Baltimore Ravens vs Pittsburgh Steelers Match Player Stats

The Baltimore Ravens vs Pittsburgh Steelers match player stats from January 4, 2026, tell the story of a remarkably close AFC North battle that ended with the Pittsburgh Steelers defeating the Baltimore Ravens 26-24. The final score was decided by a combination of passing volume, rushing efficiency, defensive pressure, turnovers, and special teams execution. While Baltimore produced explosive plays through Lamar Jackson, Derrick Henry, and Zay Flowers, Pittsburgh found enough consistency across its offense and defense to secure the two-point victory.

The matchup was especially interesting because the statistical profile of the game was not simply a case of one team dominating the other. Baltimore had several major individual performances, including Derrick Henry’s 126 rushing yards and Zay Flowers’ 138 receiving yards. Lamar Jackson also finished with three touchdown passes and a 121.5 passer rating. Pittsburgh, however, benefited from Aaron Rodgers’ 294 passing yards, a larger passing workload, three defensive sacks, and a crucial interception by T.J. Watt.

The Steelers entered the game with a 10-7 record and a 6-3 home record, while Baltimore finished 8-9 overall and 5-3 on the road. Those records provide useful context, but the player-level numbers reveal much more about how the game actually unfolded.

Baltimore Ravens vs Pittsburgh Steelers Match Player Stats: Game Overview

The Steelers won 26-24, improving the significance of their home performance while Baltimore finished the season at 8-9.

Category	Baltimore Ravens	Pittsburgh Steelers
Final Score	24	26
Record	8-9	10-7
Home/Away Record	5-3 Away	6-3 Home
Passing	238 yards	294 yards
Rushing	137 yards	100 yards
Passing TDs	3	1
Rushing TDs	0	2
Interceptions	0	1
Sacks Allowed	3	2
Team Tackles	78	50
Passes Defended	5	4
QB Hits	3	5

At first glance, Baltimore appears to have had the more explosive offensive performance. The Ravens averaged 5.1 yards per rushing attempt and 21.6 yards per reception. Pittsburgh, meanwhile, generated 294 passing yards but averaged only 6.3 yards per passing attempt.

The difference was that Pittsburgh converted its offensive opportunities into enough points to win. The Steelers scored two rushing touchdowns compared with Baltimore’s three passing touchdowns, and Chris Boswell added two successful field goals.

That combination was enough to overcome Baltimore’s big-play production.

Lamar Jackson Passing Performance

Lamar Jackson completed 11 of 18 passes for 238 yards and three touchdowns. He averaged 13.2 yards per completion and finished with a 121.5 passer rating and a 53.2 QBR.

His basic passing line was:

• 11 completions
• 18 attempts
• 238 passing yards
• 13.2 yards per attempt
• 3 touchdowns
• 1 interception
• 3 sacks
• 16 sack yards lost
• 53.2 QBR
• 121.5 passer rating

The most important feature of Jackson’s performance was efficiency on completed passes. Although he attempted only 18 passes, his 238 yards meant that Baltimore generated substantial production whenever its passing game connected.

A completion rate of 61.1 percent does not fully explain his impact. The Ravens were producing explosive gains, and that becomes particularly clear when the receiving numbers are examined.

However, Jackson also experienced pressure. Pittsburgh recorded three sacks for 16 yards, compared with Baltimore’s two sacks for four yards against Aaron Rodgers.

The interception attributed to Jackson is another important part of the statistical picture. Despite throwing three touchdown passes, the turnover prevented his performance from being completely clean.

Aaron Rodgers Passing Performance

Aaron Rodgers had a different statistical profile.

He completed 31 of 47 attempts for 294 yards and one touchdown without throwing an interception. His passing line included:

• 31 completions
• 47 attempts
• 294 yards
• 6.3 yards per attempt
• 1 touchdown
• 0 interceptions
• 2 sacks
• 4 sack yards
• 65.6 QBR
• 90.2 passer rating

Rodgers attempted 29 more passes than Jackson and completed 20 more passes. That volume helped Pittsburgh accumulate 294 passing yards.

The most notable difference is that Rodgers did not throw an interception. Against a Ravens defense that recorded 78 total tackles and five passes defended, avoiding a turnover was important.

His 31 completions also show how heavily Pittsburgh relied on its passing game. The Steelers recorded 44 receiving targets and 31 receptions, compared with Baltimore’s 17 targets and 11 receptions.

This was a high-volume passing performance rather than an explosive one. Pittsburgh averaged 6.3 yards per attempt, while Baltimore’s passing production was considerably more explosive on a per-completion basis.

Derrick Henry Leads Baltimore’s Rushing Attack

Derrick Henry was the Ravens’ leading rusher and one of the most productive players in the entire game.

Henry carried the ball 20 times for 126 yards, averaging 6.3 yards per carry. His longest run went for 41 yards.

His numbers were:

• 20 carries
• 126 yards
• 6.3 yards per carry
• 0 rushing touchdowns
• Long run of 41 yards

Henry accounted for a substantial portion of Baltimore’s 137 rushing yards. The Ravens collectively carried the ball 27 times, meaning Henry handled the majority of their rushing workload.

His 126 yards also represented more than 90 percent of Baltimore’s total rushing yardage.

The 41-yard long run is especially important because it demonstrates why the Ravens were able to maintain such a strong 5.1-yard team rushing average. Baltimore did not merely accumulate short gains. The offense also generated a major explosive rushing play.

Despite that production, Henry did not score a rushing touchdown. That became relevant because Pittsburgh’s rushing attack produced two touchdowns.

Jaylen Warren Leads Pittsburgh’s Rushing Attack

Jaylen Warren led Pittsburgh in rushing with 14 carries for 66 yards.

His statistical line was:

• 14 carries
• 66 yards
• 4.7 yards per carry
• 0 touchdowns
• Long run of 15 yards

Warren’s performance was not as explosive as Henry’s, but he provided a reliable contribution within a Pittsburgh rushing attack that produced 100 total yards.

The Steelers averaged 4.2 yards per rushing attempt as a team. They did not need to dominate the ground game statistically because their passing volume and scoring efficiency provided the necessary balance.

The biggest difference was touchdown production. Pittsburgh scored two rushing touchdowns, while Baltimore scored none on the ground.

That is an important reminder when analyzing box scores: yardage does not automatically determine which team had the more effective scoring performance.

Zay Flowers Was Baltimore’s Biggest Receiving Threat

Zay Flowers produced the most explosive receiving performance for Baltimore.

He caught four passes for 138 yards and two touchdowns on six targets. His average was an extraordinary 34.5 yards per reception, and his longest reception covered 64 yards.

Flowers’ numbers included:

• 4 receptions
• 138 receiving yards
• 34.5 yards per reception
• 2 receiving touchdowns
• 64-yard long reception
• 6 targets

His four receptions accounted for a huge percentage of Baltimore’s 238 receiving yards.

The combination of 34.5 yards per reception and two touchdowns demonstrates how Baltimore generated its biggest offensive plays through explosive passing. Flowers did not need a large number of receptions to have a major statistical impact.

His 64-yard reception was also the longest receiving play listed in the game data.

From an offensive efficiency perspective, Flowers was one of the defining players of the matchup.

Kenny Gainwell’s Role for Pittsburgh

Kenny Gainwell led the Steelers in receptions.

He finished with eight catches for 64 yards on nine targets, averaging 8.0 yards per reception. His longest reception was 15 yards.

His numbers were:

• 8 receptions
• 64 yards
• 8.0 yards per reception
• 0 touchdowns
• Long reception of 15 yards
• 9 targets

Gainwell’s performance was almost the opposite of Flowers’ statistical profile.

Flowers produced fewer catches but generated massive yardage and two touchdowns. Gainwell was targeted frequently and produced steady short-to-medium gains.

That difference reflects two distinct offensive approaches. Baltimore’s receiving production was highly explosive, while Pittsburgh relied more heavily on volume.

Comparing the Receiving Statistics

The overall receiving numbers provide one of the clearest contrasts in the game.

Baltimore recorded:

• 11 receptions
• 238 yards
• 21.6 yards per reception
• 3 touchdowns
• 17 targets

Pittsburgh recorded:

• 31 receptions
• 294 yards
• 9.5 yards per reception
• 1 touchdown
• 44 targets

Baltimore had 23 fewer receptions but only 56 fewer receiving yards.

That is a remarkable statistical contrast.

It means Baltimore gained substantially more yardage per catch, while Pittsburgh moved the ball through a much larger number of completions.

This distinction helps explain why the game remained close. Baltimore could change field position rapidly through explosive plays. Pittsburgh created more sustained passing volume.

Baltimore’s Defensive Performance

Baltimore’s defense recorded 78 total tackles, including 43 solo tackles.

The team also recorded:

• 2 sacks
• 3 tackles for loss
• 5 passes defended
• 3 quarterback hits

Trenton Simpson led the Ravens in tackles with nine total tackles, including six solo tackles.

The 78 total tackles were significantly higher than Pittsburgh’s 50. That does not automatically mean Baltimore’s defense played better, because tackle totals are influenced by how frequently the opposing offense runs plays and completes passes.

Pittsburgh’s 47 pass attempts created many opportunities for Baltimore defenders to record tackles.

Still, the Ravens managed to generate two sacks and five passes defended. Their defense also did not record an interception.

The absence of a Baltimore interception became important because Pittsburgh’s offense was able to operate through a high volume of passing attempts without giving the Ravens a turnover from the quarterback.

Trenton Simpson Leads Baltimore in Tackles

Trenton Simpson finished as Baltimore’s leading tackler with nine total tackles and six solo tackles.

His performance stood out because Baltimore’s defense was involved in a high-volume game. Pittsburgh completed 31 passes, creating many opportunities for defenders to finish plays.

Simpson’s nine tackles were the highest individual total listed for Baltimore.

The Ravens also recorded three tackles for loss, showing that their defensive production was not limited to plays at or beyond the line of scrimmage.

Pittsburgh’s Defensive Performance

Pittsburgh recorded 50 total tackles and 32 solo tackles.

The Steelers finished with:

• 3 sacks
• 3 tackles for loss
• 4 passes defended
• 5 quarterback hits
• 1 interception

The lower tackle total compared with Baltimore is partly connected to the difference in offensive play distribution.

The Steelers’ most important defensive statistics were the three sacks, five quarterback hits, and one interception.

Those plays created pressure and helped limit Baltimore despite the Ravens’ high yards-per-play production.

T.J. Watt’s Interception Was a Major Defensive Moment

T.J. Watt recorded the game’s listed defensive interception for Pittsburgh.

The Steelers finished with one interception, while Baltimore had none.

That turnover is particularly significant because Baltimore’s offense was producing explosive plays. When a team generates large chunks of yardage, creating a turnover can interrupt momentum and remove a potential scoring opportunity.

Watt’s interception therefore stands out as one of the most consequential defensive statistics in the box score.

The Steelers also produced three sacks compared with Baltimore’s two. Combined with the interception, those defensive plays helped Pittsburgh compensate for Baltimore’s explosive offense.

Cameron Heyward Leads Pittsburgh in Tackles

Cameron Heyward led Pittsburgh with seven total tackles, including five solo tackles.

His seven tackles were the highest individual total for the Steelers.

Pittsburgh’s defense also recorded three tackles for loss, four passes defended, and five quarterback hits.

The five quarterback hits are notable because pressure does not always end with a sack. A defense can affect an offense by forcing rushed decisions, disrupting timing, or making the quarterback uncomfortable even when the play does not result in a sack.

The Steelers finished with three sacks, giving them one more than Baltimore.

Sacks and Quarterback Pressure

Quarterback pressure was relatively balanced.

Baltimore recorded two sacks for four yards against Rodgers.

Pittsburgh recorded three sacks for 16 yards against Jackson.

The difference was not enormous in sack count, but Pittsburgh’s pressure produced one additional sack.

Jackson’s mobility and ability to create explosive plays made pressure especially important for Pittsburgh. Limiting the Ravens’ quarterback even on a few key downs could have a major impact in a two-point game.

Rodgers was sacked twice but lost only four yards on those plays, while Jackson lost 16 yards on his three sacks.

Special Teams Statistics

Special teams played a meaningful role in the final score.

Baltimore’s Tyler Loop made one of two field-goal attempts and converted all three extra-point attempts. He finished with six points, with his successful field goal covering 40 yards.

Pittsburgh’s Chris Boswell was perfect on field goals, making both of his attempts. His longest successful field goal was 57 yards.

Boswell finished with eight points after going 2-for-2 on field goals and 2-for-3 on extra points.

That gave Pittsburgh a clear field-goal advantage.

Baltimore Kick Returns

Baltimore returned five kickoffs for 130 yards.

The Ravens averaged 26.0 yards per return, with a long return of 41 yards.

They did not record a punt return.

Pittsburgh Kick Returns

Pittsburgh returned three kickoffs for 91 yards.

The Steelers averaged 30.3 yards per return, with a long return of 32 yards.

They also recorded two punt returns for 11 yards, averaging 5.5 yards per return. Their longest punt return was nine yards.

The return numbers show that Pittsburgh had the stronger average kickoff return, while Baltimore had more kickoff returns and more total kickoff-return yardage.

Punting Comparison

Baltimore’s Jordan Stout punted four times for 191 yards.

His average was 47.8 yards per punt, with three punts placed inside the 20-yard line. His longest punt was 54 yards.

Pittsburgh’s Corliss Waitman punted three times for 119 yards.

He averaged 39.7 yards per punt, had one punt inside the 20, and recorded a long of 53 yards.

Baltimore therefore had the stronger punting numbers by average distance and punts inside the 20.

This is another example of how the losing team can lead an individual statistical category. Baltimore’s punting performance was stronger, but the Steelers still won the game.

Where the Game Was Won

The final score of 26-24 suggests that the difference was narrow, and the statistics support that conclusion.

Several factors stand out.

1. Pittsburgh’s Passing Volume

Rodgers attempted 47 passes compared with Jackson’s 18.

That created a major difference in completed passes and overall offensive volume. Pittsburgh completed 31 passes, while Baltimore completed 11.

2. Baltimore’s Explosive Plays

Baltimore was far more explosive per reception.

The Ravens averaged 21.6 yards per reception, compared with Pittsburgh’s 9.5.

Zay Flowers was the clearest example, averaging 34.5 yards per catch.

3. Pittsburgh’s Rushing Touchdowns

The Steelers scored two rushing touchdowns.

Baltimore’s rushing attack produced 137 yards but no rushing touchdowns.

That difference mattered because touchdowns, not yardage totals, determine the score.

4. The Turnover

Pittsburgh recorded one interception through T.J. Watt.

Baltimore recorded none.

In a two-point game, a single turnover can become one of the most important statistics on the sheet.

5. Field-Goal Efficiency

Boswell made both of his field-goal attempts, including a 57-yarder.

Tyler Loop made one of two attempts.

The kicking difference gave Pittsburgh additional scoring value.

Offensive Efficiency vs. Offensive Volume

One of the most interesting lessons from this game is the difference between efficiency and volume.

Baltimore’s passing game was extremely efficient in terms of yards generated from its limited number of completions.

The Ravens produced 238 receiving yards on only 11 receptions.

Pittsburgh needed 31 receptions to reach 294 receiving yards.

However, volume can be valuable when it consistently keeps an offense moving.

Rodgers’ 31 completions allowed Pittsburgh to maintain a steady passing attack. Baltimore instead relied on fewer but much larger gains.

Neither strategy was completely dominant.

The final score shows that both approaches were effective enough to keep the game within one possession.

Why Derrick Henry’s 126 Yards Did Not Guarantee a Ravens Victory

Derrick Henry’s 126 rushing yards were one of the most impressive individual statistics of the game.

Yet Baltimore still lost.

This is an important lesson when reading football statistics. A strong individual performance does not necessarily translate into a team victory.

Henry averaged 6.3 yards per carry and produced a 41-yard run. But Baltimore did not score a rushing touchdown.

Meanwhile, Pittsburgh’s rushing attack produced two touchdowns despite gaining only 100 yards.

The difference was therefore not simply how many rushing yards each team gained. It was what happened with those possessions.

Why Zay Flowers’ Two Touchdowns Were Not Enough

Flowers caught only four passes, but those catches produced 138 yards and two touchdowns.

That means Baltimore received huge production from a relatively small number of opportunities.

His 64-yard reception was particularly valuable.

But Pittsburgh’s defense created the game’s listed interception and generated three sacks. Those defensive plays helped offset Baltimore’s explosive receiving production.

This is why the player statistics should be viewed collectively rather than individually.

Flowers had a huge game.

Henry had a huge game.

Jackson posted three touchdown passes.

Yet Pittsburgh still found a way to score 26 points and win.

Baltimore Ravens vs Pittsburgh Steelers Match Player Stats: Key Takeaways

The Baltimore Ravens vs Pittsburgh Steelers match player stats reveal several important trends.

First, Baltimore was more explosive.

The Ravens averaged 5.1 yards per rushing attempt and 21.6 yards per reception. Flowers averaged 34.5 yards per catch, while Henry averaged 6.3 yards per carry.

Second, Pittsburgh relied heavily on passing volume.

Rodgers attempted 47 passes and completed 31. Pittsburgh’s 44 receiving targets were more than double Baltimore’s 17.

Third, Baltimore’s defense recorded more total tackles, but Pittsburgh created the more decisive turnover statistic.

The Steelers recorded one interception, while Baltimore recorded none.

Fourth, Pittsburgh had the better kicking result.

Boswell made both field-goal attempts, while Loop made one of two.

Finally, Pittsburgh converted its rushing production into two touchdowns, while Baltimore finished without a rushing touchdown.

Player Statistical Leaders

Here are the primary individual leaders from the game.

Baltimore Ravens

Passing: Lamar Jackson
11/18, 238 yards, 3 TD, 1 INT, 121.5 rating

Rushing: Derrick Henry
20 carries, 126 yards, 6.3 average

Receiving: Zay Flowers
4 receptions, 138 yards, 2 TD

Tackles: Trenton Simpson
9 total, 6 solo

Kicking: Tyler Loop
1/2 field goals, 3/3 extra points, 6 points

Punting: Jordan Stout
4 punts, 191 yards, 47.8 average

Pittsburgh Steelers

Passing: Aaron Rodgers
31/47, 294 yards, 1 TD, 0 INT, 90.2 rating

Rushing: Jaylen Warren
14 carries, 66 yards, 4.7 average

Receiving: Kenny Gainwell
8 receptions, 64 yards

Tackles: Cameron Heyward
7 total, 5 solo

Defensive highlight: T.J. Watt
1 interception

Kicking: Chris Boswell
2/2 field goals, 2/3 extra points, 8 points

Punting: Corliss Waitman
3 punts, 119 yards, 39.7 average

Statistical Comparison Table

Player	Team	Key Performance
Lamar Jackson	Ravens	238 pass yards, 3 TD, 1 INT
Aaron Rodgers	Steelers	294 pass yards, 1 TD, 0 INT
Derrick Henry	Ravens	126 rush yards
Jaylen Warren	Steelers	66 rush yards
Zay Flowers	Ravens	138 receiving yards, 2 TD
Kenny Gainwell	Steelers	8 receptions, 64 yards
Trenton Simpson	Ravens	9 tackles
Cameron Heyward	Steelers	7 tackles
T.J. Watt	Steelers	1 interception
Tyler Loop	Ravens	6 points
Chris Boswell	Steelers	8 points

What the Numbers Say About Both Teams

The statistics paint two different offensive identities.

Baltimore produced explosive offense. Its 238 passing yards came from only 11 completions, and its 137 rushing yards came at a 5.1-yard average. The Ravens also had three passing touchdowns.

Pittsburgh was more volume-oriented. Rodgers completed 31 passes, and the Steelers produced 31 receptions for 294 yards.

The defenses also had different statistical profiles.

Baltimore recorded 78 total tackles, two sacks, three tackles for loss, five passes defended, and three quarterback hits.

Pittsburgh recorded 50 tackles, three sacks, three tackles for loss, four passes defended, and five quarterback hits.

The Steelers therefore had fewer total tackles but generated more sacks and the game’s listed interception.

That combination was enough to help Pittsburgh survive Baltimore’s explosive offensive production.

Understanding the Final 26-24 Score

A 26-24 score indicates that neither side separated itself for long.

Baltimore scored enough through explosive passing and strong rushing efficiency to remain in control of the offensive statistics in several areas.

Pittsburgh answered through passing volume, rushing touchdowns, defensive pressure, a turnover, and successful field goals.

The final margin was only two points.

That means it would be misleading to describe the game as a statistical blowout in either direction. The numbers instead show a matchup where different strengths balanced each other.

Baltimore had the bigger individual offensive explosions.

Pittsburgh had several smaller advantages that collectively proved decisive.

Frequently Asked Questions

What was the final score between the Ravens and Steelers?

The Pittsburgh Steelers defeated the Baltimore Ravens 26-24 on January 4, 2026.

Who was the Ravens’ leading rusher?

Derrick Henry led Baltimore with 20 carries for 126 yards. He averaged 6.3 yards per carry and had a long run of 41 yards.

Who was the Steelers’ leading passer?

Aaron Rodgers led Pittsburgh with 31 completions on 47 attempts for 294 yards and one touchdown. He did not throw an interception.

Who was Baltimore’s leading receiver?

Zay Flowers led the Ravens with four receptions for 138 yards and two touchdowns. His longest reception was 64 yards.

Who recorded the interception in the game?

Pittsburgh’s T.J. Watt recorded the listed interception. Baltimore did not record an interception.

Which kicker scored more points?

Chris Boswell scored eight points for Pittsburgh, while Tyler Loop scored six for Baltimore.

Conclusion

The Baltimore Ravens vs Pittsburgh Steelers match player stats from January 4, 2026, show how a two-point football game can be decided by several small statistical differences rather than one dominant category.

Baltimore produced excellent individual performances from Lamar Jackson, Derrick Henry, and Zay Flowers. Henry’s 126 rushing yards and Flowers’ 138 receiving yards were particularly impressive, while Jackson threw three touchdown passes.

Pittsburgh responded with Aaron Rodgers’ 294 passing yards, two rushing touchdowns, three sacks, a T.J. Watt interception, and a perfect 2-for-2 field-goal performance from Chris Boswell.

The Ravens were more explosive in several areas, but the Steelers were able to combine offensive volume, defensive pressure, turnover production, and scoring efficiency. The result was a 26-24 Pittsburgh victory.

Looking beyond the final score, the game provides a useful example of why player statistics should always be examined together. Yardage, touchdowns, turnovers, efficiency, pressure, and special teams all contributed to the final result. No single statistic completely explains the outcome.