Los angeles rams vs 49ers match player stats
The los angeles rams vs 49ers match player stats from the October 2, 2025 matchup tell the story of a tightly contested game that required overtime to decide. The San Francisco 49ers defeated the Los Angeles Rams 26-23, improving to 4-1 while the Rams moved to 3-2. Although San Francisco ultimately secured the victory, Los Angeles produced the larger passing performance, with Matthew Stafford throwing for 389 yards and three touchdowns compared with Mac Jones’ 342 passing yards and two touchdowns.
The numbers show why this game was so competitive. Both quarterbacks protected the football and finished without an interception. The Rams were more productive through the air, while the 49ers made enough plays in critical situations to survive overtime. San Francisco also received an outstanding kicking performance from Eddy Pineiro, who converted all four of his field goal attempts, including a long 59-yarder.
This was not simply a game decided by one superstar. The box score shows contributions from quarterbacks, running backs, receivers, kickers, return specialists and defensive units on both sides. Looking closely at those numbers provides a much better understanding of how a 23-23 contest became a 26-23 San Francisco victory.
los angeles rams vs 49ers match player stats at a glance
The game took place on October 2, 2025, with San Francisco winning 26-23 in overtime.
| Category | San Francisco 49ers | Los Angeles Rams |
| Final Score | 26 | 23 |
| Passing | Mac Jones: 33/49, 342 yards, 2 TD, 0 INT, 1 sack | Matthew Stafford: 30/47, 389 yards, 3 TD, 0 INT, 1 sack |
| Leading Rusher | Christian McCaffrey: 22 carries, 57 yards | Kyren Williams: 14 carries, 65 yards |
| Leading Receiver | Kendrick Bourne: 10 receptions, 142 yards | Davante Adams: 5 receptions, 88 yards |
| Receiving TDs | Christian McCaffrey, Jake Tonges | Kyren Williams, Puka Nacua |
| Field Goals | Eddy Pineiro: 4/4, long 59 | Joshua Karty: 1/2, long 48 |
| Extra Points | Eddy Pineiro: 2/2 | Joshua Karty: 2/3 |
| Team Rushing | 33 carries, 74 yards | 16 carries, 78 yards |
| Team Receiving | 33 receptions, 342 yards, 2 TD | 30 receptions, 389 yards, 3 TD |
| Sacks | 1 | 1 |
| Interceptions | 0 | 0 |
The first major takeaway is that the Rams generated more passing yards and more receiving production, yet San Francisco won. That difference is important because it demonstrates why individual statistics must be evaluated within the context of scoring opportunities and game situations.
Mac Jones delivers a mistake-free passing performance
Mac Jones completed 33 of 49 passes for 342 yards and two touchdowns. He did not throw an interception and was sacked once.
His completion percentage was approximately 67.3 percent, calculated from 33 completions on 49 attempts. That level of accuracy, combined with zero interceptions, gave San Francisco a dependable passing performance in a game that ultimately went into overtime.
Jones did not need to produce the largest passing total in the game. Stafford finished with 389 yards, 47 more than Jones. Instead, Jones’ performance was about consistency and ball security.
A quarterback can accumulate significant yardage while still giving the opposing defense opportunities through turnovers. That did not happen here. Jones finished with zero interceptions, and San Francisco also avoided giving away possessions through an interception anywhere else in the passing game.
The 49ers quarterback also spread the ball effectively enough to produce 33 team receptions. The team finished with 342 receiving yards and two receiving touchdowns, matching Jones’ passing totals.
Jones compared with Stafford
The quarterback comparison is one of the most interesting elements of the game.
Mac Jones:
- 33 completions
- 49 attempts
- 342 yards
- 2 touchdowns
- 0 interceptions
- 1 sack
Matthew Stafford:
- 30 completions
- 47 attempts
- 389 yards
- 3 touchdowns
- 0 interceptions
- 1 sack
Stafford had the statistical advantage in passing yards and touchdowns. Jones had three more completions despite attempting two additional passes.
Both quarterbacks were credited with one sack, meaning neither offensive line completely shut down the opposing pass rush. More importantly, neither quarterback threw an interception.
That makes the final score especially notable. Los Angeles produced 47 more passing yards and one additional passing touchdown, but San Francisco still walked away with the overtime victory.
Matthew Stafford produces the bigger passing day
Matthew Stafford completed 30 of 47 attempts for 389 yards and three touchdowns. He also finished without an interception and was sacked once.
The 389-yard performance was the largest individual passing total in the game. Stafford also generated three touchdown passes, one more than Jones.
From a pure passing perspective, the Rams quarterback had an excellent statistical outing. His 30 completions generated 389 yards, giving Los Angeles an average of approximately 13.0 yards per completion.
The Rams finished with exactly 30 team receptions for 389 yards and three touchdowns, so Stafford accounted for the team’s entire recorded passing production.
That distinction matters when examining the los angeles rams vs 49ers match player stats. The Rams were not limited by their passing attack. In fact, the passing game was arguably the strongest statistical component of their performance.
Yet football is not decided by passing yards alone.
Los Angeles needed to convert its overall offensive production into enough points to win, and San Francisco’s kicking efficiency helped keep the 49ers ahead at the end.
Christian McCaffrey leads the San Francisco rushing attack
Christian McCaffrey carried the ball 22 times for 57 yards, averaging 2.6 yards per carry.
The rushing average was modest, but McCaffrey’s workload was significant. His 22 carries represented the largest individual rushing workload listed in the supplied statistics.
San Francisco finished with 33 team rushing attempts for 74 yards, an average of 2.2 yards per carry. McCaffrey therefore accounted for a substantial portion of the team’s rushing workload.
His impact also extended into the passing game. McCaffrey recorded a receiving touchdown, making him one of the two San Francisco players credited with a receiving score. Jake Tonges also recorded a receiving touchdown.
This is an important detail when analyzing his overall contribution. Looking only at his 57 rushing yards would not fully capture his involvement in the offense.
McCaffrey was used as both a runner and receiver, and his presence gave San Francisco another way to generate points when the rushing attack itself was not producing at a high rate.
Kyren Williams gives Los Angeles a more efficient rushing performance
Kyren Williams led the Rams in rushing with 14 carries for 65 yards, averaging 4.6 yards per carry.
Compared with McCaffrey’s 2.6-yard average, Williams was considerably more efficient on the ground according to the supplied box score.
Los Angeles also finished with 78 team rushing yards on 16 carries, averaging 4.9 yards per carry. That was substantially better than San Francisco’s 74 rushing yards on 33 attempts.
Williams also produced two receiving touchdowns, making his overall contribution even more significant.
His 65 rushing yards were not enough to make Los Angeles dominant on the ground, but the efficiency of the Rams rushing attack stands out when the team totals are compared.
The rushing comparison
San Francisco:
- 33 carries
- 74 yards
- 2.2 yards per carry
Los Angeles:
- 16 carries
- 78 yards
- 4.9 yards per carry
Los Angeles had four more rushing yards despite attempting 17 fewer carries.
That is one of the clearest statistical advantages for the Rams. However, the 49ers’ larger rushing workload indicates that San Francisco continued to use the ground game despite its lower average.
The contrast between rushing volume and rushing efficiency is useful for understanding the game. San Francisco relied more heavily on rushing attempts, while Los Angeles produced more yards per attempt.
Kendrick Bourne becomes San Francisco’s leading receiver
Kendrick Bourne led all San Francisco receivers with 10 receptions for 142 yards.
His average was 14.2 yards per reception, giving him a major role in the 49ers’ passing production.
Ten receptions are especially significant because Bourne’s catches represented a large portion of San Francisco’s 33 team receptions. His 142 yards also represented a substantial percentage of the team’s 342 receiving yards.
Despite those impressive numbers, Bourne did not record a receiving touchdown.
That is a useful reminder that volume and scoring production do not always belong to the same player. Bourne was the leading yardage producer for San Francisco, while the team’s receiving touchdowns went to McCaffrey and Jake Tonges.
Bourne’s performance can therefore be viewed as a high-volume yardage contribution that helped move the offense down the field.
Davante Adams leads the Rams receiving production
Davante Adams recorded five receptions for 88 yards, averaging 17.6 yards per reception.
His average per catch was higher than Bourne’s 14.2 yards, even though Adams finished with fewer receptions and fewer total yards.
Adams did not record a receiving touchdown.
The Rams’ three receiving touchdowns were credited to Kyren Williams, who recorded two, and Puka Nacua, who recorded one.
This creates an interesting distribution of production within the Los Angeles passing game. Adams was the leading receiver by the supplied individual receiving statistics, but the touchdowns came from other players.
The numbers suggest that the Rams did not depend on a single player for scoring production. Instead, multiple players contributed to the touchdown total.
Puka Nacua adds a touchdown to the Rams’ passing attack
Puka Nacua was one of the Los Angeles players credited with a receiving touchdown.
Although the supplied data does not provide his complete reception and yardage totals, his touchdown is an important part of the Rams’ three-touchdown passing performance.
This is an example of why a player-by-player analysis should distinguish between available statistical categories. It would be inaccurate to invent reception or yardage numbers that are not contained in the supplied data.
What can be established is that Nacua found the end zone once, while Kyren Williams scored twice through receptions.
The surprising role of Kyren Williams as a receiver
Williams’ two receiving touchdowns are among the most notable details in the Rams’ statistics.
His rushing line was 14 carries for 65 yards, but his offensive contribution went beyond those carries. He was also credited with two receiving touchdowns.
That combination gives Williams a strong statistical footprint in the final scoring breakdown.
The Rams recorded three receiving touchdowns in total. Williams accounted for two of them, while Nacua accounted for the third.
Therefore, two-thirds of Los Angeles’ recorded receiving touchdowns came from Williams.
This is important when assessing offensive performance. A running back can influence a game through rushing attempts, receptions, pass protection and scoring opportunities. In this particular statistical profile, Williams’ receiving production was especially important.
Eddy Pineiro was perfect on field goals
One of the biggest differences in the scoring numbers was field-goal efficiency.
Eddy Pineiro went 4-for-4 on field-goal attempts for San Francisco and made a long kick of 59 yards.
That was an exceptional kicking line in a three-point overtime victory.
The 59-yard field goal is particularly significant because it shows that San Francisco received points from long range. Every successful field goal mattered in a game ultimately decided by only three points.
Pineiro also converted both of his extra-point attempts, giving him a perfect 6-for-6 record across field goals and extra points in the supplied scoring statistics.
His kicking performance provided San Francisco with a dependable source of points throughout the game.
Joshua Karty’s kicking statistics tell another part of the story
Joshua Karty made one of two field-goal attempts for Los Angeles, with a long of 48 yards.
He also converted two of three extra-point attempts.
That produced a less efficient kicking performance than Pineiro’s.
The difference is notable because the final margin was only three points.
It would be too simplistic to say that kicking alone determined the game. The Rams’ offensive production, defensive statistics and overtime circumstances all mattered. However, when comparing the special teams numbers, San Francisco had the clear statistical advantage in placekicking.
Pineiro made all four field goals and both extra points. Karty made one of two field goals and two of three extra points.
In a close game, those differences can become highly consequential.
Defensive statistics show a busy Rams defense
The Rams recorded 89 tackles compared with 65 for San Francisco.
Los Angeles also recorded one sack, three TFLs and five tackles for loss according to the supplied data, along with 10 passes defended.
San Francisco recorded 65 tackles, one sack, one TFL, four tackles for loss and two passes defended.
The Rams’ 10 passes defended stand out as the largest defensive statistic difference between the teams.
The defense also produced more total tackles, suggesting that Los Angeles had a large volume of defensive involvement throughout the contest.
However, neither team recorded an interception.
That is another important common point. Despite the number of defensive plays and passes defended, both offenses avoided throwing an interception.
Defensive comparison
San Francisco’s supplied defensive statistics:
- 65 tackles
- 1 sack
- 1 TFL
- 4 tackles for loss
- 2 passes defended
- 0 interceptions
Los Angeles’ supplied defensive statistics:
- 89 tackles
- 1 sack
- 3 TFLs
- 5 tackles for loss
- 10 passes defended
- 0 interceptions
The Rams therefore showed stronger numbers in several listed defensive categories, but the 49ers ultimately won the game.
This reinforces a central lesson from the matchup: box-score dominance in individual categories does not automatically translate into victory.
No interceptions changed the nature of the game
Both teams finished with zero interceptions.
That is significant because turnovers can rapidly change the direction of a close NFL game.
With neither quarterback throwing an interception, the game became more dependent on execution in other areas.
The absence of interceptions also helps explain why both passing attacks were able to accumulate significant yardage.
Stafford threw for 389 yards without an interception, while Jones produced 342 yards without an interception.
Both quarterbacks were therefore able to maintain possession through the passing game without giving the opposing defense a recorded interception.
The game instead came down to the accumulation of scoring plays, field goals, rushing efficiency, defensive stops and special teams execution.
Special teams played a meaningful role
Special teams statistics are sometimes overlooked when reviewing player performances, but they are particularly useful in a close game.
San Francisco recorded four kickoff returns for 73 yards, averaging 18.3 yards per return, with a long of 38 yards.
Los Angeles recorded five kickoff returns for 122 yards, averaging 24.4 yards per return, with a long of 28 yards.
The Rams therefore had the stronger kickoff-return average and more total kickoff-return yards.
On punt returns, San Francisco had one return for zero yards. Los Angeles had three returns for 21 yards, averaging 7.0 yards per return.
Again, Los Angeles had the stronger listed return numbers.
Punting tells a different story.
Thomas Morstead punted four times for San Francisco for 168 yards, averaging 42.0 yards with a long of 50.
Ethan Evans punted twice for Los Angeles for 110 yards, averaging 55.0 yards with a long of 59.
Evans therefore had the higher punting average and longer punt.
These statistics demonstrate that San Francisco did not win because it dominated every special teams category. In fact, several return and punting figures favored Los Angeles.
The most decisive special teams difference was the placekicking performance.
Why the final score does not match the yardage story
The most useful way to interpret this matchup is to separate production from scoring efficiency.
Los Angeles produced:
- 389 passing yards
- 78 rushing yards
- 467 combined passing and rushing yards from the supplied team figures
- 3 passing touchdowns
- 1 made field goal
San Francisco produced:
- 342 passing yards
- 74 rushing yards
- 416 combined passing and rushing yards from the supplied team figures
- 2 receiving touchdowns
- 4 made field goals
The Rams therefore produced more passing yards and more total yards when adding the supplied passing and rushing figures.
Yet San Francisco scored 26 points to Los Angeles’ 23.
That difference highlights the importance of converting opportunities into points.
San Francisco’s four successful field goals provided 12 points before accounting for extra points or touchdowns. Los Angeles made only one field goal.
The 49ers also converted both extra-point attempts, while the Rams converted two of three.
The result was a game where San Francisco’s lower offensive yardage total was offset by more efficient scoring through its kicking game.
A closer look at the scoring efficiency
The 49ers’ scoring profile was balanced between touchdowns and field goals.
Their listed scoring production included two receiving touchdowns, four successful field goals and two successful extra points.
The Rams had three receiving touchdowns, one successful field goal and two successful extra points.
The Rams therefore scored more touchdowns according to the supplied data, but San Francisco made significantly more field goals.
That distinction is critical.
A team can move the ball effectively and score more touchdowns while still losing if it cannot match the opponent’s total scoring output.
The final 26-23 score is a clear example of how three-point field goals can become decisive in a tightly contested game.
What the player stats reveal about each offense
The San Francisco offense was built around a combination of Jones’ accurate passing, McCaffrey’s workload and Bourne’s receiving volume.
Jones completed 33 passes, McCaffrey carried 22 times and Bourne caught 10 passes for 142 yards.
Those three statistical lines provide a useful snapshot of how San Francisco generated offensive production.
The Rams had a different statistical shape.
Stafford threw for 389 yards and three touchdowns. Williams produced 65 rushing yards and contributed two receiving touchdowns. Adams added 88 receiving yards on five catches, while Nacua also recorded a receiving touchdown.
The Rams therefore generated substantial production through the passing game while receiving meaningful contributions from the running back position.
The key difference was not simply offensive talent. It was how the production translated into points.
How the game demonstrates the limits of box-score analysis
A common mistake when analyzing an NFL game is to assume that the player with the most yards or the team with the most total production must have played better.
This matchup challenges that assumption.
Stafford had more passing yards than Jones.
The Rams had more rushing yards than San Francisco.
Los Angeles had more passes defended.
The Rams also had more tackles, a higher kickoff-return average and a higher punting average.
Yet the 49ers won.
That does not mean the individual statistics are unimportant. It means they need to be interpreted together.
A useful statistical review asks several questions:
- Who generated yardage?
- Who converted production into touchdowns?
- Who converted field-goal opportunities?
- Who protected the football?
- Which team made the critical plays late?
- Which unit provided the extra margin needed to win?
When those questions are applied here, the result becomes easier to understand.
The importance of ball security
Neither team threw an interception.
That means ball security was strong on both sides of the quarterback matchup.
Jones and Stafford each finished with zero interceptions, and both quarterbacks were credited with one sack.
This prevented turnovers from becoming an obvious explanation for the final result.
Instead, the game was decided through smaller differences.
San Francisco’s perfect field-goal record was one of those differences.
The 49ers also converted every listed extra point attempt.
Los Angeles missed one field goal and one extra point according to the supplied statistics.
Those misses matter because the final margin was only three points.
Player-level takeaways from the matchup
Several players deserve attention when evaluating the supplied statistics.
Mac Jones
Jones’ 33-for-49 performance produced 342 yards and two touchdowns without an interception. His main statistical strength was consistency and ball security.
Matthew Stafford
Stafford produced the highest passing total in the game with 389 yards and three touchdowns. He also avoided interceptions.
Christian McCaffrey
McCaffrey handled 22 rushing attempts for 57 yards and also recorded a receiving touchdown.
Kyren Williams
Williams rushed for 65 yards on 14 attempts and recorded two receiving touchdowns. His 4.6 rushing average was significantly higher than San Francisco’s team average.
Kendrick Bourne
Bourne was San Francisco’s leading receiver with 10 catches for 142 yards.
Davante Adams
Adams led the Rams in the supplied receiving yardage statistics with 88 yards on five receptions.
Eddy Pineiro
Pineiro converted four field goals, including a 59-yard attempt, and made both extra points.
Joshua Karty
Karty made one of two field goals and two of three extra points.
Together, these performances explain why the game remained close from beginning to end.
Team statistics that deserve the most attention
Not every number in a box score carries equal analytical value.
For this particular game, several statistics deserve priority.
Passing: Los Angeles had the clear advantage in passing yardage, 389 to 342.
Rushing efficiency: Los Angeles averaged 4.9 yards per team rushing attempt compared with San Francisco’s 2.2.
Rushing volume: San Francisco attempted 33 rushes compared with Los Angeles’ 16.
Receiving: Los Angeles recorded 389 receiving yards, while San Francisco recorded 342.
Touchdowns: Los Angeles recorded three receiving touchdowns, while San Francisco recorded two.
Field goals: San Francisco made four field goals, while Los Angeles made one.
Interceptions: Both teams had zero.
Pass defense: Los Angeles recorded 10 passes defended compared with two for San Francisco.
Final result: San Francisco won 26-23 in overtime.
This combination of numbers explains why a simple “who had better stats?” question does not have one straightforward answer.
Los Angeles won several statistical categories, but San Francisco won the scoreboard.
Why overtime matters in interpreting the result
The 49ers won the game in overtime.
That detail should remain central to any analysis because it confirms how closely matched the teams were.
A three-point overtime victory is fundamentally different from a comfortable multi-score win.
The final score indicates that neither team separated itself enough during regulation to settle the game.
The overtime result also makes Pineiro’s field-goal performance even more relevant. In a game decided by a narrow margin, every successful scoring opportunity contributes to the final outcome.
The Rams’ statistical advantages did not disappear. They simply were not enough to produce a win.
Understanding the 4-1 and 3-2 records
Following the game, San Francisco was listed at 4-1 overall and 3-0 away.
Los Angeles was listed at 3-2 overall and 2-1 at home.
Those records provide useful context for the result.
San Francisco’s victory improved its overall record to 4-1 and maintained an undefeated away record according to the supplied data.
Los Angeles remained above .500 at 3-2 and had a 2-1 home record.
The game therefore had significance beyond a single win and loss. Both teams remained competitive in their respective records, with San Francisco holding the better overall mark after the overtime victory.
What fans should take from the statistics
For fans trying to understand the matchup rather than simply read the final score, three lessons stand out.
First, passing production does not guarantee victory. Stafford threw for 389 yards and three touchdowns, yet the Rams lost.
Second, rushing efficiency can coexist with limited rushing volume. Los Angeles averaged 4.9 yards per team carry but attempted only 16 rushes.
Third, special teams can decide a close game. Pineiro’s four successful field goals contrasted sharply with Karty’s one made field goal on two attempts.
These details make the game more interesting than the 26-23 score alone suggests.
A practical framework for reading NFL player stats
When reviewing a close NFL game, it helps to work through the statistics in a consistent order.
Start with the final score and result.
Next, compare quarterback production, especially completion rate, yards, touchdowns and interceptions.
Then examine rushing volume and efficiency.
After that, look at receiving volume and scoring contributions.
Finally, check defensive plays and special teams.
This approach prevents one eye-catching statistic from dominating the entire analysis.
For this matchup, starting with Stafford’s 389 passing yards might suggest a Rams victory was likely. Looking at the complete picture reveals something different.
San Francisco protected the football, received a major contribution from Bourne, continued to use McCaffrey heavily and received perfect field-goal kicking from Pineiro.
Those smaller details collectively explain the result better than passing yardage alone.
Final statistical assessment
The los angeles rams vs 49ers match player stats present a classic example of a close NFL contest where the winning team did not dominate every major statistical category.
Matthew Stafford had the bigger passing day, throwing for 389 yards and three touchdowns.
Mac Jones still delivered 342 yards and two touchdowns without an interception.
Kyren Williams was more efficient as a runner than Christian McCaffrey, averaging 4.6 yards per carry compared with McCaffrey’s 2.6.
Kendrick Bourne was San Francisco’s leading receiver with 142 yards, while Davante Adams led Los Angeles with 88 receiving yards among the supplied individual receiving statistics.
The Rams recorded more rushing yards, more receiving yards, more tackles, more passes defended and better return and punting averages in several listed categories.
San Francisco, however, made the most of its scoring opportunities.
Eddy Pineiro was perfect on four field-goal attempts and two extra points. The 59-yard field goal was particularly notable. The 49ers also avoided interceptions and ultimately secured the 26-23 overtime victory.
The game is therefore best understood not as a simple statistical blowout in either direction, but as a contest where Los Angeles generated impressive offensive and defensive numbers while San Francisco produced enough timely scoring and execution to win.
For anyone researching los angeles rams vs 49ers match player stats, the most important conclusion is that the box score needs to be read as a complete story. Individual yardage leaders matter, but so do touchdowns, field goals, efficiency, workload, turnovers and the final scoring margin.
The October 2, 2025 matchup demonstrates exactly why close NFL games can produce statistical profiles that look surprising when compared with the final result.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who won the Rams vs 49ers game on October 2, 2025?
The San Francisco 49ers defeated the Los Angeles Rams 26-23 in overtime.
How many yards did Matthew Stafford throw for?
Matthew Stafford completed 30 of 47 passes for 389 yards and three touchdowns. He did not throw an interception and was sacked once.
How many yards did Mac Jones have?
Mac Jones completed 33 of 49 passes for 342 yards and two touchdowns. He had zero interceptions and was sacked once.
Who was the leading receiver for the 49ers?
Kendrick Bourne led San Francisco with 10 receptions for 142 yards. He averaged 14.2 yards per reception and did not record a receiving touchdown.
Who led the Rams in rushing?
Kyren Williams led Los Angeles with 14 carries for 65 yards, averaging 4.6 yards per carry.
Which kicker performed better in the game?
Eddy Pineiro had the more efficient kicking performance. He made all four field-goal attempts, including a 59-yard kick, and converted both extra-point attempts. Joshua Karty made one of two field goals and two of three extra points.
Conclusion
The los angeles rams vs 49ers match player stats from October 2, 2025 show how a football game can be extremely competitive even when one team leads several statistical categories.
Los Angeles received a huge passing performance from Matthew Stafford, strong rushing efficiency from Kyren Williams and productive receiving contributions from Davante Adams and Puka Nacua. The Rams also recorded 89 tackles and 10 passes defended.
San Francisco answered with a reliable performance from Mac Jones, a heavy rushing workload for Christian McCaffrey, 142 receiving yards from Kendrick Bourne and a flawless kicking performance from Eddy Pineiro.
The final result was 26-23 in favor of San Francisco after overtime. Both teams avoided interceptions, both quarterbacks threw multiple touchdown passes and neither defense recorded more than one sack.
The most revealing statistic may ultimately be the field-goal comparison. Pineiro made all four of his attempts, while Karty made one of two. In a game decided by three points, those scoring opportunities carried considerable weight.
The matchup is a useful reminder that NFL statistics should be evaluated collectively. Passing yards, rushing efficiency, receiving production, defensive activity and special teams numbers all contribute to the story, but the scoreboard ultimately determines the winner.
For this game, the numbers show a Rams team that generated significant production and a 49ers team that found enough ways to turn its opportunities into points. That combination produced one of the closest possible outcomes: a three-point overtime victory.
