Tennessee Titans vs Arizona Cardinals Match Player Stats
The tennessee titans vs arizona cardinals match player stats from October 6, 2025 tell the story of a close and highly competitive game that Tennessee ultimately won 22-21. The final score suggests a one-point contest, but the underlying numbers reveal an even more interesting matchup. Arizona produced 168 rushing yards and three rushing touchdowns, while Tennessee relied on 265 passing yards from rookie quarterback Cam Ward and a huge receiving performance from Calvin Ridley. Kyler Murray also delivered an efficient passing game for Arizona, completing 23 of 31 attempts for 220 yards without throwing an interception. Despite Arizona’s advantage in several offensive categories, Tennessee made enough plays in key situations to escape with the victory.
Game Overview
The Tennessee Titans entered the matchup with a 1-4 record, including a 1-2 mark on the road. Arizona came into the game at 2-3 and was 1-2 at home. On paper, the Cardinals had several reasons to feel confident. Their rushing attack was substantially more productive, their quarterback protected the football, and they scored three rushing touchdowns.
Yet the Titans found a different path to victory.
Tennessee passed for 265 yards and averaged 12.6 yards per reception as a team. Arizona recorded 220 receiving yards and averaged 9.6 yards per reception. The difference was especially noticeable in the performance of Calvin Ridley, who produced 131 receiving yards on only five catches.
The Titans also received three successful field goals from Joey Slye, including a 51-yard kick. Those points became extremely important in a game decided by only one point.
Arizona moved the ball effectively on the ground, but the Cardinals also lost all three of their fumbles. Tennessee lost one of its two fumbles. That turnover margin was one of the most important statistical differences in the game.
Final Score
Tennessee Titans 22, Arizona Cardinals 21
The result gave Tennessee a road victory despite Arizona’s superior rushing production.
Team Records
| Team | Record | Home/Road Record |
| Tennessee Titans | 1-4 | 1-2 Away |
| Arizona Cardinals | 2-3 | 1-2 Home |
The records provide useful context, but the box score shows that this was not a straightforward mismatch. Both teams had areas of strong production, and the final outcome was determined by execution rather than one overwhelming statistical advantage.
Tennessee Titans vs Arizona Cardinals Match Player Stats: Passing
The quarterback numbers offer one of the clearest examples of how different offensive approaches shaped this game.
Cam Ward
Cam Ward completed 21 of 39 passes for 265 yards. He did not throw a touchdown and was intercepted once. His passer rating was 64.6.
His statistical line was not flawless, but his 265 passing yards represented the most productive passing performance in the game.
Ward’s 39 attempts also demonstrate how heavily Tennessee leaned on the passing game. The Titans attempted to move the ball through the air even though their running game generated only 78 yards.
His numbers were:
- Completions: 21
- Attempts: 39
- Completion percentage: 53.8%
- Passing yards: 265
- Passing touchdowns: 0
- Interceptions: 1
- Passer rating: 64.6
The completion percentage was modest, and the interception hurt Tennessee. However, Ward’s ability to generate 265 yards kept the Titans competitive and created opportunities for the receiving corps.
From a game-analysis perspective, the important point is that Tennessee did not need a statistically dominant quarterback performance. It needed enough explosive passing production to complement its defense and kicking game.
Kyler Murray
Kyler Murray produced the more efficient quarterback performance.
He completed 23 of 31 attempts for 220 yards, with no touchdowns and no interceptions. His passer rating was 93.5.
Murray’s numbers were:
- Completions: 23
- Attempts: 31
- Completion percentage: 74.2%
- Passing yards: 220
- Passing touchdowns: 0
- Interceptions: 0
- Passer rating: 93.5
His 74.2% completion rate stands out compared with Ward’s 53.8%.
Murray also avoided the type of passing mistake that can quickly change a close game. Arizona’s problem was that clean quarterback play did not fully compensate for its turnover issues elsewhere.
That distinction matters when evaluating quarterback performance. Murray was more efficient, but quarterback efficiency alone did not determine the winner.
Passing Comparison
| Statistic | Cam Ward | Kyler Murray |
| Completions | 21 | 23 |
| Attempts | 39 | 31 |
| Completion % | 53.8% | 74.2% |
| Passing Yards | 265 | 220 |
| Passing TDs | 0 | 0 |
| Interceptions | 1 | 0 |
| Passer Rating | 64.6 | 93.5 |
The comparison produces an important conclusion.
Murray was more accurate and efficient, while Ward produced more total passing yardage. Tennessee’s victory therefore cannot be explained simply by saying its quarterback outplayed Arizona’s quarterback.
The Titans won because their passing volume, receiving explosiveness, defensive production, kicking efficiency, and turnover advantage combined effectively enough to overcome Arizona’s strengths.
Tennessee Receiving Performance
Calvin Ridley was the standout receiver for Tennessee.
He caught five passes for 131 yards, averaging 26.2 yards per reception. His longest reception covered 47 yards.
That is a remarkable average for a player with only five receptions.
Ridley’s line:
- Receptions: 5
- Receiving yards: 131
- Average: 26.2 yards
- Touchdowns: 0
- Long reception: 47 yards
The biggest takeaway is the explosive nature of his production.
Ridley did not need a large number of receptions to influence the game. His 131 yards accounted for almost half of Tennessee’s 265 team passing yards.
That means Tennessee’s passing offense was heavily concentrated around high-value plays. When a receiver averages more than 26 yards per catch, even a relatively small number of completions can dramatically change field position.
Tennessee Team Receiving
The Titans finished with:
- 21 receptions
- 265 receiving yards
- 12.6 yards per reception
- 0 receiving touchdowns
- 47-yard longest reception
The absence of a receiving touchdown is notable. Tennessee still scored 22 points, meaning its scoring production came through other avenues, including rushing and field goals.
This is one reason the game is interesting from a statistical perspective. The Titans won without a passing touchdown.
Arizona Receiving Performance
Marvin Harrison Jr. led Arizona’s receiving production.
He recorded four receptions for 98 yards, averaging 24.5 yards per catch. His longest reception was 43 yards.
His numbers were:
- Receptions: 4
- Receiving yards: 98
- Average: 24.5 yards
- Touchdowns: 0
- Long reception: 43 yards
Harrison’s efficiency was almost as explosive as Ridley’s. Both leading receivers averaged more than 24 yards per reception.
However, the two players reached their production through different team contexts. Tennessee generated 265 passing yards overall, compared with Arizona’s 220.
Arizona Team Receiving
Arizona finished with:
- 23 receptions
- 220 receiving yards
- 9.6 yards per reception
- 0 receiving touchdowns
- 43-yard longest reception
The Cardinals completed more passes than Tennessee, but their average gain per reception was considerably lower.
That difference helps explain how Tennessee could have fewer receptions while producing more passing yards.
Rushing Statistics
The rushing battle was heavily tilted toward Arizona.
The Cardinals recorded 29 carries for 168 yards, averaging 5.8 yards per carry. They also scored three rushing touchdowns.
Tennessee recorded 24 carries for 78 yards, averaging only 3.3 yards per carry and scoring one rushing touchdown.
That is a significant advantage for Arizona.
Tennessee Rushing Leader: Tony Pollard
Tony Pollard led Tennessee with:
- 14 carries
- 67 yards
- 4.8 yards per carry
- 1 touchdown
- 14-yard longest run
Pollard’s 4.8-yard average was considerably better than Tennessee’s overall 3.3-yard rushing average.
This indicates that his individual production was stronger than the team’s overall rushing efficiency. Tennessee’s running game was not completely ineffective, but it lacked the consistency Arizona achieved on the ground.
Pollard was particularly important because he generated most of the Titans’ rushing yardage.
Arizona Rushing Leader: Emari Demercado
Emari Demercado produced one of the most unusual statistical lines in the game.
He carried the ball only three times but gained 81 yards.
That gave him an extraordinary 27.0 yards per carry, including a 71-yard run.
His numbers were:
- Carries: 3
- Rushing yards: 81
- Average: 27.0 yards
- Touchdowns: 0
- Longest run: 71 yards
The 71-yard run had a major impact on Arizona’s overall rushing statistics.
Demercado’s performance is a useful reminder that team averages can sometimes be shaped dramatically by a single explosive play. Without that 71-yard gain, Arizona’s rushing profile would look very different.
Team Rushing Comparison
| Statistic | Tennessee | Arizona |
| Carries | 24 | 29 |
| Rushing Yards | 78 | 168 |
| Yards per Carry | 3.3 | 5.8 |
| Rushing TDs | 1 | 3 |
| Longest Run | 14 | 71 |
Arizona had a clear advantage in this category.
The Cardinals produced 90 more rushing yards than Tennessee and averaged 2.5 more yards per carry.
They also scored three rushing touchdowns compared with one for Tennessee.
If the game had been decided purely by rushing production, Arizona would have had a strong statistical argument.
But football games are decided by the combined effect of passing, rushing, turnovers, field position, and scoring efficiency.
Turnovers Were a Major Difference
Turnovers are among the most important statistics in any close football game, and this matchup provides a clear example.
Tennessee recorded two fumbles and lost one.
Arizona recorded three fumbles and lost all three.
Tennessee also threw one interception through Cam Ward, while Arizona threw none.
The raw turnover picture therefore includes:
Tennessee
- 2 fumbles
- 1 fumble lost
- 1 interception thrown
Arizona
- 3 fumbles
- 3 fumbles lost
- 0 interceptions thrown
That gives Tennessee two total turnovers and Arizona three.
The one-turnover advantage was especially meaningful because the final score was separated by only one point.
This is a critical part of understanding the tennessee titans vs arizona cardinals match player stats. Looking only at passing and rushing numbers might make Arizona appear to have the stronger overall offensive profile. Looking at turnovers reveals why Tennessee had an opportunity to win despite being outgained on the ground.
Defensive Statistics
Tennessee’s defense recorded:
- 72 total tackles
- 43 solo tackles
- 3 sacks
- 4 tackles for loss
- 2 passes defended
- 6 quarterback hits
Arizona’s defense recorded:
- 58 total tackles
- 36 solo tackles
- 2 sacks
- 4 tackles for loss
- 8 passes defended
- 4 quarterback hits
Tennessee recorded more total tackles, more solo tackles, more sacks, and more quarterback hits.
Arizona did record more passes defended.
The defensive numbers suggest that Tennessee consistently generated pressure and contact around the quarterback. Three sacks and six quarterback hits represent meaningful disruption against an Arizona passing attack that otherwise operated efficiently.
Tennessee Defensive Pressure
The Titans’ six quarterback hits are particularly interesting when viewed alongside Murray’s 74.2% completion rate.
Arizona’s quarterback was accurate, but Tennessee still managed to create pressure.
This type of defensive performance can influence a game without necessarily producing interceptions. Pressure can shorten possessions, force hurried decisions, and make offensive drives less predictable.
Arizona Defensive Response
Arizona recorded two sacks and four quarterback hits.
The Cardinals also produced eight passes defended, which indicates active coverage and disruption against Tennessee’s passing attack.
Dadrion Taylor-Demerson recorded Arizona’s interception.
That interception was the only interception credited to either defense.
Special Teams Played a Critical Role
Special teams often receive less attention than quarterback and skill-position statistics, but this game shows why that approach can be misleading.
Joey Slye was perfect on field goals.
He converted three of three attempts, with a long of 51 yards, and scored 10 total points.
His numbers:
- Field goals: 3/3
- Field goal percentage: 100%
- Long field goal: 51 yards
- Extra points: 1/2
- Total points: 10
Ten points from one kicker is enormous in a one-point victory.
Without Slye’s field goals, Tennessee would have needed significantly more offensive production to win.
Arizona’s Chad Ryland went three for three on extra points but did not attempt a field goal.
His total was three points.
The contrast is important because Tennessee converted scoring opportunities through field goals while Arizona’s listed kicking production came entirely from extra points.
Punting Comparison
Johnny Hekker punted five times for Tennessee.
His totals were:
- Punts: 5
- Punting yards: 271
- Average: 54.2 yards
- Inside the 20: 3
- Longest punt: 64 yards
Arizona’s Blake Gillikin punted seven times:
- Punts: 7
- Punting yards: 367
- Average: 52.4 yards
- Inside the 20: 2
- Longest punt: 63 yards
Hekker’s 54.2-yard average was higher than Gillikin’s 52.4-yard average, and Tennessee placed three punts inside the 20 compared with two for Arizona.
The seven Arizona punts also indicate that the Cardinals had more drives that ended without a touchdown, field goal, or sustained scoring result.
Return Game
Chimere Dike was Tennessee’s main return threat.
On kick returns, he recorded:
- 4 returns
- 136 yards
- 34.0-yard average
- 65-yard longest return
He also recorded:
- 3 punt returns
- 33 yards
- 11.0-yard average
- 17-yard longest return
Those numbers provided Tennessee with strong field-position potential.
Arizona’s Bam Knight recorded four kick returns for 90 yards, averaging 22.5 yards per return with a 28-yard long.
Greg Dortch returned two punts for 16 yards, averaging 8.0 yards per return.
The return game therefore favored Tennessee, particularly on kickoffs.
A Statistical Breakdown of Why Tennessee Won
The most useful way to understand this game is to separate the categories.
Category 1: Passing
Advantage: Tennessee in yardage, Arizona in efficiency
Tennessee gained 265 passing yards.
Arizona gained 220.
However, Murray completed 74.2% of his passes compared with Ward’s 53.8%.
The Titans gained more through the air, but the Cardinals’ quarterback was more efficient.
Category 2: Rushing
Advantage: Arizona
Arizona gained 168 rushing yards.
Tennessee gained 78.
The Cardinals also scored three rushing touchdowns.
This was arguably Arizona’s strongest offensive advantage.
Category 3: Explosive Receiving
Advantage: Tennessee
Ridley produced 131 yards on five catches.
Harrison Jr. produced 98 yards on four catches.
Both were highly explosive, but Ridley finished with more receiving yardage.
Category 4: Turnovers
Advantage: Tennessee
Arizona lost three fumbles.
Tennessee lost one fumble and threw one interception.
The Titans finished with two turnovers compared with three for Arizona.
Category 5: Defensive Pressure
Advantage: Tennessee
The Titans recorded three sacks and six quarterback hits.
Arizona recorded two sacks and four quarterback hits.
Category 6: Field Goals
Advantage: Tennessee
Slye converted all three field-goal attempts.
That production was crucial in a 22-21 game.
The Most Important Individual Performances
Several players deserve special attention when reviewing the complete tennessee titans vs arizona cardinals match player stats.
Calvin Ridley
Ridley’s 131 receiving yards were the highest individual receiving total provided in the game.
His 26.2 yards per reception showed that Tennessee was able to create explosive plays through the passing game.
Cam Ward
Ward’s 265 yards led all passers.
Although he threw one interception and did not record a passing touchdown, he generated enough yardage to keep Tennessee’s offense moving.
Tony Pollard
Pollard was Tennessee’s leading rusher with 67 yards and one touchdown.
His 4.8-yard average was also significantly better than the Titans’ team rushing average.
Kyler Murray
Murray completed 23 of 31 passes and avoided interceptions.
His 93.5 passer rating was the highest quarterback rating in the game.
Marvin Harrison Jr.
Harrison Jr. averaged 24.5 yards per reception and finished with 98 yards.
His production was one of Arizona’s clearest examples of explosive passing efficiency.
Emari Demercado
Demercado’s three carries for 81 yards stand out immediately.
His 71-yard run accounted for most of his production and helped drive Arizona’s impressive team rushing numbers.
Joey Slye
Slye scored 10 points and converted three field goals.
In a one-point victory, his performance cannot be treated as a minor contribution.
What the Box Score Does Not Tell You Immediately
One of the biggest lessons from this game is that the final result cannot be explained by one statistical category.
Arizona had:
- More rushing yards
- More rushing touchdowns
- A higher quarterback completion percentage
- No interceptions thrown
- More total offensive balance
Yet Tennessee won.
Why?
Because Tennessee created a different statistical profile.
The Titans had more passing yards, explosive receiving production, stronger defensive pressure numbers, a better return performance, and perfect field-goal execution.
Most importantly, Arizona lost three fumbles.
That combination was enough to overcome the Cardinals’ rushing advantage.
This is why advanced game analysis should avoid judging a team’s performance using only total yardage.
Offensive Efficiency vs Explosive Plays
There are two different ways an offense can produce.
One is sustained efficiency. The offense consistently gains manageable yardage and keeps the chains moving.
The other is explosive production. A smaller number of plays generate very large gains.
Arizona displayed both efficient passing and strong rushing production.
Tennessee, meanwhile, generated major passing explosives through Ridley and produced 265 passing yards despite completing fewer passes than Arizona.
The numbers suggest that Tennessee’s offense relied more heavily on passing volume and explosive gains, while Arizona had a more balanced statistical attack.
Neither approach guarantees victory.
The key is what happens when those offensive styles meet turnovers, defensive pressure, and scoring opportunities.
Why the One-Point Margin Matters
A 22-21 final score means every scoring possession mattered.
Tennessee’s three field goals provided nine points before considering its extra-point contribution.
Slye’s 51-yard field goal is particularly significant because long field goals require both kicking accuracy and enough confidence from the coaching staff to attempt them.
Arizona scored 21 points despite producing three rushing touchdowns.
That tells us the Cardinals had difficulty converting their offensive production into enough total points to overcome Tennessee’s scoring distribution.
The final score therefore reflects more than offensive yardage.
It reflects the value of converting opportunities.
Key Takeaways for Future Match Analysis
When evaluating a game like this, several principles are worth remembering.
Do Not Judge the Winner Only by Rushing Numbers
Arizona’s 168 rushing yards were impressive, but Tennessee won.
A dominant rushing day can be undermined by turnovers or inefficient scoring.
Passing Yardage Can Matter Without Passing Touchdowns
Ward threw no touchdowns, yet Tennessee still generated 265 passing yards.
Passing production can create field position and scoring opportunities even when it does not directly produce touchdowns.
Turnovers Become More Important in Close Games
Arizona lost three fumbles.
In a game decided by one point, every lost possession deserves serious attention.
Field Goals Can Decide Tight Games
Slye’s three successful field goals accounted for 10 total points when his extra point is included.
That is almost half of Tennessee’s 22 points.
Explosive Plays Can Distort Team Averages
Demercado’s 71-yard run dramatically increased Arizona’s rushing average.
Likewise, Ridley’s 47-yard reception helped elevate Tennessee’s passing efficiency.
When reviewing statistics, it is useful to separate sustained production from explosive plays.
Player Stats at a Glance
| Player | Team | Key Production |
| Cam Ward | Tennessee | 21/39, 265 yards, 0 TD, 1 INT |
| Kyler Murray | Arizona | 23/31, 220 yards, 0 TD, 0 INT |
| Tony Pollard | Tennessee | 14 carries, 67 yards, 1 TD |
| Emari Demercado | Arizona | 3 carries, 81 yards |
| Calvin Ridley | Tennessee | 5 receptions, 131 yards |
| Marvin Harrison Jr. | Arizona | 4 receptions, 98 yards |
| Joey Slye | Tennessee | 3/3 FG, 10 points |
| Dadrion Taylor-Demerson | Arizona | 1 interception |
| Chimere Dike | Tennessee | 136 kick return yards |
This table provides a quick snapshot, but the complete team numbers are necessary for understanding why Tennessee won.
FAQs
Who won the Tennessee Titans vs Arizona Cardinals game?
The Tennessee Titans defeated the Arizona Cardinals 22-21 on October 6, 2025.
What were Cam Ward’s stats against the Cardinals?
Cam Ward completed 21 of 39 passes for 265 yards, with no touchdowns and one interception. His passer rating was 64.6.
What were Kyler Murray’s stats in the game?
Kyler Murray completed 23 of 31 passes for 220 yards, with no touchdowns and no interceptions. His passer rating was 93.5.
Who was Tennessee’s leading receiver?
Calvin Ridley led Tennessee with five receptions for 131 yards. He averaged 26.2 yards per reception and had a long reception of 47 yards.
Who led the game in rushing?
Emari Demercado had the highest rushing average and the most rushing yards among the listed individual rushing leaders, gaining 81 yards on three carries. His longest run was 71 yards.
How did Tennessee beat Arizona despite being outgained on the ground?
Tennessee compensated through 265 passing yards, explosive receiving production, stronger defensive pressure, return-game production, successful field goals, and a better turnover margin. Arizona lost three fumbles, while Tennessee lost one fumble and threw one interception.
Conclusion
The tennessee titans vs arizona cardinals match player stats reveal a game in which statistical superiority in one area did not automatically translate into victory.
Arizona’s rushing attack was clearly stronger. The Cardinals gained 168 rushing yards compared with Tennessee’s 78 and scored three rushing touchdowns. Kyler Murray was also more accurate and efficient than Cam Ward, completing 74.2% of his passes without an interception.
But Tennessee created enough advantages elsewhere to win.
Cam Ward produced 265 passing yards, while Calvin Ridley delivered 131 receiving yards on five catches. Tony Pollard added 67 rushing yards and a touchdown. Tennessee’s defense recorded three sacks and six quarterback hits. Chimere Dike provided strong return production, and Joey Slye converted all three field-goal attempts.
The turnover battle also played a central role. Arizona lost all three of its fumbles, while Tennessee lost one fumble and threw one interception. In a contest decided by a single point, that difference was significant.
The final 22-21 result therefore makes sense when the entire statistical picture is considered. Arizona generated impressive rushing production and efficient quarterback play, but Tennessee produced enough explosive passing, defensive pressure, special-teams value, and scoring efficiency to survive.
For anyone studying this matchup, the biggest lesson is simple: box scores should be read as a complete story rather than a collection of isolated numbers. The winning team does not always lead in total rushing, completion percentage, or touchdown production. In close games, turnovers, explosive plays, field goals, pressure, and field position can be just as important as traditional offensive totals.
