Minnesota Vikings vs Pittsburgh Steelers Match Player Stats
The minnesota vikings vs pittsburgh steelers match player stats from the September 28, 2025 NFL Dublin game tell a much more interesting story than the final 24-21 score suggests. Pittsburgh won, but Minnesota actually finished with more total yards, more first downs, and longer time of possession. The difference came from efficiency in key areas: Pittsburgh ran the ball better, protected Aaron Rodgers more effectively, created two interceptions, and generated six sacks.
The game was played at Croke Park in Dublin, Ireland, and moved the Steelers to 3-1 while the Vikings fell to 2-2.
What makes this matchup especially useful for player analysis is the contrast between volume and efficiency. Carson Wentz threw for 350 yards, while Aaron Rodgers produced 200 yards on only 22 attempts. Justin Jefferson and Jordan Addison combined for 240 receiving yards for Minnesota, while DK Metcalf supplied a major explosive play for Pittsburgh with an 80-yard touchdown reception. On defense, Payton Wilson recorded 13 tackles, while T.J. Watt contributed a sack and an interception.
Game Overview and Final Score
The Steelers defeated the Vikings 24-21 after controlling the game for much of the first three quarters and then surviving a late Minnesota comeback.
| Team | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | Final |
| Minnesota Vikings | 3 | 3 | 0 | 15 | 21 |
| Pittsburgh Steelers | 7 | 7 | 7 | 3 | 24 |
The scoring pattern is important.
Pittsburgh built a 21-6 advantage through three quarters. Minnesota then scored 15 points in the fourth quarter, including two touchdowns, but the comeback started too late to completely erase the deficit.
For readers studying the minnesota vikings vs pittsburgh steelers match player stats, the fourth quarter is one of the most important parts of the box score. A simple look at the final score could suggest an evenly matched contest from start to finish. The quarter-by-quarter numbers show something different: Pittsburgh controlled the middle portion of the game, while Minnesota became highly aggressive and productive when playing from behind.
Minnesota Vikings Offensive Performance
Minnesota finished with 372 total yards, compared with 313 for Pittsburgh. The Vikings also recorded 23 first downs to Pittsburgh’s 19 and held the ball for 33:34.
Those numbers make the loss unusual because Minnesota won several traditional volume categories.
The problem was efficiency in the most important moments.
The Vikings ran only 20 rushing plays for 70 yards, averaging 3.5 yards per carry. Their passing game generated 302 net passing yards, but Carson Wentz was pressured heavily and absorbed six sacks for 48 yards. Minnesota also threw two interceptions.
Carson Wentz Passing Stats
Carson Wentz produced a high-volume passing performance:
| Category | Carson Wentz |
| Completions | 30 |
| Attempts | 46 |
| Completion Rate | 65.2% |
| Passing Yards | 350 |
| Yards per Attempt | 7.6 |
| Touchdowns | 2 |
| Interceptions | 2 |
| Sacks | 6 |
| Sack Yards Lost | 48 |
| QBR | 42.0 |
| Passer Rating | 84.5 |
The 350 passing yards are impressive, particularly because Minnesota entered the fourth quarter trailing substantially. However, the six sacks and two interceptions significantly changed the value of those passing yards.
Wentz completed 30 of 46 attempts, giving him a 65.2% completion rate. His 350 yards show that Minnesota was able to move the ball through the air. The two interceptions show that Pittsburgh was able to disrupt that production at critical points.
From an analytical standpoint, this is a classic example of why passing yards alone should not be used to judge quarterback performance.
Wentz produced 150 more passing yards than Rodgers, yet Pittsburgh won. The Steelers were able to turn pressure and turnovers into a more efficient overall offensive performance.
Jordan Mason Rushing
Jordan Mason was Minnesota’s leading rusher.
| Category | Jordan Mason |
| Carries | 16 |
| Rushing Yards | 57 |
| Average | 3.6 |
| Touchdowns | 0 |
| Long Run | 9 yards |
Mason handled 16 of Minnesota’s 20 rushing attempts, accounting for 80% of the team’s rushing volume.
The issue was efficiency. His 3.6-yard average did not consistently create favorable down-and-distance situations, and Minnesota’s entire rushing attack finished with only 70 yards.
That limited the balance of the offense. Pittsburgh could focus considerable attention on Wentz and the passing game without facing the same level of rushing threat that the Steelers themselves created.
Justin Jefferson Leads Minnesota Receivers
Justin Jefferson was the standout offensive player for Minnesota.
| Category | Justin Jefferson |
| Receptions | 10 |
| Targets | 11 |
| Receiving Yards | 126 |
| Average | 12.6 |
| Touchdowns | 0 |
Jefferson caught 10 passes on 11 targets for 126 yards. His 10 receptions represented one-third of Minnesota’s 30 completions, while his 126 yards accounted for a significant portion of the team’s passing production.
The most notable detail is what did not appear in his stat line: a touchdown.
Jefferson was productive enough to dominate the receiving statistics but Pittsburgh’s defense prevented that production from consistently becoming points.
This distinction matters when interpreting receiver statistics. A wide receiver can have an excellent individual game while the offense still struggles to finish drives.
Jordan Addison Provides Explosive Production
Jordan Addison added another 114 receiving yards on four receptions.
| Player | Receptions | Yards | Average | TDs |
| Justin Jefferson | 10 | 126 | 12.6 | 0 |
| Jordan Addison | 4 | 114 | 28.5 | 0 |
Addison’s 28.5 yards per reception were especially significant. Four catches produced almost as many yards as Jefferson’s 10 receptions.
Together, Jefferson and Addison accounted for 240 receiving yards. That means the two receivers produced more than two-thirds of Minnesota’s 350 gross passing yards.
The distribution demonstrates how dependent Minnesota was on its top receiving weapons to generate explosive offense.
Pittsburgh Steelers Offensive Performance
Pittsburgh’s offensive numbers were very different.
The Steelers generated 313 total yards, 131 rushing yards, and 182 net passing yards. They averaged 4.5 yards per rushing attempt and 7.6 yards per passing play when sacks are included in the team calculation.
The Steelers did not need massive passing volume because their offense was more efficient in several important situations.
Aaron Rodgers Passing Stats
Aaron Rodgers completed 18 of 22 passes for 200 yards, one touchdown, and no interceptions.
| Category | Aaron Rodgers |
| Completions | 18 |
| Attempts | 22 |
| Completion Rate | 81.8% |
| Passing Yards | 200 |
| Yards per Attempt | 9.1 |
| Touchdowns | 1 |
| Interceptions | 0 |
| Sacks | 2 |
| Sack Yards Lost | 18 |
| QBR | 41.1 |
| Passer Rating | 119.7 |
Rodgers’ 81.8% completion rate was one of the clearest efficiency advantages for Pittsburgh. His 9.1 yards per attempt also showed that the Steelers were not simply relying on short throws to manufacture a high completion percentage.
Most importantly, he avoided turnovers.
That becomes even more important when compared with Wentz’s two interceptions. Pittsburgh essentially asked Rodgers to protect the football while allowing its rushing attack and defense to carry substantial responsibility.
His 119.7 passer rating was considerably higher than Wentz’s 84.5 rating.
Kenny Gainwell’s Two-Touchdown Performance
Kenny Gainwell was one of the most influential players in the game.
| Category | Kenny Gainwell |
| Rushing Attempts | 19 |
| Rushing Yards | 99 |
| Average | 5.2 |
| Rushing TDs | 2 |
| Long Run | 15 yards |
| Receptions | 6 |
| Receiving Yards | 35 |
Gainwell carried the ball 19 times for 99 yards and two touchdowns. He averaged 5.2 yards per carry, substantially better than Minnesota’s 3.5 team rushing average.
His performance explains a major part of Pittsburgh’s victory.
The Steelers were able to create consistent rushing production without needing Rodgers to throw 35 or 40 passes. Gainwell’s two rushing touchdowns also converted offensive possessions into points.
He was not merely a statistical contributor. His production shaped the game script.
DK Metcalf Creates the Biggest Explosive Play
DK Metcalf finished with five receptions for 126 yards and one touchdown.
| Category | DK Metcalf |
| Receptions | 5 |
| Receiving Yards | 126 |
| Average | 25.2 |
| Touchdowns | 1 |
| Long Reception | 80 yards |
The 80-yard touchdown was arguably the most important individual explosive play of the game.
Metcalf averaged 25.2 yards per reception, more than twice Jefferson’s average and slightly below Addison’s 28.5-yard mark.
That tells an important story about Pittsburgh’s offensive approach. The Steelers did not need a large number of completed passes because they generated enormous value from limited opportunities.
An 80-yard touchdown can completely change a game because it produces seven points while also removing the need for a long drive.
Rushing Comparison
The rushing statistics strongly favored Pittsburgh.
| Team | Attempts | Yards | Average | TDs |
| Vikings | 20 | 70 | 3.5 | 0 |
| Steelers | 29 | 131 | 4.5 | 2 |
Pittsburgh ran nine more rushing plays and gained 61 more rushing yards.
That is not a small difference.
The Steelers averaged a full yard more per carry and scored both of their rushing touchdowns. Minnesota failed to produce a rushing touchdown.
This was one of the clearest structural advantages in the game. Pittsburgh’s running game helped keep Rodgers’ workload manageable while forcing Minnesota’s defense to defend the entire field.
Receiving Comparison
The overall receiving numbers were much closer than the final score might suggest.
Minnesota recorded 30 receptions for 350 yards and two receiving touchdowns. Pittsburgh recorded 18 receptions for 200 yards and one receiving touchdown.
| Team | Receptions | Receiving Yards | TDs |
| Vikings | 30 | 350 | 2 |
| Steelers | 18 | 200 | 1 |
Minnesota’s advantage in volume was substantial.
But Pittsburgh’s passing offense was more efficient on a per-attempt basis because Rodgers attempted only 22 passes.
This is a valuable lesson when reading player statistics. More catches and more yards do not automatically mean a more effective passing offense.
Game situation matters.
Minnesota was forced to throw heavily because it was trailing. That naturally increased Wentz’s opportunities and boosted the final passing totals.
Defensive Player Statistics
Defense was arguably the deciding factor.
The Vikings recorded two team sacks, while Pittsburgh recorded six. The Steelers also intercepted Wentz twice, while Minnesota did not intercept Rodgers.
Payton Wilson’s 13 Tackles
Payton Wilson led Pittsburgh with 13 total tackles.
That number is significant because it indicates how heavily involved he was in stopping Minnesota’s offense.
A high tackle total alone does not automatically mean a defender played a perfect game, but in this matchup it illustrates Pittsburgh’s defensive workload. Minnesota ran 72 offensive plays, compared with only 53 for Pittsburgh, giving the Steelers’ defense many opportunities to make plays.
T.J. Watt Makes a Major Impact
T.J. Watt finished with five total tackles, one sack, and one interception for 13 return yards.
The interception stands out because it came from a player primarily known for pressuring quarterbacks.
Watt’s combination of pressure and coverage impact demonstrates how defensive stars can influence a game in multiple ways.
His sack contributed to Pittsburgh’s six-sack total, while his interception directly added a turnover to the defensive ledger.
Eric Wilson Leads Minnesota Tacklers
Eric Wilson led the Vikings with nine total tackles.
Minnesota’s defense was asked to defend 53 Pittsburgh offensive plays and was particularly challenged by the Steelers‘ rushing attack.
The nine tackles show strong involvement, but the larger defensive issue was Pittsburgh’s ability to produce touchdowns and avoid turnovers.
Turnover Battle
Turnovers were one of the biggest statistical separators.
| Category | Vikings | Steelers |
| Interceptions Thrown | 2 | 0 |
| Interceptions Made | 0 | 2 |
| Fumbles | 2 | 1 |
| Fumbles Lost | 0 | 0 |
| Total Turnovers | 2 | 0 |
Minnesota lost the turnover battle 2-0.
Neither team lost a fumble, so the difference came entirely through interceptions.
DeShon Elliott and T.J. Watt each recorded an interception for Pittsburgh.
This is perhaps the simplest explanation for why Minnesota could gain 372 yards and still lose.
Yardage tells you how much offense a team generated.
Turnovers tell you how often that offense gave the opponent another possession.
Third-Down and Fourth-Down Efficiency
Third-down performance also favored Pittsburgh.
The Steelers converted 4 of 10 third downs, or 40%.
Minnesota converted 4 of 14, or only 28.6%.
That difference gave Pittsburgh more control over individual drives.
Minnesota was actually more aggressive on fourth down, converting two of three attempts. Pittsburgh attempted only one fourth down and failed to convert it.
The contrasting strategies are revealing.
Minnesota had to take more risks because it was playing from behind. Pittsburgh could play more conservatively because it had already established a lead.
Red-Zone Performance
Red-zone efficiency was relatively close.
Minnesota scored touchdowns on two of four red-zone opportunities, producing a 50% touchdown efficiency rate.
Pittsburgh scored touchdowns on two of five red-zone opportunities, producing a 40% rate.
At first glance, this seems to favor Minnesota.
However, the Steelers gained a major advantage through explosive plays and turnovers outside the red zone.
This is an important distinction. Red-zone statistics are useful, but they should be viewed alongside explosive-play production and turnover creation.
Special Teams Performance
Special teams did not decide the game on their own, but several individual performances deserve attention.
Will Reichard
Minnesota kicker Will Reichard converted both of his field-goal attempts and his extra-point attempt.
| Category | Will Reichard |
| Field Goals | 2/2 |
| Field Goal Rate | 100% |
| Long | 41 yards |
| Extra Points | 1/1 |
| Points | 7 |
Reichard was perfect on his field-goal opportunities.
Chris Boswell
Pittsburgh’s Chris Boswell converted one of two field-goal attempts and all three extra points.
| Category | Chris Boswell |
| Field Goals | 1/2 |
| Field Goal Rate | 50% |
| Long | 33 yards |
| Extra Points | 3/3 |
| Points | 6 |
Although Boswell missed one field goal, Pittsburgh still finished with enough offensive production to win.
Punting
Minnesota’s Ryan Wright averaged 45.3 yards on three punts.
Pittsburgh’s Corliss Waitman averaged 48.7 yards on three punts, with a long of 54 yards and one touchback.
The punting numbers were relatively strong for both teams, with Pittsburgh holding the edge in gross average.
The Most Important Statistical Story
The most interesting aspect of the minnesota vikings vs pittsburgh steelers match player stats is that Minnesota actually won several volume categories.
The Vikings had:
- More total yards
- More first downs
- More passing yards
- More receptions
- More time of possession
- More offensive plays
Yet Pittsburgh won because it was more efficient in several high-value areas.
The Steelers had:
- More rushing yards
- More rushing touchdowns
- Fewer turnovers
- More sacks
- More interceptions
- Better third-down efficiency
- A massive 80-yard touchdown reception
That is why the 24-21 result should not be interpreted simply as a battle of total yardage.
Why Minnesota’s 372 Yards Were Not Enough
Minnesota averaged 5.2 yards per offensive play, compared with 5.9 for Pittsburgh.
That difference may seem small, but it becomes meaningful across a full game.
Minnesota also ran 72 offensive plays compared with Pittsburgh’s 53. That means the Vikings had more opportunities to accumulate yards.
Yet those opportunities did not translate into enough points.
The biggest reasons were:
- Two interceptions thrown by Wentz.
- Six sacks allowed.
- Only 70 rushing yards.
- No rushing touchdowns.
- A 28.6% third-down conversion rate.
- A large portion of the comeback occurring only in the fourth quarter.
The final 15-point fourth quarter demonstrated what Minnesota’s offense could accomplish when urgency increased. The problem was that the offense had too much ground to recover.
Why Pittsburgh Won Despite Fewer Yards
Pittsburgh’s victory was built on efficiency rather than volume.
Rodgers attempted only 22 passes and completed 18.
Gainwell produced 99 rushing yards and two rushing touchdowns.
Metcalf averaged 25.2 yards per catch and scored on an 80-yard play.
The defense generated six sacks and two interceptions.
That combination allowed Pittsburgh to score 24 points despite gaining only 313 total yards.
The Steelers essentially maximized the value of their possessions.
Key Player Rankings From the Game
Based strictly on the supplied game statistics and the official box score, the most influential individual performances can be grouped as follows.
1. Kenny Gainwell
Gainwell’s 99 rushing yards and two rushing touchdowns gave Pittsburgh the ground-game advantage.
2. DK Metcalf
Metcalf’s 126 receiving yards and 80-yard touchdown created one of the game’s biggest swings.
3. Aaron Rodgers
Rodgers was highly efficient, completing 81.8% of his passes with one touchdown and no interceptions.
4. T.J. Watt
Watt contributed a sack and an interception, combining pass-rush and turnover production.
5. Justin Jefferson
Jefferson produced 126 yards on 10 receptions and remained Minnesota’s most consistent receiving weapon.
6. Payton Wilson
Wilson’s 13 tackles made him Pittsburgh’s leading tackler.
7. Jordan Addison
Addison’s four catches for 114 yards produced exceptional explosive-play efficiency.
What the Matchup Reveals About Player Evaluation
One of the biggest mistakes in football analysis is treating the box score as a simple ranking system.
The player with the most yards is not automatically the player who had the biggest impact.
Jefferson had 126 receiving yards.
Metcalf also had 126.
But their games were structurally different.
Jefferson needed 10 receptions and 11 targets to reach his total.
Metcalf needed only five receptions and produced an 80-yard touchdown.
Both performances were valuable, but they affected the game in different ways.
The same principle applies to the quarterbacks.
Wentz threw for 350 yards.
Rodgers threw for 200.
But Rodgers protected the football and was sacked only twice, while Wentz threw two interceptions and was sacked six times.
Good player analysis therefore requires context.
Minnesota Vikings vs Pittsburgh Steelers Match Player Stats: Biggest Takeaways
The minnesota vikings vs pittsburgh steelers match player stats reveal several lessons that are useful beyond this individual game.
Passing volume is not the same as passing efficiency
Wentz had 46 attempts compared with Rodgers’ 22.
That difference was heavily influenced by game script.
Rushing efficiency mattered
Pittsburgh averaged 4.5 yards per carry compared with Minnesota’s 3.5.
Turnovers changed the game
The Steelers had two interceptions and gave the ball away zero times.
Explosive plays have disproportionate value
Metcalf’s 80-yard touchdown generated an enormous amount of scoring value from a single reception.
Defensive pressure affects quarterback efficiency
Six sacks against Wentz helped Pittsburgh control the passing game even while Minnesota accumulated 350 gross passing yards.
Fourth-quarter production can hide earlier problems
Minnesota’s 15 fourth-quarter points made the final score close, but Pittsburgh had already built a 21-6 advantage.
A Practical Way to Read This Box Score
If you are comparing player performances from this game, use a five-step process.
First, check the game script.
Determine which team was leading and when. Passing volume is often inflated for teams that trail.
Second, check efficiency.
Look at yards per attempt, yards per carry, completion percentage, and explosive plays.
Third, check turnovers.
Interceptions and lost fumbles can outweigh large yardage totals.
Fourth, check pressure.
Sacks and quarterback hits help explain why passing production may not translate into points.
Fifth, check scoring impact.
Touchdowns and successful scoring drives ultimately determine the winner.
This method provides a much better understanding than simply sorting players by yards.
Historical and Fantasy-Football Perspective
For fantasy football analysis, this game offers an important warning.
Jefferson’s 10 receptions and 126 yards represent strong volume, but the absence of a receiving touchdown limits his fantasy ceiling.
Addison’s 114 yards on four catches demonstrate the upside of explosive plays, but the lower reception count also shows why his weekly floor can differ from a high-volume receiver.
Metcalf’s five receptions for 126 yards and a touchdown demonstrate the opposite profile: fewer opportunities but massive per-catch production.
Gainwell’s two rushing touchdowns were especially valuable because touchdown production can dramatically alter fantasy scoring.
However, fantasy managers should avoid treating one game as a complete projection of future usage. Individual matchups, game scripts, injuries, offensive schemes, and player roles all matter.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who won the Minnesota Vikings vs Pittsburgh Steelers game?
The Pittsburgh Steelers defeated the Minnesota Vikings 24-21 on September 28, 2025, in the NFL’s Dublin game at Croke Park.
How many yards did Carson Wentz throw for?
Carson Wentz completed 30 of 46 passes for 350 yards, two touchdowns, and two interceptions. He was also sacked six times for 48 yards.
How many passing yards did Aaron Rodgers have?
Aaron Rodgers completed 18 of 22 passes for 200 yards, one touchdown, and no interceptions. He was sacked twice.
Who was the leading rusher?
Kenny Gainwell led Pittsburgh with 99 rushing yards and two touchdowns on 19 carries. Jordan Mason led Minnesota with 57 yards on 16 carries.
Who led the Vikings in receiving?
Justin Jefferson led Minnesota with 10 receptions for 126 yards on 11 targets. Jordan Addison added 114 yards on four receptions.
Who had the biggest defensive impact?
Pittsburgh generated six team sacks and two interceptions. Payton Wilson led the Steelers with 13 tackles, while T.J. Watt recorded a sack and an interception.
Conclusion
The minnesota vikings vs pittsburgh steelers match player stats show why football games cannot be accurately explained through total yardage alone.
Minnesota produced 372 total yards, 23 first downs, and 350 gross passing yards. Justin Jefferson and Jordan Addison were highly productive through the air, and the Vikings finished the game with a dramatic 15-point fourth quarter.
Pittsburgh, however, produced the more efficient performance.
The Steelers rushed for 131 yards compared with Minnesota’s 70, scored two rushing touchdowns, avoided turnovers, intercepted Wentz twice, and recorded six sacks. Aaron Rodgers protected the football while Kenny Gainwell supplied the ground-game production and DK Metcalf delivered the game’s most explosive receiving play.
The final 24-21 score therefore reflects a game in which Minnesota had considerable offensive volume but Pittsburgh created more value from its opportunities.
The official game data confirms the core story: Pittsburgh won the efficiency battle even though Minnesota won several volume categories.
