Green Bay Packers vs Denver Broncos Match Player Stats
The green bay packers vs denver broncos match player stats from the August 21, 2026 NFL preseason meeting provide a useful look at quarterback efficiency, offensive balance, receiving production, defensive pressure, and special teams execution. Green Bay defeated Denver 33-13 at Empower Field at Mile High, using a strong second quarter and a productive fourth quarter to pull away after the teams were tied 7-7 after the opening period. The official NFL game center records the same final score and quarter-by-quarter breakdown. NFL
This was a preseason game, so the numbers need to be read differently from a regular-season box score. Coaches are evaluating players, combinations, depth-chart competition, and execution rather than simply trying to maximize production from their primary starters. That context matters when interpreting Jordan Love’s 5-for-7 passing performance, Bo Nix’s 6-for-9 outing, and the contributions from the quarterbacks and skill players who handled the majority of the later snaps.
The final score was 33-13, but the most useful information is found deeper in the numbers. Green Bay produced three rushing touchdowns, two passing touchdowns, four successful field goals, and an interception. Denver managed one passing touchdown and two field goals while turning the ball over twice on fumbles.
Game Overview and Score Breakdown
The matchup took place on August 21, 2026, as part of the NFL preseason. Denver hosted the game at Empower Field at Mile High.
| Category | Green Bay Packers | Denver Broncos |
| Final Score | 33 | 13 |
| Q1 | 7 | 7 |
| Q2 | 16 | 3 |
| Q3 | 0 | 3 |
| Q4 | 10 | 0 |
| Record after game | 1-1 | 1-1 |
| Venue | Away | Home |
| Game Type | Preseason | Preseason |
The scoring pattern tells an important story. Both teams opened with seven points, but Green Bay gained control in the second quarter by scoring 16 points while Denver managed only a field goal.
Denver then added another three points in the third quarter, but Green Bay responded with 10 points in the final period to close the game without allowing a fourth-quarter score.
The official NFL schedule lists Green Bay’s 33-13 victory over Denver as the Packers’ second preseason game of 2026. NFL
Green Bay Packers vs Denver Broncos Match Player Stats: Quarterback Analysis
Quarterback statistics are particularly interesting in this preseason matchup because both teams used multiple passers.
Jordan Love
Jordan Love completed 5 of 7 passes for 56 yards and one touchdown. He threw no interceptions and finished with a 134.5 passer rating according to the supplied game data.
| Statistic | Jordan Love |
| Completions | 5 |
| Attempts | 7 |
| Completion Rate | 71.4% |
| Passing Yards | 56 |
| Touchdowns | 1 |
| Interceptions | 0 |
| Passer Rating | 134.5 |
Love’s efficiency was the most notable part of his limited appearance. He did not need a large number of attempts to make an impact.
NFL’s postgame analysis also highlighted Love’s opening drive. According to the league’s report, he completed several difficult throws, connected with Matthew Golden on a key fourth-down play, and delivered an 11-yard touchdown pass to MarShawn Lloyd. NFL
The important preseason takeaway is not simply the 56 yards. It is the combination of accuracy, turnover avoidance, and touchdown production on a small sample.
A seven-attempt sample is too small to project a regular-season performance by itself. However, it does show that Green Bay’s opening offensive unit was able to generate points while Love was on the field.
Kyle McCord
Kyle McCord handled the largest passing workload for Green Bay.
He completed 12 of 19 attempts for 118 yards with no touchdowns and no interceptions. His passer rating was 80.6.
| Statistic | Kyle McCord |
| Completions | 12 |
| Attempts | 19 |
| Completion Rate | 63.2% |
| Passing Yards | 118 |
| Touchdowns | 0 |
| Interceptions | 0 |
| Passer Rating | 80.6 |
McCord’s contribution was more volume-oriented than Love’s. He attempted 19 passes, which gave Green Bay a chance to evaluate the offense over a larger number of possessions and situations.
The lack of interceptions is particularly relevant for a quarterback competing for evaluation snaps. While there was no passing touchdown attached to his line, protecting the football allowed the offense to maintain possession.
Tyrod Taylor
Tyrod Taylor completed 4 of 8 passes for 17 yards and one touchdown. He did not throw an interception and recorded a 95.8 passer rating.
| Statistic | Tyrod Taylor |
| Completions | 4 |
| Attempts | 8 |
| Completion Rate | 50.0% |
| Passing Yards | 17 |
| Touchdowns | 1 |
| Interceptions | 0 |
| Passer Rating | 95.8 |
Taylor’s passing yardage was modest, but the touchdown gave his limited passing production greater scoring value.
His rushing contribution also added seven yards on two carries.
Bo Nix
Bo Nix was the most efficient Denver passer by passer rating in the supplied statistics.
He completed 6 of 9 passes for 76 yards and one touchdown without throwing an interception. His passer rating was 129.9.
| Statistic | Bo Nix |
| Completions | 6 |
| Attempts | 9 |
| Completion Rate | 66.7% |
| Passing Yards | 76 |
| Touchdowns | 1 |
| Interceptions | 0 |
| Passer Rating | 129.9 |
Nix’s appearance carried additional context because it was his first game action since an ankle injury suffered in the previous season’s divisional round. NFL’s game analysis reported that he played two drives, completed 6 of 9 passes, threw a touchdown to RJ Harvey, and connected with Jaylen Waddle for a 35-yard reception. NFL
That makes his small sample particularly useful for evaluating execution rather than raw volume.
Jarrett Stidham and Sam Ehlinger
Jarrett Stidham completed 9 of 15 passes for 82 yards, with no touchdowns and one interception. His passer rating was 47.1.
Sam Ehlinger completed both of his pass attempts for 10 yards, with no touchdowns or interceptions, and finished with an 87.5 passer rating.
The contrast between these lines illustrates why passer rating alone does not tell the entire story. Stidham had significantly more attempts and yards, while Ehlinger had a perfect completion rate on his two attempts but almost no volume.
Green Bay’s Rushing Production
Green Bay finished with 32 rushing attempts for 118 yards, averaging 3.7 yards per carry, with one rushing touchdown in the supplied team rushing data.
The leading individual rushers were:
| Player | Carries | Yards | Average | TD |
| Pierre Strong Jr. | 8 | 37 | 4.6 | 0 |
| Jaden Nixon | 4 | 20 | 5.0 | 1 |
| Damien Martinez | 5 | 17 | 3.4 | 0 |
| MarShawn Lloyd | 6 | 17 | 2.8 | 0 |
| Chris Brooks | 5 | 12 | 2.4 | 0 |
| Tyrod Taylor | 2 | 7 | 3.5 | 0 |
| Skyy Moore | 1 | 6 | 6.0 | 0 |
| Kyle McCord | 1 | 2 | 2.0 | 0 |
Pierre Strong Jr. led Green Bay in rushing volume and yardage with 37 yards on eight carries.
Jaden Nixon produced the strongest yards-per-carry figure among the listed Green Bay backs with at least four attempts, averaging 5.0 yards and scoring a rushing touchdown.
The rushing numbers also show how Green Bay distributed the workload. No single back dominated the game, which is common in preseason situations where coaching staffs want to evaluate several players.
MarShawn Lloyd had six carries for 17 yards, but his overall offensive contribution was more significant than his rushing total alone because he also caught three passes for 11 yards and a touchdown.
Denver’s Rushing Production
Denver recorded 22 carries for 70 yards, averaging 3.2 yards per attempt and scoring no rushing touchdowns.
| Player | Carries | Yards | Average | TD |
| Cody Schrader | 4 | 15 | 3.8 | 0 |
| Jaleel McLaughlin | 4 | 15 | 3.8 | 0 |
| Jarrett Stidham | 3 | 12 | 4.0 | 0 |
| Jonah Coleman | 3 | 9 | 3.0 | 0 |
| Sam Ehlinger | 2 | 7 | 3.5 | 0 |
| Adam Prentice | 1 | 5 | 5.0 | 0 |
| RJ Harvey | 4 | 2 | 0.5 | 0 |
Cody Schrader and Jaleel McLaughlin tied for the team lead with 15 rushing yards each.
RJ Harvey’s rushing line was unusual because he recorded four carries for only two yards, yet he made a major impact as a receiver with a touchdown reception.
That distinction is important when reading a preseason box score. A player can have limited success in one phase while still contributing meaningfully in another.
Receiving Breakdown
Green Bay’s supplied receiving totals show 21 receptions for 191 yards and two touchdowns.
Will Sheppard
Will Sheppard led Green Bay with six receptions for 47 yards and one touchdown.
| Player | Receptions | Yards | Yards per Catch | TD |
| Will Sheppard | 6 | 47 | 7.8 | 1 |
| Isaiah Neyor | 3 | 47 | 15.7 | 0 |
| Matthew Golden | 1 | 19 | 19.0 | 0 |
| Christian Watson | 2 | 19 | 9.5 | 0 |
| MarShawn Lloyd | 3 | 11 | 11.0 | 1 |
| Messiah Swinson | 1 | 11 | 11.0 | 0 |
| J. Michael Sturdivant | 1 | 8 | 8.0 | 0 |
| Bo Melton | 1 | 7 | 7.0 | 0 |
| Drake Dabney | 1 | 7 | 7.0 | 0 |
| Skyy Moore | 1 | 7 | 7.0 | 0 |
Sheppard’s six catches represented the highest reception volume among the listed Green Bay players.
Isaiah Neyor matched Sheppard’s 47 receiving yards despite needing only three receptions to reach that total. His 15.7 yards per reception was therefore significantly higher.
Matthew Golden had only one reception, but it went for 19 yards. NFL’s recap specifically mentioned Golden’s 19-yard fourth-down catch during the opening touchdown drive. NFL
Christian Watson finished with two catches for 19 yards.
His involvement is also notable because NFL’s account described an early play in which Watson initially appeared to fumble before replay review overturned the ruling. NFL
Denver Receiving Leaders
Denver recorded 17 receptions for 168 receiving yards and one touchdown in the supplied data.
| Player | Receptions | Yards | Yards per Catch | TD |
| Jaylen Waddle | 1 | 35 | 35.0 | 0 |
| Lil’Jordan Humphrey | 2 | 32 | 16.0 | 0 |
| RJ Harvey | 2 | 25 | 12.5 | 1 |
| Dane Key | 1 | 25 | 25.0 | 0 |
| Cameron Ross | 2 | 22 | 11.0 | 0 |
| Justin Joly | 2 | 10 | 5.0 | 0 |
| Jaleel McLaughlin | 3 | 9 | 3.0 | 0 |
| Cody Schrader | 1 | 5 | 5.0 | 0 |
Jaylen Waddle produced the biggest individual receiving play with 35 yards on one reception.
NFL’s postgame report specifically highlighted the Waddle play as a 35-yard catch and run that helped flip field position. NFL
RJ Harvey added two catches for 25 yards and a touchdown. His 21-yard touchdown reception from Nix was one of Denver’s most productive offensive plays.
The combination of Waddle’s explosive gain and Harvey’s touchdown shows that Denver could create chunk plays even though the overall offense scored only 13 points.
Green Bay Defensive Performance
Green Bay’s defense recorded:
- 63 total tackles
- 30 solo tackles
- 2 sacks
- 7 tackles for loss
- 4 passes defended
- 1 quarterback hit
- 1 interception
Mark Perry recorded Green Bay’s interception, returning it two yards.
The defense also benefited from Denver’s two fumbles, although Denver recovered both of them. That means the Packers created three listed turnover events in total when combining the interception and fumbles, but only one resulted in a change of possession through the interception.
This distinction matters. A forced or recorded fumble does not automatically become a takeaway if the offense recovers it.
The two sacks also indicate that Green Bay generated some pressure without needing a large sack total. In preseason games, defensive players often receive different snap distributions, so team pressure numbers can be more informative than trying to assign too much meaning to a small individual sample.
Denver Defensive Performance
Denver’s defense recorded:
- 77 total tackles
- 37 solo tackles
- 1 sack
- 3 tackles for loss
- 3 passes defended
- 3 quarterback hits
- 0 interceptions
The Broncos therefore registered more total tackles than Green Bay, 77 to 63.
That number should not be interpreted as proof of superior defensive play. More tackles can occur because an opponent runs more plays, sustains more possessions, or reaches the second level more often.
Denver’s three quarterback hits compared with Green Bay’s one also show that pressure was present even though the final score strongly favored the Packers.
The larger difference came in scoring efficiency and turnovers rather than simply tackle volume.
Special Teams Played a Major Role
Special teams contributed significantly to the final margin.
Green Bay Kicking
Trey Smack was perfect on field goals and extra points:
- 4-for-4 field goals
- 100 percent field-goal rate
- Long field goal of 59 yards
- 3-for-3 extra points
- 15 total points
Fifteen kicking points is a substantial part of a 33-point team total.
A 59-yard field goal also demonstrates that Green Bay converted from long range when the opportunity was available.
Denver Kicking
Wil Lutz finished 2-for-2 on field goals and 1-for-1 on extra points.
His longest field goal was 53 yards, and he scored seven points.
The kicking comparison was therefore:
| Category | Trey Smack | Wil Lutz |
| Field Goals | 4/4 | 2/2 |
| FG Percentage | 100% | 100% |
| Long | 59 | 53 |
| Extra Points | 3/3 | 1/1 |
| Total Points | 15 | 7 |
Both kickers were perfect on their listed attempts, but Green Bay created and converted more scoring opportunities.
Return Game Comparison
Green Bay recorded three kickoff returns for 119 yards, averaging 39.7 yards per return, with a long of 68 yards.
Denver had five kickoff returns for 143 yards, averaging 28.6 yards per return, with a long of 40 yards.
On punt returns, Green Bay had two returns for 20 yards, while Denver had two for 27 yards.
| Return Category | Green Bay | Denver |
| Kickoff Returns | 3 | 5 |
| Kickoff Return Yards | 119 | 143 |
| Kickoff Return Average | 39.7 | 28.6 |
| Long Kick Return | 68 | 40 |
| Punt Returns | 2 | 2 |
| Punt Return Yards | 20 | 27 |
| Punt Return Average | 10.0 | 13.5 |
The return numbers provide another example of why total yardage should not be read without context.
Denver had more total kickoff-return yards because it had five returns compared with Green Bay’s three. Green Bay, however, averaged considerably more yards per return and produced the longer return.
Punting Numbers
Daniel Whelan punted twice for Green Bay for 95 total yards, averaging 47.5 yards per punt. His longest punt traveled 51 yards.
Denver’s Jeremy Crawshaw punted three times for 132 yards, averaging 44.0 yards. One of his punts went inside the 20-yard line, and his longest traveled 47 yards.
| Punter | Punts | Yards | Average | Long | Inside 20 |
| Daniel Whelan | 2 | 95 | 47.5 | 51 | Not listed |
| Jeremy Crawshaw | 3 | 132 | 44.0 | 47 | 1 |
Green Bay’s higher average was achieved with fewer punts.
Denver’s inside-the-20 figure is also useful because raw distance is not the only measure of a punt’s value. Field position can matter more than maximum distance on an individual kick.
What the Score Says About Offensive Efficiency
The final score of 33-13 represents a 20-point Green Bay margin.
The scoring difference came from several areas rather than one statistical category.
Green Bay scored:
- Two passing touchdowns
- One listed rushing touchdown
- Four field goals
- Three extra points
Denver scored:
- One passing touchdown
- Two field goals
- One extra point
The supplied player data contains an important statistical inconsistency that should be acknowledged rather than hidden.
The team-level Green Bay passing line is listed as 21 completions on 34 attempts for 181 yards, while the three individual quarterback lines add up to 191 passing yards. The receiving data also lists 191 receiving yards.
Because 118 plus 56 plus 17 equals 191, the individual passing figures reconcile with the receiving total, but not with the supplied team passing total of 181.
For a publish-ready statistics article, the safest approach is to preserve the individual figures exactly as supplied while noting that the team-level passing yardage should be checked against the final official box score before being used in a statistical database.
This is especially important because official statistics can sometimes be corrected after a game. ESPN notes that NFL statistical corrections can change player and team statistics after the initial game is completed. ESPN Fan Support
What Jordan Love’s Short Appearance Tells Us
Love’s 5-for-7 performance should not be treated like a full-game statistical line.
His 56 yards came on only seven attempts, giving him limited volume. His one touchdown, zero interceptions, and 134.5 rating nevertheless show that Green Bay’s first offensive unit produced efficiently during its opportunity.
NFL’s account provides additional play-level context. Love made multiple off-platform throws, connected with Golden on fourth down, and found Lloyd for a touchdown. NFL
That combination is more informative than simply saying Love completed 71.4 percent of his passes.
The sample still has a clear limitation. Seven attempts cannot establish a sustainable completion rate, touchdown rate, or passer rating. Those figures require much larger samples.
What Bo Nix’s Return Means in the Box Score
Nix’s 6-for-9 performance for 76 yards and one touchdown was one of Denver’s more notable individual lines.
The context is important because he was returning to game action after an ankle injury. NFL reported that Nix played two drives and finished without an interception. NFL
His production included:
- 6 completions
- 9 attempts
- 76 yards
- 1 touchdown
- 0 interceptions
- 129.9 passer rating
The most significant explosive play was the 35-yard connection with Waddle.
Nix also connected with Harvey for the touchdown, giving Denver two notable passing plays during his limited appearance.
Why Preseason Player Stats Need Context
Preseason statistics are useful, but they answer different questions from regular-season statistics.
A regular-season box score is usually interpreted around winning efficiency, production, and team performance over a competitive game. A preseason box score is also a personnel evaluation document.
Coaches may be asking:
- Can a quarterback execute the offense under pressure?
- Can a running back protect the football?
- Can a receiver create separation?
- Can a defensive player consistently tackle?
- Can a backup unit maintain field position?
- Can a kicker perform under game conditions?
- Can players execute assignments when the lineup changes?
That means a player with modest raw statistics can still have an important evaluation.
For example, a quarterback completing short passes may be helping the offense maintain possession, while a defensive lineman who does not record a sack may still create pressure that changes the quarterback’s decision.
This is why green bay packers vs denver broncos match player stats should be examined through several categories rather than one headline number.
Key Statistical Takeaways
Several patterns stand out from the supplied data.
1. Green Bay created more scoring opportunities
The Packers finished with 33 points and converted four field goals.
Denver scored 13 points and produced two field goals.
The scoring gap therefore was not caused exclusively by touchdown production.
2. Both starting quarterbacks avoided interceptions
Love and Nix each finished their listed passing appearances without an interception.
That was especially useful in a preseason environment where decision-making and ball security are important evaluation points.
3. Green Bay’s kicking production was significant
Smack converted all four field-goal attempts and all three extra points.
His 15 points represented nearly half of Green Bay’s final 33-point total.
4. Denver produced explosive receiving plays
Waddle’s 35-yard reception was Denver’s longest listed reception.
Dane Key also averaged 25 yards per reception on his single catch.
5. Green Bay had broader scoring distribution
The Packers combined passing touchdowns, rushing production, and field goals.
That variety helped produce 33 points despite a scoreless third quarter.
6. Turnovers mattered
Green Bay recorded one interception.
Denver had two fumbles, although both were recovered by Denver.
The Packers therefore finished with the only interception in the supplied data.
A Closer Look at Green Bay’s Receiving Distribution
The Packers did not depend on one receiver for every major production category.
Sheppard led in receptions with six.
Sheppard and Neyor tied for the team lead in receiving yards at 47.
Neyor did so with three catches, while Sheppard needed six.
Golden averaged 19 yards per catch on his lone reception.
Watson produced 19 yards on two catches.
Lloyd added a touchdown as a receiver despite producing only 11 receiving yards.
This is a good example of why receptions and yards should be examined together.
A six-catch, 47-yard performance and a three-catch, 47-yard performance have the same yardage but different usage profiles.
A Closer Look at Denver’s Receiving Distribution
Denver’s receiving production was similarly spread across several players.
Waddle’s 35 yards led the team.
Humphrey followed with 32 yards.
Harvey recorded 25 yards and a touchdown.
Key also recorded 25 yards on one catch.
Ross contributed 22 yards on two receptions.
The distribution suggests Denver generated production through both explosive plays and shorter completions.
However, the offense ultimately produced only 13 points, which means yardage did not translate into the same scoring output as Green Bay’s possessions.
Defensive Numbers Versus Offensive Numbers
One of the most interesting contrasts in the box score is that Denver recorded 77 tackles compared with Green Bay’s 63.
At first glance, that might seem surprising given the 33-13 result.
The explanation is that tackle totals are not direct measures of defensive success.
A team can record many tackles because its defense spends more time on the field or because opposing players reach the second level of the defense.
Similarly, quarterback hits do not automatically become sacks or turnovers.
Denver recorded three quarterback hits and one sack.
Green Bay recorded one quarterback hit and two sacks.
These numbers demonstrate different forms of defensive pressure.
The Importance of Field Goals in This Matchup
Field goals accounted for 12 of Green Bay’s 33 points and six of Denver’s 13.
That means kicking represented a significant part of the game’s scoring.
Smack’s 59-yard field goal was particularly notable because long-distance attempts can change how a team approaches fourth down and field position.
Denver’s Lutz also remained perfect on his two field-goal attempts, including a 53-yard long.
The difference was opportunity volume. Green Bay attempted four field goals while Denver attempted two.
How to Read These Stats Without Overreacting
A common mistake when reviewing preseason statistics is to treat one performance as a definitive statement about a player’s future.
That approach is risky.
Love’s 134.5 rating came from seven attempts.
Nix’s 129.9 rating came from nine attempts.
Both are impressive individual lines, but neither is comparable to a full regular-season workload.
The same applies to rushing.
A player averaging 5.0 yards per carry over four attempts has produced useful efficiency, but four carries are not enough to establish a reliable season-long rushing rate.
The best use of these statistics is to identify what happened in the game, understand the player’s role, and then compare the performance with additional games and larger samples.
Green Bay Packers vs Denver Broncos Match Player Stats: Complete Reference
For readers who want the central numbers in one place, the most important individual performances from the supplied data are summarized below.
| Player | Team | Key Production |
| Jordan Love | Green Bay | 5/7, 56 yards, 1 TD, 0 INT |
| Kyle McCord | Green Bay | 12/19, 118 yards, 0 TD, 0 INT |
| Tyrod Taylor | Green Bay | 4/8, 17 yards, 1 TD, 0 INT |
| Pierre Strong Jr. | Green Bay | 8 carries, 37 yards |
| Jaden Nixon | Green Bay | 4 carries, 20 yards, 1 TD |
| Will Sheppard | Green Bay | 6 receptions, 47 yards, 1 TD |
| Isaiah Neyor | Green Bay | 3 receptions, 47 yards |
| MarShawn Lloyd | Green Bay | 6 carries, 17 yards; 3 receptions, 11 yards, 1 TD |
| Bo Nix | Denver | 6/9, 76 yards, 1 TD, 0 INT |
| Jarrett Stidham | Denver | 9/15, 82 yards, 0 TD, 1 INT |
| Sam Ehlinger | Denver | 2/2, 10 yards, 0 TD, 0 INT |
| Cody Schrader | Denver | 4 carries, 15 yards |
| Jaleel McLaughlin | Denver | 4 carries, 15 yards |
| Jaylen Waddle | Denver | 1 reception, 35 yards |
| RJ Harvey | Denver | 4 carries, 2 yards; 2 receptions, 25 yards, 1 TD |
| Lil’Jordan Humphrey | Denver | 2 receptions, 32 yards |
Frequently Asked Questions
Who won the Packers vs Broncos preseason game?
Green Bay defeated Denver 33-13 on August 21, 2026, at Empower Field at Mile High. NFL
What were Jordan Love’s stats against the Broncos?
Jordan Love completed 5 of 7 passes for 56 yards and one touchdown. He threw no interceptions and recorded a 134.5 passer rating in the supplied statistics.
What were Bo Nix’s stats against the Packers?
Bo Nix completed 6 of 9 passes for 76 yards and one touchdown. He threw no interceptions and posted a 129.9 passer rating.
Who led Green Bay in rushing?
Pierre Strong Jr. led the Packers with 37 rushing yards on eight carries. Jaden Nixon recorded 20 yards on four carries and scored a rushing touchdown.
Who led Denver in receiving?
Jaylen Waddle led Denver with 35 receiving yards on one catch. Lil’Jordan Humphrey had 32 yards on two receptions, while RJ Harvey recorded 25 yards and a touchdown.
How many points did Trey Smack score?
Trey Smack scored 15 points by making four field goals and three extra points. His longest field goal was 59 yards.
Conclusion
The August 21, 2026 preseason matchup produced a 33-13 Green Bay victory, but the deeper statistical picture is more informative than the final score alone.
Green Bay combined quarterback efficiency, a distributed rushing workload, multiple receiving contributors, strong kicking production, and an interception to build its scoring advantage. Jordan Love was highly efficient in limited action, while Kyle McCord received the largest passing workload among Green Bay quarterbacks. Trey Smack also played a major role by converting four field goals and three extra points.
Denver showed useful individual flashes. Bo Nix completed 6 of 9 passes for 76 yards and a touchdown during his limited appearance, while Jaylen Waddle produced a 35-yard reception and RJ Harvey contributed a receiving touchdown.
The defensive numbers also show why box-score interpretation requires context. Denver recorded more total tackles, while Green Bay recorded more sacks and the game’s only interception.
For anyone studying green bay packers vs denver broncos match player stats, the main lesson is to examine volume, efficiency, scoring production, turnovers, and player roles together. Preseason statistics are most valuable when treated as individual evidence within a larger evaluation process rather than as standalone predictions about a player’s full-season performance.
