New England Patriots vs Minnesota Vikings Match Player Stats
The New England Patriots vs Minnesota Vikings Match Player Stats from the August 16, 2025 NFL preseason meeting tell a much more detailed story than the final 20-12 score alone. New England came away with the victory, but the numbers reveal several important differences between the teams. The Patriots were more efficient through the air, produced three rushing touchdowns as a team, created four sacks, and intercepted Minnesota quarterbacks twice. The Vikings moved the ball for 219 passing yards and 252 receiving yards, but turnovers and an inability to finish drives into touchdowns kept their offense from turning yardage into points.
This preseason matchup was also useful for evaluating individual performances. Joshua Dobbs led New England’s passing attack with 106 yards and a touchdown, while Max Brosmer produced 156 passing yards for Minnesota but also threw an interception. JaMycal Hasty led the Patriots in rushing with 47 yards, and Zavier Scott paced Minnesota with 28 rushing yards. In the receiving game, Efton Chism III stood out for New England with six catches for 71 yards and a touchdown, while Tim Jones led Minnesota with five receptions for 68 yards.
The final score was New England Patriots 20, Minnesota Vikings 12, with New England building its advantage early and Minnesota remaining within striking distance throughout the second half.
New England Patriots vs Minnesota Vikings Match Player Stats
The most important numbers from the game are summarized below:
| Category | New England Patriots | Minnesota Vikings |
| Final Score | 20 | 12 |
| Passing | 22/36, 207 yards, 1 TD, 0 INT | 23/43, 219 yards, 0 TD, 2 INT |
| Passer Rating | 86.2 | 51.7 |
| Rushing | 34 carries, 107 yards, 1 TD | 16 carries, 54 yards, 0 TD |
| Rushing Average | 3.1 | 3.4 |
| Receiving | 22 receptions, 207 yards, 1 TD | 23 receptions, 252 yards, 0 TD |
| Defensive Interceptions | 2 | 0 |
| Sacks | 4 | 0 |
| Kick Returns | 4 for 130 yards | 4 for 141 yards |
| Punt Returns | 2 for 46 yards | 2 for 33 yards |
| Field Goals | 2/3 | 4/4 |
| Extra Points | 2/2 | Not listed |
| Punts | 4 for 208 yards | 4 for 206 yards |
| Punting Average | 52.0 | 51.5 |
One of the clearest themes is that Minnesota actually gained more passing yards and more receiving yards, yet New England controlled the scoreboard. That difference is important because it shows why raw yardage is not always enough to explain an NFL result.
Final Score and Game Flow
New England defeated Minnesota 20-12 after taking control during the opening half.
The Patriots scored seven points in the first quarter and another seven in the second quarter. Minnesota did not score in the first quarter and managed only three points in the second. That left New England with a 14-3 advantage at halftime.
The third quarter was much tighter. Neither team scored a touchdown, and Minnesota added three points to reduce the gap to 14-6.
The fourth quarter produced the most points for both teams. New England scored six points, while Minnesota scored six as well. Even though Minnesota matched the Patriots’ fourth-quarter scoring output, the early deficit was too large to overcome.
The quarter-by-quarter scoring was:
| Quarter | Patriots | Vikings |
| First | 7 | 0 |
| Second | 7 | 3 |
| Third | 0 | 3 |
| Fourth | 6 | 6 |
| Final | 20 | 12 |
This scoring pattern is particularly revealing. Minnesota did not collapse after halftime. Instead, the Vikings improved their scoring output and kept the game competitive. The problem was that their offense did not produce enough touchdowns, while New England had already established a meaningful advantage.
How New England Won the Game
New England’s victory was built around several complementary areas rather than one overwhelming statistical category.
Passing efficiency
The Patriots completed 22 of 36 passes for 207 yards, one touchdown, and no interceptions. Their listed passer rating was 86.2.
Minnesota completed more passes in absolute terms, going 23 of 43 for 219 yards. However, the Vikings did not throw a touchdown and were intercepted twice. Their passer rating was only 51.7.
That creates an important contrast.
New England’s passing attack was not dramatically more productive in yardage. The Patriots actually finished 12 passing yards behind Minnesota. The difference was efficiency and ball security.
New England averaged approximately 5.8 yards per pass attempt based on the supplied passing totals, while Minnesota averaged approximately 5.1. More importantly, the Patriots protected the football while Minnesota gave the defense two opportunities to change possession.
Rushing production
The Patriots ran the ball 34 times for 107 yards and a touchdown.
Minnesota carried the ball only 16 times for 54 yards and did not score a rushing touchdown.
The Vikings had a slightly better rushing average, 3.4 yards per carry compared with New England’s 3.1. That is an important detail because it prevents an overly simplistic conclusion that New England simply ran the ball more efficiently.
Instead, the bigger difference was volume and scoring. New England used the running game much more frequently and eventually turned that workload into a rushing touchdown.
The Patriots had 18 more rushing attempts and 53 more rushing yards.
Defensive pressure
Perhaps the biggest defensive difference was the sack total.
New England recorded four sacks.
Minnesota recorded zero.
That difference matters even in a preseason game. Quarterbacks need time to operate, and defensive pressure can disrupt drives before they reach scoring range. New England also recorded two interceptions, while Minnesota finished without one.
Taken together, the Patriots produced four sacks and two defensive interceptions. That is six major defensive disruption plays listed in the supplied statistics.
Minnesota, by comparison, recorded no sacks and no interceptions.
Joshua Dobbs Leads the Patriots Passing Attack
Joshua Dobbs was New England’s leading passer, completing 11 of 16 attempts for 106 yards and one touchdown.
His listed passer rating was 107.8.
The efficiency of that performance stands out. Dobbs completed 68.8 percent of his passes based on the supplied numbers and did not throw an interception.
His stat line was:
| Joshua Dobbs | Statistic |
| Completions | 11 |
| Attempts | 16 |
| Completion Rate | 68.8% |
| Passing Yards | 106 |
| Touchdowns | 1 |
| Interceptions | 0 |
| Passer Rating | 107.8 |
The most useful way to interpret Dobbs’ performance is not simply to look at his 106 yards. The Patriots’ passing game did not need huge volume from him to remain effective.
He completed nearly seven of every ten attempts, avoided turnovers, and produced the team’s only listed passing touchdown. In a preseason setting, those qualities can be especially valuable when the objective includes evaluating players while maintaining offensive stability.
His performance also fits the broader team pattern. New England did not need to dominate through the air because the Patriots combined competent passing with a much heavier rushing workload and a disruptive defense.
Max Brosmer Produces Yardage but Minnesota Struggles With Efficiency
Max Brosmer led Minnesota with 15 completions on 27 attempts for 156 yards.
He did not throw a touchdown and was intercepted once. His listed passer rating was 57.0.
His individual numbers were:
| Max Brosmer | Statistic |
| Completions | 15 |
| Attempts | 27 |
| Completion Rate | 55.6% |
| Passing Yards | 156 |
| Touchdowns | 0 |
| Interceptions | 1 |
| Passer Rating | 57.0 |
Brosmer’s 156 yards were the highest passing total by either team’s listed leading quarterback. Yet the final result demonstrates why yardage must be evaluated alongside turnovers and touchdowns.
Minnesota’s overall passing totals included two interceptions, while New England had none. Brosmer was responsible for one of the Vikings’ listed interceptions, with the team’s overall defensive statistics showing two interceptions by New England.
For Minnesota, the key issue was therefore not simply generating passing yards. The offense needed to turn those yards into touchdowns while avoiding the mistakes that gave New England additional opportunities.
JaMycal Hasty Leads New England’s Ground Game
JaMycal Hasty was the Patriots’ leading rusher with 11 carries for 47 yards.
His average was 4.3 yards per carry.
That was one of the more efficient individual rushing performances in the game, especially compared with the Patriots’ overall 3.1-yard team average.
Hasty’s numbers were:
| JaMycal Hasty | Statistic |
| Carries | 11 |
| Rushing Yards | 47 |
| Average | 4.3 yards |
| Rushing Touchdowns | Not listed |
Hasty accounted for 47 of New England’s 107 rushing yards. That means he supplied a substantial portion of the team’s ground production while operating within a larger committee.
The team total also tells us something important about the Patriots’ offensive approach. New England did not rely exclusively on one running back. With 34 total rushing attempts, the workload was distributed across the backfield.
That type of usage is common in preseason football because teams are evaluating multiple players rather than relying exclusively on a single primary back.
Zavier Scott Leads the Vikings in Rushing
Zavier Scott led Minnesota’s rushing attack with 10 carries for 28 yards.
His average was 2.8 yards per carry.
The individual line was:
| Zavier Scott | Statistic |
| Carries | 10 |
| Rushing Yards | 28 |
| Average | 2.8 yards |
| Touchdowns | 0 |
Scott received a meaningful portion of Minnesota’s limited rushing workload. However, the Vikings finished with only 54 rushing yards on 16 attempts.
That limited rushing production placed greater pressure on the passing game.
Minnesota threw the ball 43 times compared with only 16 rushing attempts. The imbalance is striking. The Vikings were far more dependent on their passing attack than New England was.
That reliance becomes more significant when the passing game produces no touchdowns and two interceptions.
Efton Chism III Was New England’s Leading Receiver
Efton Chism III led the Patriots in receiving with six receptions for 71 yards and one touchdown.
That made him the team’s most productive listed pass catcher in terms of both receptions and receiving yards.
His performance:
| Efton Chism III | Statistic |
| Receptions | 6 |
| Receiving Yards | 71 |
| Touchdowns | 1 |
Chism’s six receptions represented a substantial share of New England’s 22 completions and 22 receptions.
The touchdown was particularly important because New England finished with only one passing touchdown in the supplied team statistics. Chism therefore played a direct role in one of the Patriots’ most important scoring plays.
His 71 receiving yards were also more than one-third of New England’s 207 receiving yards.
For anyone studying the player statistics rather than simply the final score, Chism is one of the clearest individual names to remember from this matchup.
Tim Jones Leads Minnesota Receivers
Tim Jones was Minnesota’s leading receiver with five receptions for 68 yards.
He did not record a touchdown in the supplied data.
His line was:
| Tim Jones | Statistic |
| Receptions | 5 |
| Receiving Yards | 68 |
| Touchdowns | 0 |
Jones was responsible for 68 of Minnesota’s 252 receiving yards.
Interestingly, Minnesota finished with more total receiving yards than New England, 252 to 207. Yet the Vikings did not turn that advantage into a touchdown.
That is one of the strongest examples from this game of why player statistics should be interpreted in context.
A receiver can have a productive individual day while the overall offense still struggles to score. Jones’ five catches and 68 yards show that Minnesota was capable of producing useful receiving plays. The team’s problem was converting those opportunities into touchdowns and avoiding turnovers.
Patriots Defense Makes the Biggest Difference
The defensive statistics provide perhaps the clearest explanation for the final result.
New England recorded:
- Four sacks
- Two interceptions
- Six tackles by Kobee Minor
- No listed team fumbles
- One interception each from Kyle Dugger and Alex Austin
Minnesota recorded:
- Zero sacks
- Zero interceptions
- Seven tackles by Austin Keys
- Two fumbles in the supplied team data, with none listed as lost by the Vikings’ players or team total
The Patriots’ defensive pressure stands out immediately.
Kyle Dugger and Alex Austin Produce Interceptions
Kyle Dugger and Alex Austin each recorded one interception for New England.
Those two turnovers were critical because Minnesota finished with no defensive interceptions of its own.
The turnover differential shown by the supplied data strongly favored New England. The Patriots protected their own passing game while creating two takeaways from Minnesota’s quarterbacks.
That combination is one of the simplest explanations for the 20-12 result.
Kobee Minor Leads New England in Tackles
Kobee Minor led the Patriots with six tackles.
That does not mean he was solely responsible for New England’s defensive performance, but it highlights his activity level within the supplied defensive statistics.
The Patriots’ defense also benefited from a broader pressure package. Four sacks meant Minnesota quarterbacks were repeatedly put under pressure.
Austin Keys Leads Minnesota in Tackles
Austin Keys recorded seven tackles for Minnesota, the highest listed tackle total from either team.
His seven tackles show that Minnesota had individual defensive activity despite the team recording no sacks and no interceptions.
This distinction matters. Tackles alone do not necessarily indicate defensive dominance. Minnesota had a player leading the game in tackles, but New England created the more consequential defensive events through sacks and interceptions.
The Turnover Battle Explains More Than the Yardage Battle
If someone looked only at the passing and receiving totals, Minnesota might appear to have had the better offensive day.
The Vikings produced:
- 219 passing yards
- 252 receiving yards
- 23 completions
New England produced:
- 207 passing yards
- 207 receiving yards
- 22 completions
Minnesota therefore gained more passing yards and more receiving yards.
Yet New England won 20-12.
Why?
Because football rewards points, not yardage totals.
New England threw no interceptions. Minnesota threw two. New England recorded four sacks. Minnesota recorded none. New England also scored three rushing touchdowns according to the supplied team rushing statistic? The provided team line says New England had 1 rushing touchdown, so the correct interpretation is that the Patriots had one rushing touchdown and one passing touchdown listed, while the remaining points came from kicking.
This distinction is important because the final scoring total was supported by multiple scoring methods rather than a huge offensive explosion.
The supplied kicking statistics show New England went 2/3 on field goals and 2/2 on extra points for eight kicking points. Minnesota made all four of its listed field-goal attempts for 12 points.
That means Minnesota’s 12 points came entirely through field goals in the supplied scoring data. New England, meanwhile, combined touchdowns with field-goal and extra-point production.
That is a major difference in scoring efficiency.
Why Minnesota’s 12 Points Were Not Enough
Minnesota made four field goals, producing 12 points.
On paper, four successful field goals sound productive. But the absence of a touchdown is significant.
A field goal gives an offense three points. A touchdown creates a much larger scoring opportunity and can change the shape of a game quickly.
Minnesota’s scoring pattern was:
- 0 points in the first quarter
- 3 points in the second quarter
- 3 points in the third quarter
- 6 points in the fourth quarter
The Vikings therefore never produced more than six points in any quarter.
New England scored two touchdowns during the first half according to the supplied scoring breakdown, creating a 14-3 lead. Once that happened, Minnesota was forced to spend the rest of the game trying to close the gap.
The Vikings eventually matched New England’s fourth-quarter six points, but that was not enough.
Special Teams Were Competitive
The special-teams numbers were much closer than the offensive and defensive statistics.
New England recorded four kick returns for 130 yards, an average of 32.5 yards per return.
Minnesota recorded four kick returns for 141 yards, averaging 35.3 yards.
That gave Minnesota a slight edge in kick-return efficiency.
On punt returns, New England had two returns for 46 yards, averaging 23.0 yards.
Minnesota had two returns for 33 yards, averaging 16.5 yards.
This gave New England the stronger listed punt-return production.
The punting numbers were nearly identical:
| Special Teams | Patriots | Vikings |
| Kick Returns | 4 | 4 |
| Kick Return Yards | 130 | 141 |
| Kick Return Average | 32.5 | 35.3 |
| Punt Returns | 2 | 2 |
| Punt Return Yards | 46 | 33 |
| Punt Return Average | 23.0 | 16.5 |
| Punts | 4 | 4 |
| Punt Yards | 208 | 206 |
| Punt Average | 52.0 | 51.5 |
| Long Punt | 64 | 58 |
The special-teams battle was therefore not the primary reason for New England’s victory. The decisive differences were much more apparent in quarterback efficiency, turnovers, sacks, rushing volume, and touchdown production.
Field-Goal Accuracy Kept Minnesota Competitive
Minnesota’s kicking performance deserves specific attention.
The Vikings converted all four listed field-goal attempts.
New England made two of three.
Minnesota therefore had a perfect field-goal record in the supplied data, while New England missed one attempt.
Despite that advantage, Minnesota still lost by eight points.
This is a useful lesson when interpreting kicking statistics. Field-goal accuracy can keep a team competitive, but it cannot fully compensate for an offense that fails to produce touchdowns.
Minnesota’s four field goals accounted for all 12 of its points in the supplied kicking and scoring data. New England’s touchdowns created the difference.
The Biggest Statistical Mismatches
Several numbers from the matchup deserve to be highlighted because they show exactly where the game separated.
Rushing attempts
New England: 34
Minnesota: 16
Difference: 18 attempts
The Patriots were much more committed to the running game.
Rushing yards
New England: 107
Minnesota: 54
Difference: 53 yards
This gave the Patriots a stronger overall ground contribution.
Sacks
New England: 4
Minnesota: 0
Difference: 4 sacks
This was one of the clearest defensive advantages.
Interceptions
New England: 2
Minnesota: 0
Difference: 2 interceptions
Turnovers significantly favored the Patriots.
Passing yards
New England: 207
Minnesota: 219
Difference: Minnesota +12
Minnesota actually had the edge in passing yardage.
Receiving yards
New England: 207
Minnesota: 252
Difference: Minnesota +45
Again, Minnesota produced more yardage through the air.
These contrasting numbers explain why simply checking box-score yardage can produce the wrong impression about a football game.
What the Matchup Says About Preseason Player Evaluation
Preseason statistics should be interpreted differently from regular-season statistics.
A regular-season team usually has a more stable rotation and a stronger incentive to maximize the best available players.
In the preseason, coaches are evaluating depth, roster competition, role fit, execution, and consistency.
That makes individual statistics useful, but not definitive.
For example, a receiver with six catches and 71 yards has clearly produced useful numbers. But those numbers do not automatically establish where that player will rank on the final depth chart.
Similarly, a quarterback can post a strong passer rating without necessarily securing a long-term starting role.
The most useful approach is to combine statistics with context.
For this matchup, the strongest statistical signals include:
- Quarterback efficiency and ball security
- Ability to create defensive pressure
- Rushing workload and production
- Touchdown conversion
- Individual receiving consistency
- Special-teams contribution
- Performance across multiple areas rather than one isolated statistic
This approach produces a more realistic understanding of what the box score can and cannot tell us.
What Patriots Fans Can Take From the Numbers
For New England, the most encouraging statistical signs were balance and defensive disruption.
The Patriots passed for 207 yards and rushed for 107. They did not depend entirely on one phase of the offense.
Their defense also created four sacks and two interceptions.
The combination of no passing interceptions and two defensive takeaways is especially encouraging from a basic execution standpoint.
The Patriots also received strong individual performances from several players:
- Joshua Dobbs: 106 passing yards and one touchdown
- JaMycal Hasty: 47 rushing yards
- Efton Chism III: 71 receiving yards and one touchdown
- Kobee Minor: six tackles
- Kyle Dugger: one interception
- Alex Austin: one interception
The biggest caveat is that preseason performance is not the same as regular-season proof. These statistics are useful indicators, but they should not be treated as a guarantee of future production.
What Vikings Fans Can Take From the Numbers
Minnesota’s numbers are more complicated.
The Vikings generated more passing yards and receiving yards than New England. Tim Jones recorded 68 receiving yards, while Max Brosmer passed for 156 yards.
Minnesota also averaged 3.4 yards per rushing attempt, slightly better than New England’s 3.1.
The problem was conversion.
The Vikings finished with no passing touchdowns and no rushing touchdowns in the supplied team statistics. Their 12 points came from four successful field goals.
The defense also failed to record a sack or interception.
That combination created a difficult formula:
- Reasonable passing yardage
- Reasonable receiving production
- Limited rushing volume
- No offensive touchdowns
- Two defensive interceptions allowed
- No defensive sacks
- No defensive interceptions
The numbers suggest that Minnesota needed better finishing and more defensive disruption to turn its yardage into a winning performance.
A Practical Way to Read This Box Score
When evaluating a game like this, it helps to avoid looking at every statistic with equal weight.
A useful order is:
First: Check the final score
The Patriots won 20-12.
Second: Check touchdowns
New England had touchdown production. Minnesota did not record a touchdown in the supplied team scoring data.
Third: Check turnovers
New England recorded two interceptions. Minnesota recorded none.
Fourth: Check quarterback efficiency
Dobbs had a 107.8 rating in his listed individual line. Brosmer had a 57.0 rating.
Fifth: Check pressure
New England recorded four sacks. Minnesota recorded zero.
Sixth: Check the rushing workload
New England ran 34 times. Minnesota ran 16 times.
Seventh: Check individual leaders
Chism, Hasty, Dobbs, Minor, Dugger, Austin, Brosmer, Scott, Jones, and Keys provide the main individual statistical reference points.
This method gives a much clearer picture than simply comparing total yards.
Important Limitations of the Supplied Statistics
There are a few areas where the supplied data should be treated carefully.
The team passing totals and the individual quarterback totals do not provide a complete breakdown of every quarterback who played. Therefore, the leading quarterback statistics should not be interpreted as the entire team’s quarterback distribution.
The same applies to individual defensive statistics. The listed tackle leaders and interceptions identify the supplied leaders and major plays, but they do not represent every defensive contribution.
The fumble information also needs careful wording. The supplied data lists two Vikings fumbles with none lost by the listed players or team total, while also noting one recovered by the Patriots. Because the supplied summary contains that combination, it is safer to describe the fumble information exactly as provided rather than infer a complete turnover sequence that is not separately detailed.
This is an important part of responsible sports reporting. A good player-stat article should distinguish between confirmed figures and conclusions that require additional play-by-play information.
New England Patriots vs Minnesota Vikings Match Player Stats: Key Takeaways
The most important conclusions from the supplied numbers are straightforward.
New England won because it was more effective in the areas that directly influence scoring and possession.
The Patriots:
- Won 20-12
- Passed for 207 yards
- Rushed for 107 yards
- Recorded one passing touchdown
- Recorded one rushing touchdown
- Threw no interceptions
- Recorded four sacks
- Intercepted Minnesota twice
- Received 71 yards and one touchdown from Efton Chism III
- Got 106 passing yards and one touchdown from Joshua Dobbs
- Got 47 rushing yards from JaMycal Hasty
Minnesota:
- Passed for 219 yards
- Rushed for 54 yards
- Recorded no passing touchdowns
- Recorded no rushing touchdowns
- Threw two interceptions
- Recorded no sacks
- Produced 252 receiving yards
- Got 156 passing yards from Max Brosmer
- Got 28 rushing yards from Zavier Scott
- Got 68 receiving yards from Tim Jones
- Made all four listed field-goal attempts
The biggest lesson is that Minnesota gained more passing and receiving yardage but failed to translate those yards into touchdowns.
New England did not need to win the yardage battle in every category. Instead, the Patriots were more effective at protecting the football, creating turnovers, applying pressure, and scoring touchdowns.
FAQs
Who won the Patriots vs Vikings preseason game?
The New England Patriots defeated the Minnesota Vikings 20-12 on August 16, 2025.
Who was the Patriots’ leading passer?
Joshua Dobbs was New England’s listed leading passer, completing 11 of 16 passes for 106 yards and one touchdown with a 107.8 passer rating.
Who led the Vikings in passing?
Max Brosmer led Minnesota with 15 completions on 27 attempts for 156 yards, no touchdowns, one interception, and a 57.0 passer rating.
Who was the Patriots’ leading receiver?
Efton Chism III led New England with six receptions for 71 yards and one touchdown.
Who led the Vikings in receiving?
Tim Jones led Minnesota with five receptions for 68 yards.
How many sacks and interceptions did the Patriots record?
New England recorded four sacks and two interceptions. Kyle Dugger and Alex Austin recorded one interception each.
Conclusion
The New England Patriots vs Minnesota Vikings Match Player Stats from this preseason matchup show why a final score cannot be understood through total yardage alone.
Minnesota produced 219 passing yards and 252 receiving yards, both higher than New England’s totals. However, the Vikings did not score a touchdown and threw two interceptions. New England, meanwhile, protected the football, recorded four sacks, created two interceptions, ran the ball 34 times, and scored 20 points.
Joshua Dobbs provided efficient quarterback play in his listed statistics, while Efton Chism III was the Patriots’ leading receiver and JaMycal Hasty led their rushing attack. On defense, Kyle Dugger and Alex Austin produced interceptions, while Kobee Minor led New England in tackles.
For Minnesota, Max Brosmer led the passing numbers, Tim Jones led the receiving statistics, Zavier Scott led the rushing attack, and Austin Keys recorded the highest listed tackle total.
The matchup ultimately came down to execution in high-value situations. Minnesota moved the ball, but New England was better at turning its opportunities into points and defensive disruptions. That is the central statistical story behind the Patriots’ 20-12 preseason victory.
