Colts vs Seahawks Match Player Stats

The colts vs seahawks match player stats from the December 15, 2025 meeting tell a story that goes well beyond the final 18-16 score. Seattle Seahawks won a tight home game over the Indianapolis Colts, improving to 11-3 while Indianapolis fell to 8-6. The scoreboard suggests a defensive battle, but the individual numbers reveal a more detailed picture. Sam Darnold produced 271 passing yards for Seattle, Jaxon Smith-Njigba delivered 113 receiving yards, Jonathan Taylor led Indianapolis with 87 rushing yards, and Jason Myers converted all six of his field-goal attempts to provide every Seattle point.

This was the type of game where small differences mattered. Seattle did not score a touchdown, yet still won because Myers was perfect on six field-goal attempts. Indianapolis, meanwhile, had the advantage of a rushing performance led by Taylor but could not generate enough total scoring production to overcome Seattle’s kicking output. The Seahawks also received a major contribution from their passing game, with Darnold averaging 7.5 yards per attempt and Smith-Njigba averaging 16.1 yards per reception.

For anyone studying the game from a player-performance perspective, the most useful approach is not simply to identify the highest yardage totals. It is to understand how passing efficiency, rushing volume, receiving production, turnovers, defensive pressure, special teams, and field-goal accuracy combined to produce the result.

Colts vs Seahawks Match Player Stats: Game Overview

The Indianapolis Colts entered the game at 8-6 overall and 2-5 on the road. Seattle came in at 11-3 overall and 5-2 at home. That difference in home and road performance was important context for a contest decided by only two points.

Seattle ultimately won 18-16.

The scoring pattern was unusual because the Seahawks did not record a touchdown according to the supplied statistics. Instead, Jason Myers accounted for all 18 Seattle points by making six field goals. His longest successful kick was 56 yards.

Indianapolis scored 16 points, with Blake Grupe making three field goals and one extra point for 10 total points. The Colts therefore had a more conventional scoring profile, but their offensive production did not translate into enough points to beat Seattle.

The core game data is:

Category	Indianapolis Colts	Seattle Seahawks
Final score	16	18
Record after game	8-6	11-3
Home/Away record	2-5 away	5-2 home
Passing yards	120	271
Rushing leader	Jonathan Taylor, 87 yards	Zach Charbonnet, 31 yards
Receiving leader	Ameer Abdullah, 32 yards	Jaxon Smith-Njigba, 113 yards
Field goals	3/3	6/6
Team tackles	61	67
Sacks	1	1
Interceptions	0	1

The biggest statistical difference is immediately visible: Seattle’s passing production was substantially higher. At the same time, Indianapolis had a clear rushing centerpiece in Taylor.

That contrast helps explain why the final score was so close despite Seattle’s advantage through the air.

Philip Rivers vs Sam Darnold

The quarterback comparison is one of the most interesting parts of this game.

Philip Rivers completed 18 of 27 passes for 120 yards, one touchdown, and one interception. His average was 4.4 yards per attempt, with a 52.2 QBR and a 73.1 passer rating according to the supplied data.

Sam Darnold completed 22 of 36 passes for 271 yards, with no touchdowns and no interceptions. He averaged 7.5 yards per attempt, posted a 39.8 QBR, and recorded an 84.4 passer rating.

The basic comparison looks like this:

Quarterback	Comp/Att	Yards	Yards/Attempt	TD	INT	QBR	Rating
Philip Rivers	18/27	120	4.4	1	1	52.2	73.1
Sam Darnold	22/36	271	7.5	0	0	39.8	84.4

Darnold clearly produced more yardage and generated more yards per attempt. His 271 passing yards were more than twice Rivers’ 120 yards.

However, the quarterback comparison should not be reduced to yardage alone.

Rivers was more efficient in completion percentage. He completed 66.7 percent of his attempts, while Darnold completed 61.1 percent. Rivers also threw a touchdown, something Darnold did not accomplish.

The more important difference was explosive passing production. Darnold’s 7.5 yards per attempt indicate that Seattle was gaining considerably more ground whenever the passing game connected. Smith-Njigba’s 113 receiving yards were a major part of that output.

The supplied statistics also list one sack against Rivers and seven sacks against Darnold under the respective sack figures. That is another important consideration because Seattle’s passing production remained strong despite the reported pressure.

Why Darnold’s 271 yards mattered

A quarterback can accumulate passing yards without creating meaningful scoring opportunities. That is not what happened here.

Darnold’s passing yardage helped Seattle sustain an offensive advantage despite failing to throw a touchdown pass. His 271 yards created opportunities for the Seahawks to reach field-goal range repeatedly.

That distinction is crucial.

The Seahawks did not need Darnold to produce touchdown passes because their kicker was perfect. Every successful long drive had potential value, even when the final result was three points instead of seven.

Rivers’ touchdown was not enough

Rivers had fewer passing yards but did produce one touchdown.

That touchdown contribution helped Indianapolis remain within striking distance, but the Colts lacked the broader offensive output needed to separate from Seattle. A 120-yard passing performance combined with Taylor’s 87 rushing yards gave Indianapolis some balance, yet the Seahawks’ passing attack generated much more total yardage through the air.

This is a good example of why quarterback statistics should be examined in context rather than through one headline number.

Jonathan Taylor Leads the Colts Rushing Attack

Jonathan Taylor was Indianapolis’ leading rusher with 25 carries for 87 yards.

His average was 3.5 yards per carry, and his longest run covered 11 yards. He did not score a rushing touchdown.

The statistics show a heavy workload:

Jonathan Taylor: 25 carries, 87 yards, 3.5 average, 0 touchdowns, 11-yard long.

Taylor’s 25 attempts demonstrate that Indianapolis relied heavily on its ground game. The challenge was efficiency. A 3.5-yard average means the Colts were often working through relatively modest gains rather than consistently creating explosive runs.

Yet volume itself has value.

Twenty-five rushing attempts can help control tempo, create manageable down-and-distance situations, and reduce the amount of pressure placed on a quarterback. Taylor’s workload therefore needs to be considered as part of Indianapolis’ overall offensive approach.

The problem was that the rushing attack did not generate enough explosive production to compensate for the limited passing output.

Taylor’s performance in context

An 87-yard rushing performance is not poor in isolation. In fact, Taylor was clearly the Colts’ most productive runner.

The issue was efficiency relative to opportunity.

Twenty-five carries for 87 yards works out to 3.5 yards per carry. With a long of only 11 yards and no rushing touchdown, there was no single run that dramatically changed the scoring picture.

Seattle’s defense therefore managed to keep Indianapolis from turning Taylor’s substantial workload into a dominant scoring advantage.

Zach Charbonnet and Seattle’s Rushing Production

Seattle’s leading rusher was Zach Charbonnet, who carried the ball eight times for 31 yards.

His average was 3.9 yards per carry, with an eight-yard longest run and no rushing touchdowns.

Compared with Taylor, Charbonnet had much less volume.

Rusher	Carries	Yards	Average	TD	Long
Jonathan Taylor	25	87	3.5	0	11
Zach Charbonnet	8	31	3.9	0	8

The contrast is revealing.

Indianapolis depended on the running game much more heavily, while Seattle’s offensive production was driven primarily by the passing game. Charbonnet’s 3.9-yard average was slightly better than Taylor’s 3.5, but his eight carries meant he had a much smaller role in total offensive volume.

Seattle did not need a huge rushing performance because Darnold and the receiving corps supplied the majority of the meaningful yardage.

Jaxon Smith-Njigba Was the Offensive Standout

Among the colts vs seahawks match player stats, Jaxon Smith-Njigba’s receiving performance stands out as one of the clearest individual advantages for Seattle.

Smith-Njigba recorded seven receptions for 113 yards on nine targets. He averaged 16.1 yards per reception and produced a 39-yard long reception.

Those numbers indicate more than simple volume.

He was not merely catching short passes and accumulating yardage through repetition. His 16.1-yard average demonstrates significant downfield impact.

Receiver	Receptions	Yards	Average	TD	Long	Targets
Jaxon Smith-Njigba	7	113	16.1	0	39	9
Ameer Abdullah	5	32	6.4	0	14	5

Smith-Njigba accounted for a substantial portion of Seattle’s passing production.

His 113 yards represented more than 40 percent of Darnold’s 271 passing yards. That makes his performance especially significant when evaluating how Seattle moved the ball.

The importance of the 39-yard reception

The longest reception in the supplied statistics was Smith-Njigba’s 39-yard catch.

Explosive plays matter because they can change the expected outcome of an entire drive. Instead of requiring several short completions to move into scoring territory, one long reception can immediately place an offense in a position where a field goal becomes realistic.

That dynamic fits the final result perfectly.

Seattle did not need touchdown production to win. It needed enough offensive movement to put Myers in position to convert field goals.

Smith-Njigba’s ability to generate large chunks of yardage therefore had direct value even without a touchdown.

Ameer Abdullah Leads Indianapolis Receivers

Ameer Abdullah led Indianapolis in receiving with five catches for 32 yards on five targets.

He averaged 6.4 yards per reception and had a 14-yard long reception.

His production was much smaller than Smith-Njigba’s, but his perfect five-catch result on five listed targets indicates that he was reliable when targeted.

The broader issue for Indianapolis was not necessarily one receiver failing to produce. It was the overall lack of passing yardage.

The supplied team receiving figures list Indianapolis at 18 receptions for 120 yards, 6.7 yards per reception, one touchdown, and 26 targets. Seattle is listed at 22 receptions for 271 yards, 12.3 yards per reception, zero touchdowns, and 33 targets.

Those figures underline the central offensive contrast:

Seattle generated significantly more yardage per reception.

That difference helps explain why Seattle could move the ball effectively without recording a passing touchdown.

Seattle’s Six Field Goals Were the Deciding Factor

Jason Myers may have been the most important player on the scoreboard.

Myers made all six of his field-goal attempts. His longest successful kick was 56 yards, and he scored all 18 of Seattle’s points.

That means Seattle’s entire scoring total came through its kicker.

This is an unusual but highly instructive outcome.

A team does not necessarily need touchdowns to win a football game. If an offense can consistently cross midfield, protect the football, and reach realistic field-goal range, an accurate kicker can turn those possessions into points.

Myers converted every opportunity.

Indianapolis kicker Blake Grupe was also perfect, making three of three field goals and one of one extra point. He scored 10 points for the Colts.

The kicking comparison was therefore:

Kicker	FG	FG %	Long	XP	Points
Blake Grupe	3/3	100%	60	1/1	10
Jason Myers	6/6	100%	56	0/0	18

Both kickers were perfect.

The difference was opportunity.

Myers attempted twice as many field goals and converted all of them. That six-point gap in field-goal production ultimately became the difference between winning and losing.

Turnovers and Defensive Plays

Turnovers can decide close games, and Seattle recorded the most notable takeaway in the supplied defensive statistics.

Coby Bryant recorded one interception for Seattle.

Indianapolis had no interceptions listed.

Both quarterbacks were also credited with one fumble, but neither fumble was lost.

That means the key turnover difference was the interception.

Seattle’s defense also recorded 67 total tackles compared with Indianapolis’ 61. Both teams recorded one sack and five tackles for loss.

The defensive comparison was:

Defensive category	Indianapolis	Seattle
Total tackles	61	67
Solo tackles	40	39
Sacks	1	1
Tackles for loss	5	5
Pass deflections	1	6
QB hits	5	4
Interceptions	0	1

Seattle’s six pass deflections compared with Indianapolis’ one are especially noteworthy.

Although the Colts limited Seattle’s scoring opportunities well enough to keep the game close, Seattle’s defense created more disruption in the passing game through pass breakups and the interception.

Coby Bryant’s interception

Coby Bryant’s interception was Seattle’s biggest individual defensive highlight.

An interception can have value beyond the raw turnover statistic because it ends an opponent’s possession immediately and can prevent potential scoring opportunities.

In a two-point game, that type of defensive play becomes especially important.

The Seahawks did not dominate Indianapolis defensively in every category. Both teams had one sack and five tackles for loss. But Seattle produced the game’s only interception and recorded six pass deflections.

Those small advantages contributed to the narrow victory.

Zaire Franklin and Ernest Jones IV Lead Their Defenses

Both teams had a player finish with 10 total tackles.

For Indianapolis, Zaire Franklin led the team with 10 tackles, including seven solo tackles and one tackle for loss.

For Seattle, Ernest Jones IV also recorded 10 tackles, with five solo tackles and no tackles for loss.

The numbers were:

Player	Tackles	Solo	Sacks	TFL
Zaire Franklin	10	7	0	1
Ernest Jones IV	10	5	0	0

Franklin’s seven solo tackles indicate a particularly active individual role in bringing down Seattle’s ball carriers or receivers.

Jones’ 10 total tackles were equally significant for Seattle, especially in a game where the defense needed to prevent Indianapolis from turning its offensive possessions into touchdowns.

The similarity in tackle totals reflects how competitive the contest was. Neither defense completely overwhelmed the other.

Special Teams Added Hidden Value

Special teams often receive less attention than quarterbacks and receivers, but this game shows why they matter.

Indianapolis recorded four kick returns for 123 yards, averaging 30.8 yards per return. The longest return went 44 yards.

Seattle recorded five kick returns for 131 yards, averaging 26.2 yards per return. Rashid Shaheed handled those returns and had a 30-yard long.

Shaheed also recorded one punt return for six yards.

Indianapolis’ Coleman Owen recorded one punt return for two yards.

The kick-return figures were:

Team	Returns	Yards	Average	Long
Indianapolis	4	123	30.8	44
Seattle	5	131	26.2	30

Indianapolis actually had the higher average kick-return yardage.

That is an important reminder that not every statistical advantage translates directly into the final score. The Colts had strong return efficiency, but Seattle’s superior field-goal production and passing yardage outweighed it.

The Punting Battle

The punting numbers also show a difference in field-position potential.

Rigoberto Sanchez punted five times for Indianapolis for 228 yards. He averaged 45.6 yards per punt, had one touchback, placed four punts inside the 20-yard line, and recorded a 59-yard long.

Michael Dickson punted four times for Seattle for 193 yards. He averaged 48.3 yards per punt, had no touchbacks, placed zero punts inside the 20, and had a 52-yard long.

Punter	Punts	Yards	Average	Touchbacks	Inside 20	Long
Rigoberto Sanchez	5	228	45.6	1	4	59
Michael Dickson	4	193	48.3	0	0	52

Sanchez had the stronger inside-the-20 figure, with four punts pinning Seattle deep.

Dickson averaged more yards per punt.

Again, the lesson is that one statistic rarely explains an entire game. Field position is created by the combined work of offense, defense, kicking, punting, and returns.

What the Numbers Say About the Colts

Indianapolis had several positive individual performances.

Jonathan Taylor carried the ball 25 times for 87 yards, providing a consistent rushing workload.

Philip Rivers completed 18 of 27 passes and threw one touchdown.

Ameer Abdullah caught all five of his listed targets for 32 yards.

Blake Grupe was perfect on three field-goal attempts and an extra point.

Zaire Franklin recorded 10 tackles.

The problem was that these contributions did not combine into enough offensive scoring.

The Colts scored 16 points and lost by two. That means they were close enough that one additional successful possession, one extra field goal, or one defensive takeaway could potentially have changed the outcome.

From an analytical perspective, Indianapolis’ biggest concern was offensive efficiency rather than a total lack of production.

The 120 passing yards were modest, and Taylor’s 3.5-yard rushing average limited the explosive potential of the ground game. Indianapolis also failed to create an interception.

The Colts were competitive, but their margin for error was extremely small.

What the Numbers Say About the Seahawks

Seattle’s profile was different.

The Seahawks had much greater passing production, led by Sam Darnold’s 271 yards and Jaxon Smith-Njigba’s 113 receiving yards.

Zach Charbonnet provided 31 rushing yards on eight attempts.

Coby Bryant created the game’s only interception.

Ernest Jones IV led the defense with 10 tackles.

Jason Myers was flawless, converting all six field-goal attempts.

The Seahawks therefore won through a combination of passing production, defensive disruption, and elite kicking execution.

Their offense did not finish drives with touchdowns, but it generated enough yardage to create field-goal chances.

That is arguably the defining feature of the game.

Why Seattle Won Despite Scoring No Touchdowns

The final 18-16 score can initially look confusing because Seattle’s passing and rushing leaders did not score touchdowns.

The answer is field-goal volume.

Seattle made six field goals.

Indianapolis made three field goals and an extra point, along with its listed touchdown production.

Myers alone scored 18 points, which was two more than the entire Colts team.

That tells us something important about close-game football: scoring efficiency is not always about touchdown percentage.

A team that repeatedly reaches scoring range can still win through field goals if its defense keeps the opponent from producing enough points.

Seattle’s defense allowed only 16 points.

Myers converted every scoring opportunity provided to him.

The Seahawks therefore paired sufficient offensive movement with defensive resistance and flawless kicking.

Key Statistical Lessons From the Game

Several lessons emerge when the numbers are examined together.

1. Passing volume can create scoring opportunities

Darnold’s 271 passing yards did not produce a touchdown pass, but the yardage helped Seattle move into scoring territory.

2. Explosive receiving plays matter

Smith-Njigba’s 16.1 yards per reception and 39-yard long reception gave Seattle an important big-play element.

3. Rushing volume does not guarantee rushing efficiency

Taylor received 25 carries but averaged only 3.5 yards per attempt.

4. Field goals can decide close games

Myers made six field goals. That was the difference in a two-point victory.

5. Turnovers have amplified value in close contests

Seattle recorded the only interception, with Coby Bryant making the play.

6. Special teams can provide advantages that do not appear on the scoreboard

Indianapolis averaged 30.8 yards per kick return, better than Seattle’s 26.2, yet Seattle still won.

7. Defensive consistency can matter more than headline statistics

Neither defense dominated in sacks or tackles for loss. Both recorded one sack and five tackles for loss. Seattle’s advantage came more from pass deflections, the interception, and limiting Indianapolis to 16 points.

A Deeper Look at Offensive Efficiency

One of the strongest ways to interpret this game is to compare the relationship between yardage and points.

Seattle generated 271 passing yards from Darnold while Indianapolis’ listed passing output was 120 yards from Rivers.

Yet Seattle scored only 18 points.

That means the Seahawks’ offensive yardage did not translate into touchdowns. Instead, their scoring came through repeated field-goal opportunities.

Indianapolis had less passing yardage but did record a touchdown through the passing statistics supplied.

This creates an interesting contrast:

Seattle was better at moving the ball through the air, while Indianapolis was more successful at turning at least one offensive opportunity into a touchdown.

But Seattle had more opportunities to score overall, and Myers converted them with perfect accuracy.

This is why looking only at touchdowns can be misleading.

Player Performances That Deserve the Most Attention

If the goal is to identify the most important individual performances, several players stand out.

Jason Myers

Myers was arguably the decisive player.

Six field goals on six attempts produced all 18 Seattle points.

Sam Darnold

Darnold’s 271 passing yards gave Seattle a substantial advantage through the air. His 7.5 yards per attempt were also considerably higher than Rivers’ 4.4.

Jaxon Smith-Njigba

Seven catches for 113 yards and a 39-yard long reception made Smith-Njigba Seattle’s leading offensive playmaker.

Jonathan Taylor

Taylor’s 25 carries and 87 yards made him Indianapolis’ primary rushing threat, even though his 3.5-yard average limited his efficiency.

Philip Rivers

Rivers completed 18 of 27 passes and threw one touchdown, but his 120 yards indicate that Indianapolis’ passing attack had limited overall production.

Coby Bryant

Bryant produced Seattle’s only interception, creating an important defensive advantage in a two-point game.

Zaire Franklin and Ernest Jones IV

Both linebackers recorded 10 tackles, showing how active they were throughout the contest.

How to Read These Player Stats Correctly

A common mistake in football analysis is to treat every statistic as an isolated ranking.

For example, Taylor’s 87 rushing yards were more than Charbonnet’s 31, but that does not mean Indianapolis had the better overall offensive game.

Likewise, Rivers threw a touchdown while Darnold did not, but Darnold generated more than twice as many passing yards.

The correct approach is to connect individual statistics to team outcomes.

A useful framework is:

1. Volume: How many opportunities did the player receive?
2. Efficiency: How much production came from those opportunities?
3. Explosiveness: Did the player create large gains?
4. Scoring: Did the production result in points?
5. Context: How did the performance affect the final result?
6. Supporting cast: Did teammates convert those opportunities into points?

Using this framework makes the game easier to understand.

Taylor had tremendous volume.

Smith-Njigba had strong efficiency and explosiveness.

Darnold had major passing volume and yardage.

Myers had perfect scoring efficiency.

Bryant provided a crucial defensive turnover.

Each player contributed differently.

The Biggest Statistical Difference Between Indianapolis and Seattle

The simplest summary is this:

Seattle had the stronger passing game and the stronger scoring conversion through field goals, while Indianapolis had the heavier rushing workload.

Seattle’s passing figures created a large yardage advantage.

Indianapolis’ running game provided balance but not enough efficiency.

The Colts also had good special teams return numbers and a perfect field-goal performance from Grupe, but Seattle’s six field goals were too much to overcome.

The game was therefore not decided by one overwhelming statistical category. It was decided by several small advantages combining in Seattle’s favor.

What This Match Teaches About Close NFL Games

Close games often come down to execution rather than total statistical domination.

Seattle did not score a touchdown according to the supplied team statistics.

The Seahawks did not produce a dominant rushing performance.

Their quarterback did not throw a touchdown.

Yet they won.

Why?

Because they moved the football effectively enough through the passing game, generated a takeaway, prevented Indianapolis from scoring more than 16 points, and had a kicker who converted every opportunity.

That combination is an important lesson for anyone evaluating football statistics.

A team does not have to lead every category to win.

It needs to win the categories that matter most in the scoring environment of that particular game.

Final Statistical Snapshot

The most important individual numbers can be summarized as follows:

Indianapolis Colts

• Philip Rivers: 18 completions on 27 attempts, 120 passing yards, one touchdown, one interception
• Jonathan Taylor: 25 carries, 87 rushing yards, 3.5 yards per carry
• Ameer Abdullah: five receptions, 32 yards, five targets
• Blake Grupe: three field goals on three attempts, 10 points
• Zaire Franklin: 10 tackles, seven solo tackles
• Coleman Owen: one punt return for two yards
• Rigoberto Sanchez: five punts, 45.6-yard average

Seattle Seahawks

• Sam Darnold: 22 completions on 36 attempts, 271 passing yards, no touchdowns, no interceptions
• Zach Charbonnet: eight carries, 31 rushing yards, 3.9 yards per carry
• Jaxon Smith-Njigba: seven receptions, 113 yards, nine targets
• Jason Myers: six field goals on six attempts, 18 points
• Ernest Jones IV: 10 tackles, five solo tackles
• Coby Bryant: one interception
• Rashid Shaheed: five kick returns for 131 yards and one punt return for six yards
• Michael Dickson: four punts, 48.3-yard average

The final outcome was Seattle 18, Indianapolis 16.

FAQs

Who won the Colts vs Seahawks game?

The Seattle Seahawks defeated the Indianapolis Colts 18-16 on December 15, 2025.

Who was the leading passer?

Sam Darnold was the leading passer. He completed 22 of 36 attempts for 271 yards, with no touchdowns or interceptions in the supplied statistics.

Who led the Colts in rushing?

Jonathan Taylor led Indianapolis with 25 carries for 87 yards. He averaged 3.5 yards per carry and did not score a rushing touchdown.

Who was Seattle’s leading receiver?

Jaxon Smith-Njigba led Seattle with seven receptions for 113 yards on nine targets. His longest reception was 39 yards.

Who scored the most points?

Seattle kicker Jason Myers scored all 18 of Seattle’s points by making six field goals on six attempts.

Which player recorded the game’s interception?

Seattle defensive back Coby Bryant recorded one interception. Indianapolis had no interceptions listed.

Conclusion

The colts vs seahawks match player stats show why the 18-16 result was much more competitive and nuanced than the final score alone suggests.

Seattle’s biggest statistical advantage came through the passing game. Sam Darnold produced 271 yards, while Jaxon Smith-Njigba added 113 receiving yards at an impressive 16.1 yards per catch. The Seahawks also received a crucial interception from Coby Bryant and strong tackling production from Ernest Jones IV.

Indianapolis leaned heavily on Jonathan Taylor, who carried 25 times for 87 yards. Philip Rivers completed 18 of 27 passes and threw a touchdown, while Blake Grupe converted all three of his field-goal attempts.

Ultimately, Jason Myers made the defining difference. His six successful field goals accounted for all 18 Seattle points. With Seattle winning 18-16, those three additional field goals compared with Indianapolis became the clearest scoring separator.

The game is a strong example of why player statistics should be interpreted collectively. Passing yards, rushing volume, receiving efficiency, turnovers, defensive plays, kicking accuracy, and field position all contributed to the outcome. No single category completely explains the victory.

Seattle did not need a touchdown-heavy offensive performance. Instead, the Seahawks combined productive passing, defensive disruption, and perfect kicking execution to secure a narrow home victory and improve to 11-3.