Buffalo bills vs Miami dolphins match player stats

The buffalo bills vs miami dolphins match player stats from the September 18, 2025 meeting tell a much more detailed story than the 31 to 21 final score alone. Buffalo finished the game with a 3-0 record after beating Miami, while the Dolphins fell to 0-3. Josh Allen delivered an efficient passing performance, James Cook III controlled the ground game, and Dalton Kincaid produced the most receiving yards for Buffalo. Miami, meanwhile, received useful contributions from Tua Tagovailoa, De’Von Achane, and Tyreek Hill, but the overall offensive production was not enough to keep pace.

The final score was Buffalo Bills 31, Miami Dolphins 21. Buffalo completed 22 of 28 passes for 213 yards and three touchdowns, while Miami completed 22 of 34 passes for 146 yards and two touchdowns. The rushing numbers also favored Buffalo, which gained 157 yards on 27 attempts compared with Miami’s 130 yards on 25 attempts.

Those numbers provide the basic answer for anyone checking player production. But a closer look at the box score shows why the game developed the way it did. Buffalo was more efficient through the air, more productive on the ground, and better at turning its offensive opportunities into points.

buffalo bills vs miami dolphins match player stats at a glance

The most important individual and team statistics from the game are summarized below.

Category	Buffalo Bills	Miami Dolphins
Final Score	31	21
Record After Game	3-0	0-3
Passing	22/28, 213 yards	22/34, 146 yards
Passing TDs	3	2
Interceptions	0	1
Passing Average	7.6 yards	4.3 yards
QBR	66.6	73.1
Passer Rating	134.1	81.2
Team Rushing	157 yards	130 yards
Rushing Attempts	27	25
Rushing TDs	1	1
Team Receiving	213 yards	146 yards
Receptions	22	22
Receiving TDs	3	2
Total Tackles	60	58

At first glance, the passing totals immediately stand out. Both teams completed 22 passes, but Buffalo gained 67 more passing yards. That difference came from efficiency rather than volume.

Buffalo attempted only 28 passes and averaged 7.6 yards per attempt. Miami attempted 34 and averaged just 4.3 yards per attempt.

That is one of the clearest statistical differences in the game.

Josh Allen’s passing performance

Josh Allen completed 22 of 28 passes for 213 yards, averaging 7.6 yards per attempt. He threw three touchdown passes and did not throw an interception.

His final passer rating was 134.1, while his QBR was listed at 66.6.

The most important feature of Allen’s performance was not simply the number of completions. It was what Buffalo achieved with those completions.

A completion rate of 78.6 percent combined with 7.6 yards per attempt indicates that Buffalo was not relying solely on short, low-impact throws. The Bills consistently generated useful yardage from their passing opportunities.

Allen’s three touchdown passes were also critical because Buffalo converted its passing production into points.

Allen compared with Tagovailoa

The quarterback comparison is especially interesting because the two players produced the same number of completions.

Josh Allen:

• 22 completions
• 28 attempts
• 213 yards
• 7.6 yards per attempt
• 3 touchdowns
• 0 interceptions
• 134.1 passer rating
• 66.6 QBR

Tua Tagovailoa:

• 22 completions
• 34 attempts
• 146 yards
• 4.3 yards per attempt
• 2 touchdowns
• 1 interception
• 81.2 passer rating
• 73.1 QBR

The six extra attempts for Tagovailoa produced no additional completions and only 146 total passing yards.

This is an important reminder that completion totals alone do not tell the whole story. Both quarterbacks completed 22 passes, but Allen generated 67 more passing yards.

The difference in yards per attempt is even more revealing. Buffalo averaged 3.3 yards more per pass attempt.

That efficiency gap helped create Buffalo’s offensive advantage.

Tua Tagovailoa’s performance

Tua Tagovailoa completed 22 of 34 passes for 146 yards, with two touchdowns and one interception.

His completion percentage was 64.7 percent, which is respectable on its own. The bigger concern was the limited yardage gained from those completions.

His 4.3 yards per attempt was considerably below Allen’s 7.6.

Tagovailoa’s two touchdown passes gave Miami opportunities to remain competitive, but the Dolphins did not generate enough total passing yardage to match Buffalo’s offensive consistency.

The interception also mattered. Buffalo recorded one interception through Terrel Bernard, who returned it 24 yards.

Miami did not record an interception.

James Cook III was Buffalo’s leading rusher

James Cook III produced one of the strongest individual performances in the game.

He carried the ball 19 times for 108 yards, averaging 5.7 yards per carry. He also scored a rushing touchdown and recorded a long run of 26 yards.

Cook’s performance was significant because he accounted for a large portion of Buffalo’s rushing production.

The Bills had 27 rushing attempts for 157 yards. Cook alone contributed 108 yards.

That means Cook accounted for roughly 69 percent of Buffalo’s rushing yardage.

His 26-yard long run also demonstrated the ability to create a major gain rather than simply accumulate yards through repeated modest carries.

Why Cook’s performance mattered

A productive rushing attack changes how a defense can approach the quarterback.

Buffalo did not need Allen to throw 40 or 45 passes. The running game produced 157 yards on 27 attempts, giving the offense another reliable way to move the ball.

Cook’s 5.7 yards per carry was also slightly better than Buffalo’s overall 5.8 team average only because the team figure includes all rushing attempts and is subject to rounding. His workload was particularly notable because he handled 19 of the team’s 27 attempts.

For anyone analyzing the game beyond the final score, Cook’s workload is one of the clearest indicators of Buffalo’s offensive balance.

De’Von Achane led Miami’s rushing attack

De’Von Achane was Miami’s leading rusher with 12 carries for 62 yards.

He averaged 5.2 yards per carry and had a long run of 14 yards. He did not score a rushing touchdown.

Miami finished with 130 rushing yards on 25 attempts, meaning Achane supplied nearly half of the team’s rushing yardage.

His 62 yards were productive, but Miami did not get the same level of volume from its leading back that Buffalo received from Cook.

The contrast is useful:

• Cook: 19 carries, 108 yards, 1 touchdown
• Achane: 12 carries, 62 yards, 0 touchdowns

Both backs averaged more than five yards per carry, so the issue was not simply that Miami could not run the ball.

The bigger difference was volume and scoring impact.

Buffalo’s primary rusher had 19 carries and found the end zone. Miami’s leading rusher had 12 carries and did not score.

Dalton Kincaid led Buffalo in receiving

Dalton Kincaid was Buffalo’s leading receiver by yardage.

He finished with 5 receptions for 66 yards and one touchdown on six targets.

His average was 13.2 yards per reception, and his longest reception covered 20 yards.

Kincaid’s production is important because he generated more receiving yards than any Miami player despite seeing only six targets.

His five catches accounted for nearly one quarter of Buffalo’s 22 receptions, while his 66 yards represented almost 31 percent of the Bills’ total receiving yardage.

The one touchdown also made his contribution more valuable than yardage alone suggests.

Tyreek Hill led Miami in receiving

Tyreek Hill finished as Miami’s leading receiver with 5 receptions for 49 yards and one touchdown.

He was targeted 10 times.

That target volume is one of the more interesting numbers in the box score.

Hill received 10 of Miami’s 33 targets, or roughly 30 percent. Despite that involvement, he finished with 49 receiving yards.

His 9.8 yards per reception was below Kincaid’s 13.2.

Hill’s touchdown still gave Miami an important scoring contribution, but the overall receiving production indicates that Miami’s passing offense was unable to turn its volume of targets into enough yardage.

Hill’s targets versus production

The distinction between targets and production is particularly useful when evaluating a receiver.

Hill:

• 10 targets
• 5 receptions
• 49 yards
• 1 touchdown
• 9.8 yards per reception
• 19-yard long reception

Kincaid:

• 6 targets
• 5 receptions
• 66 yards
• 1 touchdown
• 13.2 yards per reception
• 20-yard long reception

Kincaid caught five passes on six targets, while Hill caught five on 10.

That does not mean Kincaid was automatically the more talented player. It does show that Buffalo extracted more yardage from fewer opportunities in this particular game.

Buffalo’s passing efficiency was the biggest statistical edge

When examining the buffalo bills vs miami dolphins match player stats, the passing efficiency gap deserves special attention.

Buffalo had:

• 28 pass attempts
• 22 completions
• 213 yards
• 7.6 yards per attempt
• 3 passing touchdowns
• 0 interceptions

Miami had:

• 34 pass attempts
• 22 completions
• 146 yards
• 4.3 yards per attempt
• 2 passing touchdowns
• 1 interception

The teams had identical completion totals.

But Buffalo generated 213 yards compared with Miami’s 146.

That is a 67-yard difference despite the same number of completions.

This is why a good box-score analysis should look beyond completion percentage.

Buffalo completed 78.6 percent of its passes. Miami completed 64.7 percent.

The Bills were more accurate and more productive per attempt.

Buffalo also controlled the rushing numbers

The rushing comparison was closer than the passing comparison, but Buffalo still had the edge.

Buffalo:

• 27 attempts
• 157 yards
• 5.8 yards per carry
• 1 touchdown
• 26-yard long

Miami:

• 25 attempts
• 130 yards
• 5.2 yards per carry
• 1 touchdown
• 16-yard long

Buffalo had only two more rushing attempts but produced 27 additional yards.

The Bills also had the longer explosive run, with a 26-yard gain compared with Miami’s 16-yard long.

That combination of rushing efficiency and passing efficiency made Buffalo’s offense more productive across the game.

The receiving numbers reveal a major efficiency difference

The receiving totals were essentially a mirror of the passing totals.

Buffalo recorded:

22 receptions for 213 yards, averaging 9.7 yards per reception.

Miami recorded:

22 receptions for 146 yards, averaging 6.6 yards per reception.

Again, the reception totals were identical.

The difference was what happened after the catch and how far downfield the completed passes traveled.

Buffalo averaged 9.7 yards per reception across its receiving production.

Miami averaged 6.6.

That 3.1-yard difference per reception becomes substantial over 22 catches.

The Bills also recorded three receiving touchdowns compared with two for Miami.

Defensive statistics and the turnover battle

Buffalo recorded one interception through Terrel Bernard.

Bernard returned the interception 24 yards and did not score.

Miami recorded no interceptions.

Neither team lost a fumble.

Miami had one fumble and recovered it. Buffalo had two fumbles and recovered both.

That means the game featured:

• Buffalo: 1 interception, 0 lost fumbles
• Miami: 0 interceptions, 0 lost fumbles

The turnover margin therefore favored Buffalo by one.

That is not an enormous turnover difference, but it mattered because Buffalo also had the stronger offensive efficiency.

The Bills recorded 60 total tackles compared with Miami’s 58.

Interestingly, Miami recorded two sacks, while Buffalo recorded none.

So the defensive statistics were not uniformly in Buffalo’s favor.

Miami actually generated more quarterback sacks.

Buffalo’s advantage came from its overall offensive efficiency and its interception.

Tackles, sacks, tackles for loss, and passes defended

Buffalo recorded:

• 60 total tackles
• 40 solo tackles
• 0 sacks
• 5 tackles for loss
• 3 passes defended
• 1 quarterback hit

Miami recorded:

• 58 total tackles
• 44 solo tackles
• 2 sacks
• 2 tackles for loss
• 3 passes defended
• 2 quarterback hits

These numbers provide an important nuance.

A casual reading of the score could suggest that Buffalo dominated every aspect of the game.

The defensive statistics do not support that conclusion.

Miami generated two sacks and two quarterback hits, while Buffalo did not record a sack.

Buffalo, however, produced more tackles for loss.

Both teams recorded three passes defended.

This suggests that Buffalo’s victory was driven more by the cumulative performance of its offense and turnover creation than by a traditional defensive pass-rush takeover.

Special teams statistics

Special teams often receive less attention in player-stat searches, but the numbers provide useful context.

Kick returns

Miami:

• 5 returns
• 152 yards
• 30.4-yard average
• 54-yard long
• 0 touchdowns

Buffalo:

• 3 returns
• 95 yards
• 31.7-yard average
• 33-yard long
• 0 touchdowns

Miami had more return opportunities and more total return yards.

Buffalo had the slightly better average.

Neither team returned a kickoff for a touchdown.

Punt returns

Miami:

• 2 returns
• 22 yards
• 11.0-yard average
• 11-yard long

Buffalo:

• 2 returns
• 15 yards
• 7.5-yard average
• 15-yard long

Miami gained more punt-return yardage despite both teams having two returns.

Kicking comparison

Riley Patterson handled kicking duties for Miami.

He made all three extra-point attempts and scored three points. He did not attempt a field goal.

Matt Prater handled kicking for Buffalo.

Prater went 1 for 2 on field-goal attempts, with a long of 48 yards, and made all four extra-point attempts.

His final scoring total was seven points.

The field-goal miss is worth noting, but Buffalo still finished with 31 points and successfully converted all four extra points.

Punting comparison

Miami punter Jake Bailey recorded:

• 4 punts
• 200 total yards
• 50.0-yard average
• 56-yard long
• 0 touchbacks
• 1 punt inside the 20

Buffalo punter Cameron Johnston recorded:

• 2 punts
• 95 total yards
• 47.5-yard average
• 48-yard long
• 0 touchbacks
• 0 punts inside the 20

Miami punted twice as often.

That does not automatically mean its punter performed worse. In fact, Bailey averaged 50 yards per punt.

The larger takeaway is that Buffalo sustained more offensive drives and therefore had fewer punting opportunities.

What the score does not tell you

The 31 to 21 score is straightforward, but the player statistics reveal a more balanced interpretation.

Miami was not completely ineffective.

The Dolphins rushed for 130 yards, averaged 5.2 yards per carry, scored two passing touchdowns, and generated two sacks.

They also produced 152 kick-return yards.

The problem was that Buffalo was consistently more efficient in the most important offensive areas.

The Bills gained:

• 67 more passing yards
• 27 more rushing yards
• 67 more total receiving yards
• 1 more passing touchdown
• 1 more rushing touchdown
• 1 more interception

Those differences explain why the final margin reached 10 points.

Why Josh Allen’s 134.1 passer rating matters

Passer rating is not a perfect measure of quarterback performance, but in this box score it captures a major part of the difference.

Allen’s rating was 134.1.

Tagovailoa’s was 81.2.

The gap of 52.9 rating points is substantial.

Allen combined high completion efficiency with strong yards per attempt, three touchdowns, and no interceptions.

Tagovailoa completed 22 passes, but his lower yards per attempt and interception reduced the overall efficiency of his performance.

The QBR numbers add another layer.

Tagovailoa’s QBR was listed at 73.1, while Allen’s was 66.6.

That difference is a reminder that quarterback evaluation metrics measure different things.

A single metric should not override the full box score.

For this game, the most practical approach is to look at completion rate, yards per attempt, touchdowns, interceptions, rushing support, and the final score together.

The hidden importance of target efficiency

One of the most useful ways to read these statistics is by comparing targets with receptions.

Miami had 33 team targets and 22 receptions.

Buffalo had 27 team targets and 22 receptions.

Both teams caught 22 passes.

But Buffalo needed six fewer targets to produce those 22 receptions.

That is a meaningful efficiency difference.

Buffalo’s 22 receptions generated 213 yards.

Miami’s 22 receptions generated 146 yards.

So Buffalo’s passing attack was both more efficient at converting opportunities and more productive once the ball was caught.

This is one reason the Bills could produce 31 points without throwing the ball nearly as often as Miami.

A closer look at offensive balance

Buffalo’s offensive profile was unusually balanced in a simple statistical sense.

The Bills produced 213 passing yards and 157 rushing yards.

Miami produced 146 passing yards and 130 rushing yards.

Buffalo therefore gained:

370 yards from passing and rushing combined.

Miami gained:

276 yards from passing and rushing combined.

That creates a 94-yard advantage for Buffalo in the two primary offensive categories represented by the supplied data.

The Bills gained those extra yards without needing a dramatically higher number of rushing attempts or a huge passing volume.

That is the central offensive story of the game.

What fantasy football managers can learn from the box score

Although this article is focused on game statistics rather than fantasy projections, the numbers offer several useful lessons.

James Cook’s 19 carries, 108 rushing yards, and rushing touchdown demonstrate the value of workload.

Dalton Kincaid’s five catches, 66 yards, and touchdown show how a relatively modest target total can still produce a strong fantasy line when the efficiency is high.

Tyreek Hill’s 10 targets demonstrate significant involvement, even though his five catches produced only 49 yards.

De’Von Achane’s 12 carries for 62 yards show strong rushing efficiency, but the lack of a rushing touchdown limited the scoring impact.

Josh Allen’s three touchdown passes and zero interceptions were the defining features of his passing performance.

Fantasy analysis should always separate opportunity from production. A receiver can receive many targets without producing a huge yardage total, while another player can produce efficiently on fewer opportunities.

What the numbers suggest about each team

Buffalo Bills

The most encouraging signs for Buffalo were offensive efficiency and balance.

The Bills averaged 7.6 yards per pass attempt and 5.8 yards per rush.

They scored three passing touchdowns and one rushing touchdown.

Allen avoided interceptions.

Cook surpassed 100 rushing yards.

Kincaid led the team in receiving yardage.

That is a strong combination.

The biggest statistical concern was the lack of sacks generated by the defense and the fact that Prater missed one of two field-goal attempts.

Neither issue changed the result, but both are worth tracking in future games.

Miami Dolphins

Miami’s most encouraging offensive statistic was the 5.2-yard rushing average.

Achane produced 62 yards on only 12 carries.

The Dolphins also received two passing touchdowns from Tagovailoa and a touchdown reception from Hill.

The main weakness was passing efficiency.

Miami completed 22 passes but gained only 146 yards.

Its 4.3 yards per attempt was significantly lower than Buffalo’s 7.6.

Miami also committed the game’s only interception.

Defensively, the Dolphins did generate two sacks, which was one of the clearer areas where they performed better than Buffalo.

The most important individual performances

If the game is reduced to its most influential player statistics, five performances stand out.

Josh Allen

22 of 28, 213 yards, 3 touchdowns, 0 interceptions.

Allen was the most efficient quarterback in the game by passer rating and yards per attempt.

James Cook III

19 carries, 108 yards, 1 touchdown.

Cook gave Buffalo a productive rushing foundation and supplied the game’s most significant rushing performance.

Dalton Kincaid

5 receptions, 66 yards, 1 touchdown.

Kincaid led Buffalo in receiving yardage and scored once.

Tua Tagovailoa

22 of 34, 146 yards, 2 touchdowns, 1 interception.

Tagovailoa produced two touchdown passes but struggled to generate explosive passing yardage.

Tyreek Hill

5 receptions, 49 yards, 1 touchdown on 10 targets.

Hill remained heavily involved, but his receiving efficiency was limited compared with Buffalo’s leading pass catchers.

buffalo bills vs miami dolphins match player stats: the biggest takeaways

For readers searching specifically for buffalo bills vs miami dolphins match player stats, the clearest conclusions are straightforward.

First, Buffalo’s passing attack was significantly more efficient.

Second, James Cook provided a major advantage on the ground.

Third, Dalton Kincaid was Buffalo’s leading receiver by yardage.

Fourth, Tyreek Hill led Miami in receiving but needed 10 targets to produce 49 yards.

Fifth, Buffalo won the turnover battle by one interception.

Sixth, Miami’s defense produced two sacks even though the Dolphins lost the game.

Seventh, both teams completed exactly 22 passes, making the yardage difference especially revealing.

Eighth, Buffalo’s 157 rushing yards combined with 213 passing yards for 370 yards through the air and on the ground, compared with Miami’s 276.

Those are the numbers that best explain the 31 to 21 final score.

How to read a box score like an analyst

A box score becomes much more useful when you stop looking at individual numbers in isolation.

Start with the score.

Then compare passing efficiency.

Next, examine rushing volume and yards per carry.

After that, look at receiving opportunities and production.

Finally, check turnovers, sacks, and special teams.

This approach prevents one eye-catching statistic from creating a misleading conclusion.

For example, Miami had more sacks.

That does not mean Miami controlled the game.

Hill had 10 targets.

That does not mean Miami’s passing offense was efficient.

Allen had fewer attempts than Tagovailoa.

That does not mean Buffalo’s passing attack was less productive.

Cook had 19 carries.

That does not mean Buffalo simply ran the ball constantly.

The context around each number matters.

Frequently Asked Questions

Who won the Buffalo Bills vs. Miami Dolphins game on September 18, 2025?

The Buffalo Bills defeated the Miami Dolphins 31 to 21. Buffalo improved to 3-0, while Miami fell to 0-3.

How did Josh Allen perform against the Dolphins?

Josh Allen completed 22 of 28 passes for 213 yards, three touchdowns, and no interceptions. He averaged 7.6 yards per attempt and finished with a 134.1 passer rating.

How many yards did James Cook have against Miami?

James Cook III rushed 19 times for 108 yards and one touchdown. His longest run was 26 yards, and he averaged 5.7 yards per carry.

Who was Buffalo’s leading receiver?

Dalton Kincaid led Buffalo in receiving yards with five catches for 66 yards and one touchdown. He was targeted six times.

How did Tua Tagovailoa perform?

Tagovailoa completed 22 of 34 passes for 146 yards, two touchdowns, and one interception. He averaged 4.3 yards per attempt and had an 81.2 passer rating.

Who led Miami in receiving?

Tyreek Hill led Miami with five receptions for 49 yards and one touchdown. He received 10 targets and recorded a long reception of 19 yards.

Conclusion

The buffalo bills vs miami dolphins match player stats show that Buffalo’s 31 to 21 win was built on efficiency rather than simply overwhelming volume.

Josh Allen completed 22 of 28 passes and produced 213 yards with three touchdowns and no interceptions. James Cook added 108 rushing yards and a touchdown on 19 carries. Dalton Kincaid led the Bills in receiving with 66 yards and a touchdown.

Miami had productive individual contributions of its own. Tua Tagovailoa threw two touchdown passes, De’Von Achane averaged 5.2 yards per carry, and Tyreek Hill scored once. The Dolphins also recorded two sacks and generated more kick-return yardage.

The decisive difference was the efficiency of Buffalo’s offense. Both teams completed 22 passes, but Buffalo gained 213 passing yards compared with Miami’s 146. Buffalo also rushed for 157 yards compared with Miami’s 130.

Taken together, those numbers explain the final score more clearly than any single player statistic. Buffalo was more efficient through the air, more productive on the ground, and cleaner in the turnover column. Miami remained competitive, but its lower passing efficiency prevented its offense from matching Buffalo’s production.

For anyone analyzing this matchup, the most useful lesson is to look beyond headline statistics. Completion totals, target counts, sacks, and individual yardage numbers all matter, but the strongest evaluation comes from understanding how those numbers interact. In this game, that interaction clearly favored Buffalo.