Minnesota Vikings vs Detroit Lions Match Player Stats
The minnesota vikings vs detroit lions match player stats from December 25, 2025, tell the story of a game that Minnesota won 23-10 through a stronger rushing attack, better ball security, and more effective defensive pressure. The Vikings and Lions entered the matchup with identical 8-8 records, but the final numbers showed a clear difference in how each team handled key situations. Minnesota produced 158 rushing yards and two rushing touchdowns, while Detroit managed only 68 rushing yards and turned the ball over four times.
The final score was Minnesota Vikings 23, Detroit Lions 10. Detroit scored its only touchdown through the passing game, while Minnesota combined its ground production with three successful field goals from Will Reichard. The Vikings also recorded two interceptions and recovered four Detroit fumbles, creating a major advantage in possession and field position.
For readers searching for individual performances, the most important names include Jared Goff, Jahmyr Gibbs, David Montgomery, Amon-Ra St. Brown, Aaron Jones Sr., Justin Jefferson, Max Brosmer, Harrison Smith, Byron Murphy Jr., and Jordan Addison. Each contributed to a different part of the statistical story.
This breakdown examines the passing, rushing, receiving, defensive, kicking, punting, return, and turnover numbers to explain what actually shaped the game.
Minnesota Vikings vs Detroit Lions Match Player Stats at a Glance
The game took place on December 25, 2025. Minnesota won 23-10, with the Vikings scoring in the first, third, and fourth quarters. Detroit scored all 10 of its points in the second and fourth quarters.
| Category | Detroit Lions | Minnesota Vikings |
| Final Score | 10 | 23 |
| Record | 8-8 | 8-8 |
| Passing Yards | 197 | 51 |
| Rushing Yards | 68 | 158 |
| Rushing Touchdowns | 0 | 2 |
| Passing Touchdowns | 1 | 0 |
| Interceptions Thrown | 2 | 0 |
| Fumbles Lost | 4 | 0 |
| Sacks | 7 | 5 |
| Tackles for Loss | 6 | 8 |
| Passes Defended | 2 | 5 |
| Field Goals | 1/1 | 3/3 |
One of the most striking differences is the balance between passing and rushing production. Detroit generated more passing yards, but Minnesota was much more productive on the ground. That difference mattered because Minnesota converted its rushing production into touchdowns while Detroit did not score a rushing touchdown.
How the Game Was Decided
A box score can sometimes hide the reasons behind a result. Here, the major statistical factors are relatively clear.
Minnesota Won the Turnover Battle
Detroit lost four fumbles, while Minnesota lost none. Jared Goff was credited with three fumbles, all of which were lost. Jahmyr Gibbs also lost one fumble.
Minnesota recorded four defensive fumble recoveries:
- Andrew Van Ginkel: 2 recoveries
- Byron Murphy Jr.: 1 recovery
- Jalen Redmond: 1 recovery
Minnesota also intercepted Goff twice. Harrison Smith recorded one interception for 1 yard, while Byron Murphy Jr. recorded another interception.
Detroit did not record an interception.
This means Minnesota finished the game with six takeaways from Detroit when combining four fumble recoveries and two interceptions. That is one of the clearest statistical explanations for the 13-point difference on the scoreboard.
Minnesota Created More Rushing Value
Detroit ran the ball 30 times for 68 yards, averaging 2.3 yards per carry.
Minnesota ran 28 times for 158 yards, averaging 5.6 yards per carry.
The difference was 90 rushing yards despite Minnesota having two fewer rushing attempts.
That is significant because Minnesota averaged more than twice Detroit’s yards per carry. The Vikings also scored twice on the ground.
The most explosive rushing play came from Jordan Addison, who had one carry for 65 yards and a touchdown. That single play represented a huge portion of Minnesota’s rushing output.
Detroit Struggled to Protect the Football
Turnovers were not limited to interceptions. Goff’s three lost fumbles and Gibbs’ lost fumble gave Minnesota repeated opportunities.
Goff finished 18 of 29 passing for 197 yards, one touchdown, and two interceptions. His listed QBR was 28.5, with a 64.9 passer rating.
The seven sacks recorded against Detroit also affected the passing offense. Goff was listed with 5-34 in sack statistics, while Detroit’s offense was under pressure throughout the game.
Jared Goff’s Passing Performance
Jared Goff completed 18 of 29 passes for 197 yards. His completion rate was approximately 62.1 percent.
His statistical line was:
- 18 completions
- 29 attempts
- 197 passing yards
- 6.8 yards per attempt
- 1 touchdown
- 2 interceptions
- 3 fumbles
- 3 lost fumbles
- 5 sacks for 34 yards
- 28.5 QBR
- 64.9 passer rating
Goff’s 197 passing yards were considerably higher than Minnesota’s 51 passing yards. However, raw passing yardage did not translate into offensive efficiency for Detroit.
The two interceptions were particularly costly because Minnesota was already creating pressure and forcing turnovers in other ways.
The three lost fumbles added another layer to the problem. A quarterback can produce respectable passing volume while still having a difficult statistical day if turnovers repeatedly end possessions.
That is exactly what happened here.
Max Brosmer’s Passing Numbers
Minnesota quarterback Max Brosmer completed 9 of 16 passes for 51 yards.
His passing line included:
- 9 completions
- 16 attempts
- 51 yards
- 3.2 yards per attempt
- 0 touchdowns
- 0 interceptions
- 7 sacks for 48 yards
- 8.8 QBR
- 62.2 passer rating
At first glance, those numbers are not impressive from a passing perspective. Minnesota did not win because of a high-volume aerial attack.
Instead, the Vikings relied heavily on rushing production and defensive takeaways.
Brosmer also contributed 16 rushing yards on two carries, averaging 8.0 yards per carry with an 11-yard long.
The quarterback’s passing statistics therefore need to be considered within the overall offensive structure. Minnesota did not need to generate a large number of passing yards to score 23 points because its running game and defense supplied critical production.
Minnesota’s Rushing Attack
Minnesota recorded 28 carries for 158 yards, a 5.6-yard average, with two touchdowns.
That was the most productive offensive statistical category in the game for the Vikings.
Aaron Jones Sr.
Aaron Jones Sr. led Minnesota in rushing attempts.
He recorded:
- 18 carries
- 53 yards
- 2.9 yards per carry
- 1 touchdown
- 10-yard long
Jones accounted for 18 of Minnesota’s 28 rushing attempts. That means he handled the majority of the team’s designed rushing workload.
His 53 yards were not especially explosive on a per-carry basis, but his touchdown gave the Vikings important scoring production.
Jones also caught three passes for 10 yards on four targets.
Jordan Addison’s 65-Yard Rushing Touchdown
Jordan Addison had only one rushing attempt, but it was the most explosive rushing play of the game.
He carried the ball 65 yards for a touchdown.
That single run represented approximately 41 percent of Minnesota’s total rushing yardage.
It also dramatically changed the statistical profile of the Vikings’ rushing attack. Without the 65-yard run, Minnesota would have had 93 rushing yards on its remaining 27 attempts.
This is an important lesson when evaluating player statistics. A team average can be strongly affected by one explosive play, so looking only at yards per carry can hide how the production was distributed.
Ty Chandler
Ty Chandler recorded seven carries for 24 yards.
His average was 3.4 yards per carry, with a longest run of 5 yards.
Chandler provided additional rushing volume behind Jones and helped Minnesota maintain a diversified running workload.
Detroit’s Rushing Production
Detroit ran 30 times for only 68 yards.
The Lions averaged 2.3 yards per carry and did not score a rushing touchdown.
Jahmyr Gibbs
Jahmyr Gibbs led Detroit with 17 rushing attempts.
His line:
- 17 carries
- 41 yards
- 2.4 yards per carry
- 0 touchdowns
- 8-yard long
Gibbs also caught two passes for 23 yards.
His 41 rushing yards represented more than half of Detroit’s total rushing production.
However, the 2.4-yard average shows how difficult it was for Detroit to consistently generate positive rushing plays.
Gibbs also lost one fumble, which added to Detroit’s turnover problems.
David Montgomery
David Montgomery carried the ball 10 times for 25 yards.
He averaged 2.5 yards per carry and had an 8-yard long.
Montgomery also recorded two receptions for 15 yards.
Combined, Gibbs and Montgomery accounted for 27 of Detroit’s 30 rushing attempts and 66 of the team’s 68 rushing yards.
That means the Detroit running game was heavily concentrated around its two primary backs, but neither was able to generate consistent efficiency.
Detroit Receiving Statistics
Detroit finished with 18 receptions for 197 yards and one touchdown on 29 targets.
The receiving average was 10.9 yards per reception.
Amon-Ra St. Brown
Amon-Ra St. Brown led Detroit in receptions.
He recorded:
- 8 receptions
- 68 yards
- 8.5 yards per reception
- 13 targets
- 23-yard long
- 0 touchdowns
His eight catches represented nearly 44 percent of Detroit’s completed passes.
He was clearly a major part of the passing game, receiving 13 of Goff’s 29 pass attempts.
However, the 68 receiving yards did not result in a touchdown.
Isaac TeSlaa
Isaac TeSlaa produced Detroit’s receiving touchdown.
He finished with:
- 3 receptions
- 49 yards
- 16.3 yards per reception
- 1 touchdown
- 28-yard long
- 4 targets
TeSlaa was one of Detroit’s most efficient receivers on a per-catch basis.
His 49 yards came on only three receptions, giving him a 16.3-yard average.
Jameson Williams
Jameson Williams recorded two receptions for 37 yards.
He averaged 18.5 yards per reception and had a 22-yard long.
His three targets indicate that he was involved less frequently than St. Brown but generated substantial yardage when targeted.
Other Detroit Receivers
Jahmyr Gibbs added two receptions for 23 yards.
David Montgomery recorded two receptions for 15 yards.
Kalif Raymond had one reception for 5 yards.
Anthony Firkser and Giovanni Ricci were each targeted once without recording a reception.
The overall receiving numbers show that Detroit generated 197 passing yards, but the production was spread across several players and did not overcome the team’s turnovers and limited rushing efficiency.
Minnesota Receiving Statistics
Minnesota’s passing attack was much smaller.
The Vikings finished with nine receptions for 51 yards on 14 targets.
That produced an average of 5.7 yards per reception.
Justin Jefferson
Justin Jefferson recorded four receptions for 30 yards on five targets.
His average was 7.5 yards per catch, with a 10-yard long.
Jefferson therefore led Minnesota in receptions and receiving yards, but his overall numbers were modest.
This is another example of why player statistics should be interpreted in context. A star receiver can have a relatively quiet receiving day when the team’s offensive approach relies on the running game.
Aaron Jones Sr.
Jones added three receptions for 10 yards on four targets.
That gave him a total of 21 touches or receptions combined across rushing and receiving categories, based on the supplied statistics.
Josh Oliver and Ben Sims
Josh Oliver caught one pass for 8 yards on two targets.
Ben Sims caught one pass for 3 yards on one target.
Jalen Nailor and Jordan Addison each received one target without a reception.
The limited passing output was not enough to prevent Minnesota from winning because the Vikings gained significant value from rushing plays and defensive takeaways.
Minnesota’s Defensive Performance
The Minnesota defense produced several game-changing numbers.
The Vikings recorded:
- 79 total tackles
- 40 solo tackles
- 5 sacks
- 8 tackles for loss
- 5 passes defended
- 8 quarterback hits
- 2 interceptions
- 4 defensive fumble recoveries
The five sacks and eight quarterback hits indicate that Minnesota consistently created pressure against Goff.
More importantly, the defense converted pressure and contact into turnovers.
Andrew Van Ginkel recorded two fumble recoveries.
Byron Murphy Jr. recorded one fumble recovery and one interception.
Jalen Redmond recorded one fumble recovery.
Harrison Smith added another interception.
The defensive production was therefore not simply about accumulating tackles. Minnesota’s defenders produced possession-changing plays.
Harrison Smith and Byron Murphy Jr.
Harrison Smith recorded one interception for 1 yard and no touchdown.
Byron Murphy Jr. also intercepted Goff, with the play producing 0 return yards and no touchdown.
Murphy’s statistical contribution went beyond the interception because he also recovered one Detroit fumble.
That combination of an interception and fumble recovery made him one of the more significant defensive contributors in the supplied box score.
Detroit’s Defensive Statistics
Detroit recorded 59 total tackles, including 29 solo tackles.
The Lions also registered:
- 7 sacks
- 6 tackles for loss
- 2 passes defended
- 8 quarterback hits
Detroit actually recorded more sacks than Minnesota, 7 compared with 5.
That is an important statistical detail because it shows that Detroit did create pressure on Brosmer.
However, the Lions were unable to turn that pressure into the same kind of turnover production.
Detroit recorded no interceptions, while Minnesota recorded two.
The difference in takeaways was therefore much larger than the difference in sacks.
The Importance of Ball Security
The turnover statistics are arguably the most revealing part of the game.
Detroit lost four fumbles and threw two interceptions.
Minnesota lost no fumbles and threw no interceptions.
This produced a six-turnover difference.
Turnovers can change both possession count and field position. They can also prevent a team from finishing drives after it has already invested significant time and yardage.
For Detroit, the issue was especially damaging because the offense was not producing enough rushing efficiency to compensate.
A team that averages only 2.3 yards per rushing attempt has less margin for error when it also gives the opponent extra possessions.
Minnesota’s 5.6-yard rushing average provided a more stable offensive foundation, while its defense repeatedly created additional possessions.
Special Teams and Kicking
Special teams also contributed to the final scoring margin.
Will Reichard
Minnesota kicker Will Reichard converted all three field-goal attempts.
He also made both extra-point attempts.
His scoring line was:
- 3/3 field goals
- 56-yard longest field goal
- 2/2 extra points
- 11 total points
Reichard therefore accounted for nearly half of Minnesota’s 23 points.
His 56-yard field goal was the longest successful field goal listed in the supplied game statistics.
Jake Bates
Detroit’s Jake Bates made his only field-goal attempt.
He also converted his only extra-point attempt.
His line:
- 1/1 field goals
- 48-yard long
- 1/1 extra points
- 4 points
Detroit’s kicker was perfect on his attempts, but the Lions did not create enough scoring opportunities to match Minnesota’s three successful field goals and two touchdowns.
Punting Numbers
Detroit punted three times for 159 yards.
Jack Fox averaged 53.0 yards per punt, with a 70-yard long. Two punts were placed inside the 20-yard line, and one resulted in a touchback.
Minnesota punted seven times for 358 yards.
Ryan Wright averaged 51.1 yards per punt, with a 63-yard long. Two punts went inside the 20-yard line and two resulted in touchbacks.
The punting numbers show that Minnesota’s offense was not consistently sustaining drives. Seven punts is a substantial number.
Yet the Vikings compensated by creating explosive rushing plays, converting field goals, and forcing turnovers.
Kick Returns and Punt Returns
Detroit had four kick returns for 116 yards.
Tom Kennedy handled all four returns, averaging 29.0 yards per return with a 31-yard long.
Minnesota had one kick return for 24 yards, handled by Myles Price.
On punt returns, Detroit recorded five returns for 31 yards.
Kalif Raymond handled all five, averaging 6.2 yards per return with a 14-yard long.
Minnesota recorded no punt returns.
These numbers show that Detroit had considerably more return activity, but that did not translate into enough offensive scoring.
Quarter-by-Quarter Breakdown
The scoring pattern was:
| Quarter | Detroit Lions | Minnesota Vikings |
| First | 0 | 7 |
| Second | 7 | 0 |
| Third | 0 | 6 |
| Fourth | 3 | 10 |
| Final | 10 | 23 |
Minnesota started the game with a 7-0 advantage.
Detroit answered in the second quarter to make the halftime scoring even.
The Vikings then regained control in the third quarter by scoring six points.
The fourth quarter produced the largest late-game scoring difference, with Minnesota adding 10 points while Detroit managed three.
The scoring pattern is useful because it shows that Minnesota did not simply build an early lead and hold on. The Vikings responded after Detroit tied the scoring in the second quarter and then produced a stronger finish.
Comparing the Offensive Approaches
The offensive statistics reveal two very different approaches.
Detroit generated 197 passing yards and only 68 rushing yards.
Minnesota generated only 51 passing yards but 158 rushing yards.
The combined yardage was:
- Detroit: 265 total yards
- Minnesota: 209 total yards
Interestingly, Detroit produced more total offensive yardage despite losing by 13 points.
That is an important reminder that total yards alone do not determine a football game.
Minnesota’s six takeaways gave it an enormous advantage in possession and scoring opportunities.
The Vikings also converted their rushing production into two touchdowns and made all three field-goal attempts.
Detroit’s offense, despite gaining more total yards, produced only one touchdown and one field goal.
Why Total Yards Do Not Tell the Whole Story
A reader looking only at total yardage might expect Detroit to have performed better offensively than Minnesota.
Detroit’s 265 total yards exceeded Minnesota’s 209.
But Minnesota’s statistical advantages were more valuable:
- Minnesota rushed for 158 yards compared with Detroit’s 68.
- Minnesota averaged 5.6 yards per carry compared with Detroit’s 2.3.
- Minnesota scored two rushing touchdowns.
- Minnesota intercepted Goff twice.
- Minnesota recovered four Detroit fumbles.
- Minnesota lost no turnovers.
- Minnesota converted all three field-goal attempts.
The game demonstrates why advanced box-score analysis should consider efficiency, turnovers, scoring opportunities, and explosive plays rather than total yardage alone.
The Explosive Play Factor
Jordan Addison’s 65-yard touchdown run deserves special attention.
Minnesota’s entire rushing total was 158 yards.
Addison’s single carry produced 65 yards, meaning that one play accounted for more than two-fifths of the Vikings’ rushing output.
Detroit also had explosive receiving plays.
Jameson Williams averaged 18.5 yards per reception, while Isaac TeSlaa averaged 16.3.
However, Minnesota’s explosive rushing play directly produced a touchdown.
That difference matters.
An explosive play that ends in the end zone has a much larger direct effect on the scoreboard than a long gain that does not produce points.
What the Player Statistics Reveal
The individual numbers point toward several broader observations.
Minnesota’s Running Game Was More Efficient
The Vikings averaged 5.6 yards per rushing attempt.
Detroit averaged 2.3.
That is a difference of 3.3 yards per attempt.
Over dozens of rushing plays, that gap can substantially affect down-and-distance situations.
Detroit’s Passing Game Produced More Volume
Goff threw 29 passes compared with Brosmer’s 16.
Detroit also had 197 receiving yards, while Minnesota had only 51.
The Lions therefore relied much more heavily on their passing game.
Minnesota’s Defense Produced More Possession-Changing Plays
Minnesota recorded two interceptions and four fumble recoveries.
Detroit recorded no interceptions and did not recover a Minnesota fumble.
This was one of the strongest statistical differences in the matchup.
Kicking Was Perfect on Both Sides
Both teams made every field-goal and extra-point attempt listed in the supplied data.
The difference was opportunity.
Minnesota attempted three field goals, while Detroit attempted one.
That gave Reichard 11 points compared with Bates’ four.
Key Players to Remember From the Game
For a quick player-focused summary, these performances stand out statistically:
Jared Goff: 18/29 passing, 197 yards, 1 touchdown, 2 interceptions, and 3 lost fumbles.
Jahmyr Gibbs: 17 carries for 41 yards, plus 2 receptions for 23 yards. He also lost one fumble.
Amon-Ra St. Brown: 8 receptions for 68 yards on 13 targets.
Isaac TeSlaa: 3 receptions for 49 yards and 1 touchdown.
Aaron Jones Sr.: 18 carries for 53 yards and 1 touchdown, plus 3 receptions for 10 yards.
Jordan Addison: 1 rushing attempt for 65 yards and a touchdown.
Justin Jefferson: 4 receptions for 30 yards on 5 targets.
Will Reichard: 3/3 field goals and 2/2 extra points for 11 points.
Harrison Smith: 1 interception.
Byron Murphy Jr.: 1 interception and 1 fumble recovery.
Andrew Van Ginkel: 2 fumble recoveries.
These statistics collectively provide a much clearer picture than the final score alone.
What Readers Should Look For When Studying NFL Player Stats
When analyzing a game like this, it is useful to separate production into several categories.
1. Volume
Look at attempts, carries, targets, and receptions.
Volume tells you which players were central to the offensive plan.
2. Efficiency
Yards per attempt and yards per reception show how effectively those opportunities were converted into production.
3. Scoring
Touchdowns and field goals explain which statistical gains actually became points.
4. Turnovers
Interceptions and lost fumbles can have a much larger impact than modest differences in total yardage.
5. Explosive Plays
Long gains can change the entire statistical profile of a game.
6. Defensive Impact
Sacks, tackles for loss, quarterback hits, interceptions, and fumble recoveries help explain why an offense struggled.
Using these categories makes it easier to understand the game without relying on one headline statistic.
Minnesota Vikings vs Detroit Lions Match Player Stats: Final Statistical Takeaway
The minnesota vikings vs detroit lions match player stats show a game in which Minnesota won despite producing fewer total offensive yards.
Detroit had 265 total yards compared with Minnesota’s 209, but the Lions struggled with ball security and rushing efficiency.
Minnesota’s 158 rushing yards were the foundation of its offense. Aaron Jones Sr. provided the largest share of rushing volume, while Jordan Addison supplied the game’s biggest rushing play with a 65-yard touchdown.
Detroit’s passing attack was more productive in raw yardage. Jared Goff threw for 197 yards, while Amon-Ra St. Brown led the receiving group with eight catches for 68 yards. Isaac TeSlaa added Detroit’s only receiving touchdown.
The decisive statistical difference was turnovers.
Detroit lost four fumbles and threw two interceptions. Minnesota lost no turnovers and intercepted Goff twice.
The Vikings also received 11 points from Will Reichard, who made all three field goals and both extra points.
The final 23-10 score therefore reflects more than a simple advantage in total yardage. Minnesota was more efficient on the ground, protected the football, created takeaways, and converted its scoring opportunities.
For anyone studying the minnesota vikings vs detroit lions match player stats, the central lesson is that box-score interpretation requires context. Passing yards, rushing yards, receptions, and tackles are useful starting points, but turnovers, efficiency, explosive plays, and scoring conversion often explain the result more clearly.
FAQs
Who won the Vikings vs Lions game on December 25, 2025?
The Minnesota Vikings defeated the Detroit Lions 23-10 on December 25, 2025.
How many passing yards did Jared Goff have?
Jared Goff completed 18 of 29 passes for 197 yards, with one touchdown and two interceptions.
How many rushing yards did Minnesota have?
Minnesota recorded 158 rushing yards on 28 carries, averaging 5.6 yards per carry.
Who led the Lions in receiving?
Amon-Ra St. Brown led Detroit with eight receptions for 68 yards on 13 targets.
Who scored Minnesota’s rushing touchdowns?
Jordan Addison scored on a 65-yard rushing play, while Aaron Jones Sr. also recorded a rushing touchdown.
How many turnovers did the Lions have?
Detroit lost six turnovers in total, including four lost fumbles and two interceptions thrown.
Conclusion
The minnesota vikings vs detroit lions match player stats from December 25, 2025, provide a strong example of why football analysis goes beyond total yardage.
Detroit moved the ball more effectively through the air, but its rushing attack averaged only 2.3 yards per carry. The Lions also surrendered six turnovers, including four lost fumbles and two interceptions.
Minnesota’s offense was far more effective on the ground. The Vikings rushed for 158 yards at 5.6 yards per carry and scored two rushing touchdowns. Jordan Addison’s 65-yard touchdown run was the biggest individual rushing play, while Aaron Jones Sr. supplied the majority of the rushing workload.
On defense, Minnesota combined five sacks with two interceptions and four fumble recoveries. Will Reichard then converted all three field-goal attempts and both extra points.
The resulting 23-10 score was therefore supported by several interconnected statistical advantages. The Vikings were more efficient as a rushing team, created more turnovers, avoided giveaways, and converted their scoring opportunities. Detroit’s higher total yardage did not overcome those differences.
For anyone reviewing the minnesota vikings vs detroit lions match player stats, the most useful approach is to examine the complete statistical picture rather than focusing on one category. Passing, rushing, receiving, defense, special teams, turnovers, and scoring efficiency all contribute to understanding how the game developed and why the final score ended 23-10.
