Baltimore ravens vs Pittsburgh steelers match player stats
The baltimore ravens vs pittsburgh steelers match player stats from the January 4, 2026 NFL regular season finale tell the story of one of the most competitive divisional battles of the year. Pittsburgh defended its home field with a dramatic 26 to 24 victory after overcoming an early deficit, while Baltimore produced explosive offensive plays that nearly secured an important road win. Although the Ravens generated more rushing efficiency and several long touchdown plays, the Steelers capitalized on sustained drives, timely defensive stops, and reliable special teams to complete the comeback. Looking beyond the final score, this matchup provides valuable insight into quarterback efficiency, rushing production, receiving impact, defensive execution, and the critical moments that ultimately decided the outcome.
This article provides a complete breakdown of every major statistical category, explains what the numbers actually mean, and highlights the performances that shaped one of Week 1’s most memorable AFC North contests.
Match Overview
| Match Detail | Result |
| Sport | NFL |
| Week | Week 1 |
| Date | January 4, 2026 |
| Venue | Pittsburgh Steelers (Home) |
| Final Score | Pittsburgh Steelers 26, Baltimore Ravens 24 |
| Winning Team | Pittsburgh Steelers |
| Baltimore Record | 8 to 9 |
| Pittsburgh Record | 10 to 7 |
Both teams entered the rivalry knowing that games between Baltimore and Pittsburgh rarely follow expectations. Physical defense, disciplined football, and momentum swings have historically defined this matchup, and this contest followed the same script. Baltimore controlled stretches with explosive offensive plays, while Pittsburgh relied on consistency, patience, and execution during the second half.
Baltimore Ravens vs Pittsburgh Steelers Match Player Stats
The baltimore ravens vs pittsburgh steelers match player stats reveal a fascinating contrast in offensive philosophy.
Baltimore relied on explosive production. Their offense generated big passing plays and averaged over five yards per rushing attempt, producing touchdowns quickly when opportunities appeared.
Pittsburgh, meanwhile, emphasized sustained offensive drives. Aaron Rodgers completed 31 passes, allowing the Steelers to control possession and gradually wear down Baltimore’s defense before finishing drives late in the game.
Although Baltimore produced several of the biggest individual plays, Pittsburgh’s balanced approach ultimately proved more effective over four quarters.
Final Score Summary
| Quarter | Ravens | Steelers |
| First | 7 | 0 |
| Second | 3 | 3 |
| Third | 0 | 10 |
| Fourth | 14 | 13 |
| Final | 24 | 26 |
The quarter-by-quarter scoring highlights a major momentum shift.
Baltimore dominated the opening half, entering halftime with a 10 to 3 advantage. Pittsburgh responded immediately after halftime, scoring ten unanswered points during the third quarter before holding off the Ravens during an exciting fourth quarter.
Momentum changed multiple times, making every possession increasingly important as the game progressed.
Quarterback Performance Analysis
Quarterback play often determines rivalry games, and both starters delivered performances that reflected different offensive styles.
Lamar Jackson
| Statistic | Value |
| Completions | 11 |
| Attempts | 18 |
| Passing Yards | 238 |
| Passing TD | 3 |
| Interceptions | 1 |
| Passer Rating | 121.5 |
| Sacks Taken | 3 |
Lamar Jackson was extremely efficient.
Completing just eleven passes while throwing for 238 yards demonstrates remarkable downfield effectiveness. His average of 13.2 yards per completion consistently stretched Pittsburgh’s secondary, allowing Baltimore to score quickly through explosive passing plays.
However, one interception became one of the game’s defining moments. Against an experienced Steelers defense, every turnover carries significant value, and Pittsburgh converted that defensive success into momentum during the second half.
Despite the loss, Jackson remained one of the game’s most dangerous offensive players.
Aaron Rodgers
| Statistic | Value |
| Completions | 31 |
| Attempts | 47 |
| Passing Yards | 294 |
| Passing TD | 1 |
| Interceptions | 0 |
| Passer Rating | 90.2 |
| Sacks Taken | 2 |
Aaron Rodgers approached the game differently.
Rather than relying on explosive plays, he consistently moved the chains through accurate short and intermediate passes. Completing thirty-one passes demonstrated patience and trust in Pittsburgh’s offensive system.
While Rodgers threw only one touchdown, protecting the football proved equally valuable. Avoiding interceptions allowed Pittsburgh to maintain offensive rhythm throughout the afternoon.
His leadership became especially important during the comeback, helping Pittsburgh score twenty-three points after halftime.
Comparing the Quarterbacks
| Category | Lamar Jackson | Aaron Rodgers |
| Passing Yards | 238 | 294 |
| Touchdowns | 3 | 1 |
| Interceptions | 1 | 0 |
| Completion Percentage | 61.1% | 66.0% |
| Passer Rating | 121.5 | 90.2 |
Jackson produced the more explosive numbers, but Rodgers controlled the game with consistency and ball security.
This comparison perfectly illustrates how different quarterback styles can both succeed depending on situational execution.
Running Game Breakdown
The ground game played a major role for both offenses.
Derrick Henry Dominates
| Statistic | Value |
| Carries | 20 |
| Rushing Yards | 126 |
| Average | 6.3 |
| Long Run | 41 |
Derrick Henry once again demonstrated why he remains one of football’s premier power runners.
His combination of vision, patience, and physical running consistently challenged Pittsburgh’s defensive front. Averaging more than six yards per carry is an exceptional performance against one of the NFL’s traditionally strongest run defenses.
Henry’s longest run of forty-one yards significantly changed field position and kept Baltimore’s offense balanced throughout the afternoon.
Jaylen Warren Leads Pittsburgh
| Statistic | Value |
| Carries | 14 |
| Yards | 66 |
| Average | 4.7 |
| Long Run | 15 |
Jaylen Warren’s production may not appear as dominant statistically, but his contributions came during meaningful drives.
His ability to produce nearly five yards per carry helped Pittsburgh remain balanced, preventing Baltimore’s defense from focusing entirely on Rodgers’ passing attack.
While Warren did not score, his rushing efficiency helped sustain multiple scoring possessions.
Team Rushing Comparison
| Team | Attempts | Yards | Average | Touchdowns |
| Baltimore | 27 | 137 | 5.1 | 0 |
| Pittsburgh | 24 | 100 | 4.2 | 2 |
Baltimore gained more rushing yards and averaged nearly one full yard more per attempt.
However, Pittsburgh finished drives with two rushing touchdowns, illustrating that efficiency inside the red zone often outweighs total yardage.
The Steelers converted opportunities into points, while Baltimore occasionally settled for field goal attempts or relied on long passing touchdowns instead.
Receiving Leaders
Baltimore’s receiving corps produced the biggest explosive plays of the game.
Zay Flowers Delivers a Star Performance
| Statistic | Value |
| Receptions | 4 |
| Receiving Yards | 138 |
| Touchdowns | 2 |
| Targets | 6 |
| Long Reception | 64 |
Zay Flowers delivered arguably the most explosive offensive performance of the afternoon.
Despite catching only four passes, he accumulated 138 receiving yards and scored twice.
His average yards per reception demonstrate how dangerous he becomes once he finds open space.
Flowers repeatedly forced Pittsburgh’s secondary to defend deep routes, creating explosive scoring opportunities throughout the game.
Kenny Gainwell Provides Stability
While Baltimore relied on explosive gains, Pittsburgh leaned on consistent production from Kenny Gainwell.
| Statistic | Value |
| Receptions | 8 |
| Receiving Yards | 64 |
| Touchdowns | 0 |
| Targets | 9 |
| Long Reception | 15 |
Gainwell did not produce highlight-reel plays, but his role was essential. Catching eight of his nine targets helped Pittsburgh stay ahead of the chains and extend multiple drives.
His reliability on short and intermediate routes allowed Aaron Rodgers to distribute the football efficiently while minimizing unnecessary risks. In a game decided by only two points, several modest gains proved just as valuable as explosive touchdowns.
Team Receiving Comparison
| Team | Receptions | Receiving Yards | Receiving TDs |
| Baltimore Ravens | 11 | 238 | 3 |
| Pittsburgh Steelers | 31 | 294 | 1 |
The team statistics reveal two very different offensive approaches.
Baltimore completed only eleven passes, but every completion carried significant value. The Ravens averaged more than 21 yards per reception, showing their emphasis on attacking deep downfield.
Pittsburgh, by contrast, completed thirty one passes for 294 yards. Rather than chasing explosive gains, the Steelers steadily accumulated yardage through high-percentage throws that kept drives alive and controlled the pace of the game.
Both approaches were effective in different ways, but Pittsburgh’s sustained possessions ultimately proved more successful over four quarters.
Defensive Performance Breakdown
Defense has always been the defining characteristic of this rivalry, and this matchup featured several impactful defensive plays despite the offensive fireworks.
Baltimore Defensive Statistics
| Category | Total |
| Total Tackles | 78 |
| Solo Tackles | 43 |
| Sacks | 2 |
| Tackles for Loss | 3 |
| Pass Deflections | 5 |
| Quarterback Hits | 3 |
Baltimore’s defense spent considerable time on the field because Pittsburgh controlled possession through its passing game.
The Ravens recorded seventy eight total tackles, illustrating how frequently they were forced to respond to long offensive drives. Their two sacks and multiple pass breakups disrupted Pittsburgh at times, but they struggled to consistently force drive-ending mistakes.
The overall effort was competitive, yet Pittsburgh’s offensive balance limited Baltimore’s opportunities to generate momentum-changing turnovers.
Pittsburgh Defensive Statistics
| Category | Total |
| Total Tackles | 50 |
| Solo Tackles | 32 |
| Sacks | 3 |
| Tackles for Loss | 3 |
| Pass Deflections | 4 |
| Quarterback Hits | 5 |
Although Pittsburgh finished with fewer total tackles, the defense created pressure when it mattered most.
Three sacks forced Baltimore into difficult passing situations, while five quarterback hits ensured Lamar Jackson rarely felt comfortable throughout the contest.
More importantly, the Steelers produced the game’s only interception, giving the offense an additional opportunity that contributed significantly to the comeback victory.
T.J. Watt Delivers the Game’s Biggest Defensive Play
One defensive moment often determines close NFL games, and this contest was no exception.
T.J. Watt recorded Pittsburgh’s lone interception, ending one of Baltimore’s promising possessions.
Although the interception did not produce return yardage, its value extended far beyond the statistics. It shifted momentum toward Pittsburgh during the second half and prevented Baltimore from extending its lead.
When evaluating the baltimore ravens vs pittsburgh steelers match player stats, this takeaway stands out as one of the game’s defining moments because neither team committed a fumble. With turnovers being so limited, Watt’s interception became even more valuable.
Special Teams Performance
Close games frequently come down to special teams execution, and both kickers had opportunities to influence the final outcome.
Kicking Comparison
| Player | Field Goals | Long | Extra Points | Total Points |
| Tyler Loop | 1 of 2 | 40 | 3 of 3 | 6 |
| Chris Boswell | 2 of 2 | 57 | 2 of 3 | 8 |
Chris Boswell delivered one of the most important performances of the afternoon.
His perfect field goal record included an impressive fifty seven yard kick, providing Pittsburgh with valuable points during a tightly contested game.
Tyler Loop converted one field goal but missed another attempt. In a contest decided by only two points, every missed scoring opportunity became magnified.
Punting Battle
Field position quietly influenced several drives throughout the game.
Baltimore
| Statistic | Value |
| Punts | 4 |
| Average | 47.8 |
| Long | 54 |
| Inside 20 | 3 |
Jordan Stout consistently pinned Pittsburgh deep in its own territory. Placing three punts inside the twenty demonstrated outstanding directional kicking and helped Baltimore’s defense begin possessions with favorable field position.
Pittsburgh
| Statistic | Value |
| Punts | 3 |
| Average | 39.7 |
| Long | 53 |
| Inside 20 | 1 |
Corliss Waitman punted fewer times because Pittsburgh sustained longer offensive drives. Although his average was lower, he still contributed effectively when called upon.
Kick Return Analysis
Starting field position influenced offensive strategy throughout the afternoon.
Baltimore Kick Returns
| Statistic | Value |
| Returns | 5 |
| Yards | 130 |
| Average | 26.0 |
| Long | 41 |
Baltimore’s return unit consistently provided favorable starting position, averaging twenty six yards per return.
The longest return of forty one yards helped create strong field position and reduced the distance required for the offense to reach scoring range.
Pittsburgh Kick Returns
| Statistic | Value |
| Returns | 3 |
| Yards | 91 |
| Average | 30.3 |
| Long | 32 |
Although Pittsburgh returned fewer kickoffs, the Steelers averaged more than thirty yards per return.
This efficiency gave Aaron Rodgers advantageous field position on multiple drives and complemented the offense’s possession-focused game plan.
Punt Returns
Punt return opportunities were limited.
Baltimore did not record a punt return during the game.
Pittsburgh received modest production from Calvin Austin III.
| Statistic | Value |
| Returns | 2 |
| Yards | 11 |
| Average | 5.5 |
| Long | 9 |
While these numbers were relatively small, they prevented negative field position and ensured Pittsburgh consistently started offensive possessions under manageable circumstances.
Ball Security Made the Difference
One of the most interesting aspects of this rivalry was how well both teams protected the football.
Turnover Summary
| Category | Ravens | Steelers |
| Fumbles Lost | 0 | 0 |
| Interceptions Thrown | 1 | 0 |
| Interceptions Made | 0 | 1 |
Neither team lost a fumble.
The only turnover came when Pittsburgh intercepted Lamar Jackson.
In games where both offenses execute efficiently, even a single takeaway can become the deciding factor. That proved true here, as Pittsburgh protected the football while taking advantage of Baltimore’s lone mistake.
Statistical Comparison by Category
A side by side comparison makes it easier to understand why Pittsburgh finished with a narrow victory despite Baltimore producing several explosive offensive plays.
| Category | Baltimore Ravens | Pittsburgh Steelers |
| Final Score | 24 | 26 |
| Passing Yards | 238 | 294 |
| Passing Touchdowns | 3 | 1 |
| Rushing Yards | 137 | 100 |
| Team Rushing Average | 5.1 | 4.2 |
| Receiving Yards | 238 | 294 |
| Receiving Touchdowns | 3 | 1 |
| Total Sacks | 2 | 3 |
| Interceptions Made | 0 | 1 |
| Fumbles Lost | 0 | 0 |
| Field Goals Made | 1 | 2 |
At first glance, Baltimore appears to have the advantage in several offensive categories. The Ravens ran the ball more effectively, generated three passing touchdowns, and averaged significantly more yards on explosive plays.
However, football games are not decided solely by total yardage. Pittsburgh excelled in the areas that often determine close contests.
The Steelers:
- Won the turnover battle.
- Recorded more sacks.
- Converted both field goal attempts.
- Finished drives with two rushing touchdowns.
- Controlled possession through a high-volume passing attack.
Those small advantages accumulated over four quarters and ultimately resulted in a two point victory.
Key Moments That Changed the Game
Several sequences shifted momentum and influenced the final result.
Baltimore’s Fast Start
The Ravens opened the game with confidence, scoring seven points in the first quarter before adding another field goal in the second.
Their offense looked explosive, particularly whenever Lamar Jackson connected with Zay Flowers on deep routes.
At halftime, Baltimore held a 10 to 3 advantage and appeared to control the pace.
Pittsburgh’s Third Quarter Response
The third quarter completely changed the direction of the game.
Pittsburgh scored ten unanswered points while preventing Baltimore from putting any points on the scoreboard.
That defensive adjustment forced the Ravens into longer situations and allowed the Steelers to regain momentum entering the final quarter.
The Fourth Quarter Shootout
Both teams played aggressively during the final period.
Baltimore scored two touchdowns, refusing to allow Pittsburgh to pull away.
The Steelers answered with thirteen points of their own, combining efficient passing, productive rushing, and accurate kicking to maintain a narrow lead until the final whistle.
It was a classic AFC North finish where every possession mattered.
Player of the Game
Several players delivered standout performances, but one player had the greatest overall influence on the outcome.
Aaron Rodgers
While Lamar Jackson produced more touchdown passes and Derrick Henry dominated on the ground, Aaron Rodgers orchestrated the winning offense from start to finish.
His performance included:
- 31 completions.
- 294 passing yards.
- Zero interceptions.
- Efficient game management.
- Multiple long scoring drives.
Rodgers consistently made smart decisions, avoided costly mistakes, and helped Pittsburgh remain composed after trailing early.
Although his statistical line may not appear spectacular compared to Jackson’s efficiency, his ability to lead sustained drives and protect possession proved decisive.
Baltimore’s Biggest Positive Takeaways
Despite the loss, Baltimore demonstrated several encouraging signs.
Explosive Offensive Potential
The Ravens averaged impressive gains through both the passing and rushing attack.
Whenever Lamar Jackson connected with Zay Flowers, Pittsburgh’s secondary struggled to contain the explosive plays.
Derrick Henry Remains Elite
Henry once again showed why he remains one of the league’s premier running backs.
His combination of vision, power, and acceleration created consistent production against a physical defensive front.
Averaging 6.3 yards per carry against Pittsburgh is an outstanding achievement.
Defensive Competitiveness
Although Baltimore surrendered twenty six points, the defense still recorded two sacks, five pass breakups, and numerous tackles that prevented even larger gains.
The overall defensive effort remained competitive throughout the game.
Pittsburgh’s Biggest Strengths
The Steelers displayed balance across every phase of the game.
Offensive Patience
Rather than forcing deep throws, Pittsburgh trusted its offensive system.
Aaron Rodgers spread the football effectively, allowing multiple receivers to contribute while maintaining possession.
Defensive Pressure
Generating three sacks and forcing the game’s only turnover highlighted Pittsburgh’s disciplined defensive performance.
The pass rush remained active throughout the afternoon, preventing Baltimore from becoming completely comfortable offensively.
Reliable Special Teams
Chris Boswell’s perfect field goal performance provided valuable points during critical moments.
His successful fifty seven yard kick demonstrated both confidence and consistency.
In close games, dependable special teams often separate winning teams from losing teams, and Pittsburgh benefited from that advantage.
What the Statistics Really Tell Us
Numbers become more meaningful when placed into context.
The baltimore ravens vs pittsburgh steelers match player stats illustrate that explosive plays alone do not guarantee victory.
Baltimore generated more big plays.
Pittsburgh generated more sustained success.
The Ravens relied on efficiency and vertical passing.
The Steelers relied on consistency, possession, defensive pressure, and situational execution.
This contrast explains why Baltimore finished with more explosive offensive numbers while Pittsburgh secured the win.
Another important takeaway is how evenly matched these rivals remain.
Neither team committed a fumble.
Both quarterbacks played well.
Both rushing attacks were productive.
Both defenses created pressure.
Ultimately, a single interception, stronger red zone execution, and dependable kicking proved enough for Pittsburgh to earn a hard fought divisional victory.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who won the Pittsburgh Steelers vs Baltimore Ravens game on January 4, 2026?
The Pittsburgh Steelers defeated the Baltimore Ravens by a final score of 26 to 24 at home.
Who led the Ravens in passing?
Lamar Jackson completed 11 of 18 passes for 238 yards, three touchdowns, one interception, and finished with a 121.5 passer rating.
Who had the most rushing yards in the game?
Derrick Henry led all rushers with 126 yards on 20 carries, averaging 6.3 yards per attempt.
Which receiver had the biggest impact?
Zay Flowers produced the most explosive receiving performance with four receptions for 138 yards and two touchdowns.
How many turnovers occurred during the game?
There was only one turnover. T.J. Watt intercepted Lamar Jackson, while neither team lost a fumble.
Why did Pittsburgh win despite Baltimore’s explosive offense?
Pittsburgh protected the football, forced the game’s only turnover, converted key scoring opportunities, recorded more sacks, and received an excellent kicking performance from Chris Boswell. Those small advantages made the difference in a closely contested game.
Conclusion
The baltimore ravens vs steelers match player stats showcase exactly why this rivalry continues to rank among the NFL’s most competitive matchups. Baltimore produced explosive offensive plays through Lamar Jackson, Derrick Henry, and Zay Flowers, while Pittsburgh answered with disciplined execution, balanced offense, timely defensive pressure, and outstanding special teams. The Ravens gained impressive yardage and scored quickly, but the Steelers maximized their opportunities by protecting the football, capitalizing on the game’s lone turnover, and finishing drives efficiently. Every quarter featured momentum swings, making the final two point margin a fair reflection of how evenly matched these teams were. From quarterback efficiency to defensive execution and special teams contributions, every phase of the game played a meaningful role in shaping the final result.
