Minnesota Vikings vs Seahawks Match Player Stats
The Minnesota Vikings vs Seahawks Match Player Stats from the 2025 Week 13 meeting tell a much clearer story than the final score alone. Seattle defeated Minnesota 26-0 in a game where the Seahawks defense controlled the outcome, while the Vikings struggled to create sustained offense. Minnesota finished with only 126 passing yards, 66 rushing yards, four turnovers, and no touchdowns. Seattle did not produce a huge offensive yardage advantage, but its defense turned Minnesota’s mistakes into the defining factor of the game.
The matchup was played at Lumen Field in Seattle. Official NFL records list the game as November 30, 2025, while it can appear as December 1 depending on the time zone used for publication. The Seahawks entered the contest at 8-3 and moved to 9-3 with the victory, while Minnesota fell to 4-8. The official NFL game center confirms the 26-0 result and the Week 13 setting. Official NFL game center for Vikings at Seahawks
What makes this game especially interesting from a statistical perspective is that Seattle did not need an explosive passing performance to win comfortably. Sam Darnold completed 14 of 26 passes for 128 yards without a touchdown or interception. Instead, Seattle’s defense created four interceptions, including a defensive touchdown, while Minnesota’s offense repeatedly failed to convert opportunities into points.
Minnesota Vikings vs Seahawks Match Player Stats: Game Overview
The final score was:
Seattle Seahawks 26, Minnesota Vikings 0
Seattle scored 13 points in the second quarter, added six in the third, and seven in the fourth. Minnesota failed to score in every quarter.
At first glance, the offensive numbers do not look like a 26-point shutout should have been inevitable. Seattle recorded 128 passing yards and 125 rushing yards, while Minnesota recorded 126 passing yards and 66 rushing yards.
The major difference was efficiency under pressure and, above all, ball security.
Final Score and Team Records
| Category | Minnesota Vikings | Seattle Seahawks |
| Final Score | 0 | 26 |
| Record After Game | 4-8 | 9-3 |
| Passing Yards | 126 | 128 |
| Rushing Yards | 66 | 125 |
| Total Passing Completions | 19 | 14 |
| Passing Attempts | 30 | 26 |
| Interceptions Thrown | 4 | 0 |
| Sacks Allowed | 4 | 4 |
| Defensive Sacks | 4 | 4 |
| Offensive Touchdowns | 0 | 1 |
| Defensive Touchdowns | 0 | 1 |
The numbers show why the contest should not be described simply as an offensive mismatch.
Seattle gained only two more passing yards than Minnesota. The Seahawks’ biggest advantage came on the ground, where they produced 125 rushing yards compared with Minnesota’s 66.
More importantly, Seattle protected the football through the passing game. Darnold did not throw an interception, while Minnesota quarterback Max Brosmer threw four.
That turnover difference became the central statistical theme of the afternoon.
Max Brosmer’s Passing Performance
Max Brosmer completed 19 of 30 attempts for 126 yards. His completion rate was 63.3 percent, which is respectable on its own. However, the passing efficiency was severely damaged by four interceptions and four sacks.
His statistical line was:
| Passing Statistic | Max Brosmer |
| Completions | 19 |
| Attempts | 30 |
| Completion Rate | 63.3% |
| Passing Yards | 126 |
| Yards Per Attempt | 4.2 |
| Touchdowns | 0 |
| Interceptions | 4 |
| Sacks | 4 |
| Sack Yardage | 30 |
| QBR | 5.8 |
| Passer Rating | 32.8 |
The 4.2 yards per attempt figure is particularly revealing. Brosmer completed nearly two out of every three passes, but those completions were not generating enough explosive production.
This is an important distinction when evaluating quarterback performance.
A completion percentage can look acceptable while an offense remains ineffective. If the passes consistently produce short gains and turnovers erase promising possessions, the raw completion number does not tell the full story.
Brosmer’s four interceptions were the biggest problem.
The Turnover Problem
Minnesota threw four interceptions during the game.
Seattle’s defensive interception total came from:
- Ernest Jones IV: 2 interceptions
- Riq Woolen: 1 interception
- Coby Bryant: 1 interception
Ernest Jones IV was particularly influential because his two interceptions produced 91 return yards and included a defensive touchdown.
That means Seattle did not merely stop Minnesota drives. The defense directly created points.
This is one of the strongest examples of why turnover statistics deserve more weight than basic yardage comparisons when analyzing a game.
Minnesota finished with 126 passing yards, but those yards could not compensate for four interceptions. A team can move the football modestly and still lose decisively if its possessions repeatedly end with turnovers.
Sam Darnold’s Efficient but Quiet Game
Sam Darnold’s numbers were not spectacular, but they were effective enough for the game Seattle wanted to play.
He completed 14 of 26 passes for 128 yards, averaging 4.9 yards per attempt. He threw no touchdowns and no interceptions.
| Passing Statistic | Sam Darnold |
| Completions | 14 |
| Attempts | 26 |
| Completion Rate | 53.8% |
| Passing Yards | 128 |
| Yards Per Attempt | 4.9 |
| Touchdowns | 0 |
| Interceptions | 0 |
| Sacks | 4 |
| Sack Yardage | 34 |
| QBR | 23.2 |
| Passer Rating | 67.5 |
Darnold was not asked to carry the game with a high-volume passing attack.
That was not necessary.
Seattle’s defense was already creating short fields and eliminating Minnesota’s ability to maintain drives. As a result, Darnold’s primary responsibility was to avoid giving the Vikings opportunities.
He accomplished that by throwing zero interceptions.
The four sacks he absorbed prevented his performance from being completely clean, but Seattle’s overall approach allowed the offense to remain conservative without falling behind.
Minnesota’s Rushing Attack
Minnesota’s running game produced 66 yards on 16 attempts, an average of 4.1 yards per carry.
Jordan Mason led the Vikings with six carries for 47 yards. His 7.8 yards per carry average was easily the best rushing efficiency on the Minnesota roster.
| Minnesota Rusher | Carries | Yards | Average | TD | Long |
| Jordan Mason | 6 | 47 | 7.8 | 0 | 24 |
| Zavier Scott | 3 | 17 | 5.7 | 0 | 9 |
| Aaron Jones Sr. | 6 | 3 | 0.5 | 0 | 0 |
| Max Brosmer | 1 | -1 | -1.0 | 0 | -1 |
| Team Total | 16 | 66 | 4.1 | 0 | 24 |
Jordan Mason’s 47 yards stand out because he produced more than 71 percent of Minnesota’s rushing yardage.
His 24-yard run was also Minnesota’s longest rushing play.
The problem was volume.
Mason had only six attempts despite averaging 7.8 yards per carry. Once Minnesota fell behind and the turnover margin widened, the offensive structure became increasingly difficult to sustain.
Aaron Jones Sr. Struggled to Generate Yardage
Aaron Jones Sr. finished with six carries for only three yards.
That translated to an extremely low 0.5 yards per carry.
His numbers were a sharp contrast to Mason’s efficiency. The Vikings therefore had a clear difference in production among their primary runners.
This is another reason why team rushing averages can sometimes hide important individual trends. Minnesota averaged 4.1 yards per carry overall, but most of that efficiency came from Mason and Zavier Scott.
Seattle’s Rushing Attack
Seattle carried the ball 32 times for 125 yards, averaging 3.9 yards per attempt.
The Seahawks were led by Kenneth Walker III, who recorded 13 carries for 56 yards. Zach Charbonnet added 52 yards on 14 carries and scored the game’s only offensive rushing touchdown.
| Seattle Rusher | Carries | Yards | Average | TD | Long |
| Kenneth Walker III | 13 | 56 | 4.3 | 0 | 24 |
| Zach Charbonnet | 14 | 52 | 3.7 | 1 | 17 |
| Rashid Shaheed | 1 | 9 | 9.0 | 0 | 9 |
| Myles Gaskin | 3 | 6 | 2.0 | 0 | 4 |
| AJ Barner | 1 | 2 | 2.0 | 0 | 2 |
| Team Total | 32 | 125 | 3.9 | 1 | 24 |
Seattle’s rushing advantage was significant because the Seahawks almost doubled Minnesota’s rushing total.
More importantly, Seattle stayed committed to the running game.
The Seahawks attempted twice as many rushing plays as Minnesota. That allowed them to control the pace, protect their quarterback, and continue attacking an opponent that was already struggling to generate points.
Kenneth Walker III vs. Zach Charbonnet
Walker and Charbonnet provided a balanced workload.
Walker had 13 carries for 56 yards, while Charbonnet had 14 carries for 52 yards and a touchdown.
Neither player produced an extraordinary rushing average, but together they gave Seattle 108 yards on 27 attempts.
That kind of production is valuable in a game where the defense is already dominating.
The objective was not necessarily to produce explosive plays on every possession. It was to maintain possession, move the chains, and force Minnesota to defend the entire field.
Receiving Statistics
Minnesota completed 19 passes and distributed them across several players.
T.J. Hockenson was the team’s leading receiver with six receptions for 59 yards.
Jordan Addison added five receptions for 36 yards, while Aaron Jones Sr. caught four passes for 22 yards.
| Minnesota Receiver | Receptions | Yards | Average | TD | Long |
| T.J. Hockenson | 6 | 59 | 9.8 | 0 | 29 |
| Jordan Addison | 5 | 36 | 7.2 | 0 | Not listed |
| Aaron Jones Sr. | 4 | 22 | 5.5 | 0 | Not listed |
| Zavier Scott | 1 | 4 | 4.0 | 0 | Not listed |
| Justin Jefferson | 2 | 4 | 2.0 | 0 | Not listed |
| Jordan Mason | 1 | 1 | 1.0 | 0 | Not listed |
| Jalen Nailor | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Team Total | 19 | 126 | 6.6 | 0 | 29 |
Hockenson’s six receptions were the clearest positive receiving statistic for Minnesota.
He accounted for 59 of the team’s 126 passing yards, or nearly 47 percent of the team’s receiving production.
Justin Jefferson’s Limited Production
Justin Jefferson finished with only two receptions for four yards.
That is an unusually small statistical contribution for a receiver of his caliber, but the context matters.
Minnesota’s passing game never developed enough consistency to create meaningful production downfield. The Vikings also faced a defense that generated four interceptions and four sacks.
When the quarterback is under heavy pressure and possessions repeatedly end in turnovers, even elite receivers can have minimal statistical impact.
Seattle Receiving Statistics
Seattle’s receiving production was distributed among several players rather than concentrated around one dominant target.
AJ Barner led the Seahawks with four receptions for 35 yards.
Cooper Kupp caught three passes for 24 yards, while Jaxon Smith-Njigba recorded two receptions for 23 yards.
| Seattle Receiver | Receptions | Yards |
| AJ Barner | 4 | 35 |
| Cooper Kupp | 3 | 24 |
| Jaxon Smith-Njigba | 2 | 23 |
| Cody White | 1 | 21 |
| Kenneth Walker III | 3 | 18 |
| Rashid Shaheed | 1 | 7 |
| Elijah Arroyo | 0 | 0 |
| Team Total | 14 | 128 |
The most notable aspect of Seattle’s receiving numbers is how little the offense depended on one player.
No Seahawks receiver reached 40 yards.
That might look unusual in a 26-0 victory, but it reinforces the larger point about how the game was won.
Seattle’s defense created the separation.
The offense only needed to avoid catastrophic mistakes and convert the opportunities generated by the defensive unit.
Seattle’s Defense Was the Difference
The defensive statistics provide the clearest explanation for the shutout.
Seattle recorded:
- 58 total tackles
- 34 solo tackles
- 4 sacks
- 5 tackles for loss
- 6 pass defenses
- 7 quarterback hits
- 4 interceptions
- 121 interception return yards
- 1 defensive touchdown
The four interceptions were the headline statistic.
But the seven quarterback hits and four sacks also demonstrate that Seattle consistently pressured the Minnesota passing game.
Minnesota’s defense recorded four sacks as well, which means the sack count itself was even. The difference was what happened after the pressure.
Seattle turned quarterback mistakes into possession changes and points.
Ernest Jones IV’s Two-Interception Performance
Ernest Jones IV produced one of the most influential defensive performances of the game.
He recorded two interceptions and returned them for a combined 91 yards, including a 91-yard defensive touchdown according to the supplied game statistics.
That single play fundamentally changed the value of the defensive performance.
A normal interception ends an offensive possession.
A pick-six does much more.
It creates seven points, shifts momentum, forces the opposing offense to chase the scoreboard, and places additional pressure on the quarterback.
Jones’ performance therefore had an impact far beyond the basic “two interceptions” figure.
Riq Woolen and Coby Bryant Also Intercepted Brosmer
Riq Woolen recorded one interception and returned it 30 yards.
Coby Bryant added another interception with no return yardage.
That gave Seattle four total interceptions.
Minnesota did not record a single interception.
The turnover battle therefore finished:
Seattle 4, Minnesota 0 in interceptions.
That is one of the clearest statistical reasons for the 26-0 result.
Minnesota’s Defensive Performance
It would be inaccurate to say Minnesota’s defense played poorly in every category.
The Vikings recorded:
- 71 total tackles
- 39 solo tackles
- 4 sacks
- 7 tackles for loss
- 6 pass defenses
- 5 quarterback hits
Those numbers show that Minnesota’s defense generated pressure and remained active around the football.
The problem was that the defense had very little margin for error.
Seattle’s defense scored a touchdown, while Minnesota’s defense did not create a takeaway.
When an offense produces zero points and turns the ball over four times, the defense is placed in an extremely difficult position.
Minnesota’s defense allowed 26 points, but the offensive turnovers played a major role in creating Seattle’s opportunities.
Kicking and Special Teams
Jason Myers was perfect for Seattle.
He converted all four field-goal attempts and both extra-point attempts.
His longest successful field goal was 56 yards.
That produced 14 points for Seattle.
| Kicking Statistic | Jason Myers |
| Field Goals | 4/4 |
| Field Goal Percentage | 100% |
| Long Field Goal | 56 yards |
| Extra Points | 2/2 |
| Total Points | 14 |
Myers’ performance was important because Seattle did not need to rely exclusively on touchdowns.
Four successful field goals kept the scoreboard moving even when Seattle’s offense did not finish every drive with a touchdown.
Minnesota’s Kick Return Production
Myles Price was productive as a kick returner.
He recorded six returns for 169 yards, averaging 28.2 yards per return. His longest return was 29 yards.
That was one of Minnesota’s better special teams statistics.
However, strong kick-return numbers do not automatically translate into points.
Minnesota repeatedly needed its offense to capitalize on field position, and the offense could not do so.
Punt Statistics
Ryan Wright punted five times for Minnesota for 252 yards, averaging 50.4 yards per punt.
He had two punts inside the 20-yard line, with a long of 60 yards.
Seattle punter Michael Dickson recorded four punts for 203 yards, averaging 50.8 yards per punt. He also had two punts inside the 20, with a long of 56 yards.
The punting numbers were relatively close, but Seattle’s ability to create turnovers made field-position battles less important to the final outcome.
Why Seattle Won Despite Modest Passing Numbers
This is arguably the most important lesson from the game.
Seattle did not win because Sam Darnold threw for 300 yards.
He did not.
He threw for 128 yards.
Seattle did not win because its receivers produced huge individual totals.
They did not.
Seattle did not dominate Minnesota by producing an enormous rushing average.
It averaged 3.9 yards per carry.
The Seahawks won because they controlled the combination of turnovers, field position, defensive pressure, rushing volume, and scoring efficiency.
That combination can produce a decisive victory even when the offensive box score looks ordinary.
The Turnover Margin Was Decisive
Minnesota lost two fumbles according to the supplied statistics and threw four interceptions.
Seattle also recorded fumbles, but its passing game produced zero interceptions.
The most damaging part of Minnesota’s turnover profile was the four interceptions.
Four additional possessions can dramatically change the structure of an NFL game.
Even if each interception had simply ended a drive without a return, Seattle would have benefited from additional possessions.
Because one interception became a defensive touchdown and another generated a 91-yard return, the impact was even greater.
Minnesota’s Biggest Statistical Problems
Several areas explain why the Vikings were shut out.
1. Four Interceptions
The most obvious problem was quarterback turnovers.
Four interceptions are difficult to overcome under almost any circumstances.
2. Only 66 Rushing Yards
Minnesota’s rushing total was 66 yards on 16 attempts.
The team averaged 4.1 yards per carry, but the rushing workload was limited.
3. No Touchdowns
Minnesota scored zero points.
The team did not produce an offensive touchdown or a defensive touchdown.
4. Limited Explosive Passing
The Vikings averaged only 4.2 yards per pass attempt.
That prevented the passing game from compensating for the turnovers.
5. Justin Jefferson Was Held to Four Yards
Jefferson caught only two passes for four yards.
Although receiver statistics depend heavily on quarterback performance and defensive coverage, his minimal output reflected how effectively Seattle disrupted Minnesota’s passing structure.
Seattle’s Biggest Statistical Advantages
Seattle’s winning formula was more balanced.
1. Four Interceptions
The defense repeatedly changed possession.
2. 125 Rushing Yards
Seattle nearly doubled Minnesota’s rushing production.
3. Zero Passing Interceptions
Darnold protected the football.
4. One Defensive Touchdown
The defense directly contributed to the scoreboard.
5. Perfect Kicking
Jason Myers converted every field-goal attempt and every extra-point attempt.
These five elements created a margin that Minnesota could not overcome.
A Deeper Look at Efficiency
One of the best ways to evaluate an NFL game is to move beyond total yardage.
Minnesota actually completed more passes than Seattle.
The Vikings completed 19 passes compared with Seattle’s 14.
Yet Minnesota scored zero points.
Why?
Because completion volume alone does not equal offensive efficiency.
Minnesota’s 19 completions produced 126 yards, while Seattle’s 14 completions produced 128 yards.
That means Seattle generated slightly more passing yardage with five fewer completions.
Seattle also averaged 4.9 yards per attempt compared with Minnesota’s 4.2.
The difference is small in isolation, but it becomes meaningful when combined with turnovers.
Seattle’s passing game was conservative but relatively efficient.
Minnesota’s passing game was more active but dramatically less secure.
What the Receiving Numbers Reveal
The receiving statistics also reveal two different offensive philosophies.
Minnesota’s passing production was led by Hockenson, who accounted for 59 yards. Addison followed with 36.
Seattle distributed its production across Barner, Kupp, Smith-Njigba, White, Walker, and Shaheed.
The Seahawks therefore did not need a single receiver to dominate the game.
This matters because a defense can sometimes survive by limiting one primary weapon. Seattle’s offense was structured so that several players could contribute without requiring a massive individual performance.
What the Game Says About Defensive Football
The 26-0 result is a useful reminder that defense can determine the shape of an NFL game.
Seattle’s defense did three things particularly well:
- It pressured the quarterback.
- It intercepted the quarterback.
- It converted defensive success into points and field position.
Four sacks and seven quarterback hits kept Minnesota uncomfortable.
Four interceptions made sustained drives extremely difficult.
The defensive touchdown gave Seattle a direct scoring advantage.
That is a complete defensive performance.
What Fans Should Take From the Player Statistics
For someone searching for individual numbers, the most important players from the game were not necessarily the players with the highest yardage totals.
The statistical leaders by category were:
Passing: Sam Darnold with 128 yards
Minnesota passing: Max Brosmer with 126 yards and four interceptions
Minnesota rushing: Jordan Mason with 47 yards
Seattle rushing: Kenneth Walker III with 56 yards
Seattle rushing touchdowns: Zach Charbonnet with one
Minnesota receiving: T.J. Hockenson with 59 yards
Seattle receiving: AJ Barner with 35 yards
Interceptions: Ernest Jones IV with two
Field goals: Jason Myers with four
Defensive touchdown: Seattle defense
This is a good example of why player statistics should always be interpreted within the game context.
A receiver can lead his team in yards and still have little impact on the result.
A defender can record an interception and completely change the game.
A quarterback can throw for more completions than the opposing quarterback and still have a dramatically worse performance because of turnovers.
The Most Important Numbers From the Game
If you only have a few seconds to review the box score, these numbers tell most of the story:
26-0: Seattle’s final score
4: Minnesota interceptions
4: Seattle interceptions
125: Seattle rushing yards
66: Minnesota rushing yards
59: T.J. Hockenson’s receiving yards
56: Kenneth Walker III’s rushing yards
47: Jordan Mason’s rushing yards
91: Ernest Jones IV’s interception return yardage
14: Jason Myers’ points
0: Minnesota points
These figures provide a compact explanation of the result.
Lessons for Future Matchup Analysis
The game also demonstrates how to approach NFL player statistics more intelligently.
First, always examine turnovers before making conclusions about offensive production.
Second, compare passing efficiency rather than only passing yards.
Third, separate individual rushing efficiency from team rushing volume.
Fourth, look at defensive scoring and interception returns.
Fifth, consider special teams when the offensive numbers appear unusually close.
In this game, a basic comparison of passing yards would suggest an almost even contest.
A deeper statistical review reveals something very different.
Seattle’s defense controlled the game.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who won the Minnesota Vikings vs Seahawks game?
The Seattle Seahawks defeated the Minnesota Vikings 26-0 in the 2025 Week 13 matchup.
How many interceptions did Max Brosmer throw?
Max Brosmer threw four interceptions. Seattle’s Ernest Jones IV recorded two, Riq Woolen recorded one, and Coby Bryant recorded one.
Who led the Vikings in rushing?
Jordan Mason led Minnesota with six carries for 47 yards, averaging 7.8 yards per carry. His longest run was 24 yards.
Who led Minnesota in receiving?
T.J. Hockenson led the Vikings with six receptions for 59 yards. He accounted for the team’s highest receiving yardage total.
How many rushing yards did Seattle have?
Seattle finished with 125 rushing yards on 32 attempts, averaging 3.9 yards per carry.
Who scored Seattle’s points?
Seattle’s scoring included four field goals and two extra points from Jason Myers, one offensive rushing touchdown from Zach Charbonnet, and a defensive touchdown. Myers finished with 14 points.
Conclusion
The Minnesota Vikings vs Seahawks Match Player Stats show that Seattle’s 26-0 victory was primarily a defensive masterclass rather than an offensive explosion.
Sam Darnold finished with only 128 passing yards and no passing touchdowns, but he protected the football. Seattle’s running game added 125 yards, giving the offense enough balance to control the contest.
Minnesota’s offensive statistics tell a much harsher story. Max Brosmer completed 19 of 30 passes for 126 yards, but four interceptions destroyed the Vikings’ ability to sustain possessions. Minnesota managed only 66 rushing yards and failed to score in all four quarters.
T.J. Hockenson was Minnesota’s leading receiver with 59 yards, while Jordan Mason was the team’s most efficient primary runner with 47 yards on six attempts. However, individual production could not overcome the turnover problem.
For Seattle, Ernest Jones IV was arguably the most influential individual player because of his two interceptions and 91 return yards. Zach Charbonnet contributed the offensive rushing touchdown, Kenneth Walker III led the Seahawks in rushing, and Jason Myers was perfect on field goals and extra points.
The biggest lesson from the statistical record is simple: yardage does not always determine the winner. Seattle’s advantage came from protecting the football, creating turnovers, applying quarterback pressure, running the ball consistently, and converting defensive opportunities into points.
That combination turned a game with relatively modest passing totals into a one-sided shutout.
