steelers Match Player Stats provide a clear explanation for Pittsburgh’s 28-9 victory.
The Steelers dominated the most important efficiency categories, particularly passing production and explosive plays. Drew Allar delivered an outstanding performance with two touchdowns and a 154.8 passer rating, while Kaden Wetjen created major downfield impact with 79 yards and a touchdown on just two receptions.
Pittsburgh’s defense also played a critical role, recording five sacks, seven tackles for loss, and seven quarterback hits. Green Bay avoided turnovers but struggled to overcome constant pressure, limited explosive offense, and an inability to score touchdowns.
The rushing numbers were relatively even, but Pittsburgh was far more effective when it mattered most. The Steelers finished drives with touchdowns, while Green Bay relied entirely on Trey Smack’s three successful field goals.
In the end, this matchup was decided by efficiency, explosive passing plays, defensive pressure, and superior scoring execution.
