Tennessee Titans vs Cleveland Browns Match Player Stats
The tennessee titans vs cleveland browns match player stats from December 7, 2025, tell the story of one of the most unusual close games of the season. Tennessee defeated Cleveland 31-29 after building an early lead, losing momentum, and then holding on during a dramatic fourth quarter. The final score was close, but the statistical profile of the game was even more interesting.
Tennessee finished with 31 points while Cleveland scored 29. The Titans were much stronger on the ground, led by Tony Pollard’s 161 rushing yards and two touchdowns. Cleveland, however, dominated through the air. Shedeur Sanders passed for 364 yards and three touchdowns, while Harold Fannin Jr. and Jerry Jeudy produced major receiving plays.
The contrast between the two offenses explains much of what happened. Tennessee created consistent value with its rushing attack, while Cleveland generated explosive gains through the passing game. Both teams also recorded an interception, making turnovers another important part of the contest.
This article breaks down the complete player statistics, team performance, offensive production, defensive impact, special teams numbers, and the statistical reasons Tennessee escaped with the victory.
Tennessee Titans vs Cleveland Browns Match Player Stats
The tennessee titans vs cleveland browns match player stats show two offenses taking very different routes toward nearly identical scoring totals.
Tennessee scored 14 points in the first quarter, added no points in the second, scored seven in the third, and finished with 10 in the fourth. Cleveland opened with only three points, responded with 14 in the second quarter, went scoreless in the third, and scored 12 in the final period.
That quarter-by-quarter pattern is important.
Tennessee’s 14-point opening quarter gave the Titans an advantage that ultimately proved decisive. Cleveland spent much of the game trying to recover from that early deficit. The Browns did manage to make the contest extremely close, but Tennessee’s early production gave them enough margin to survive Cleveland’s late push.
Final Score
| Team | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | Final |
| Tennessee Titans | 14 | 0 | 7 | 10 | 31 |
| Cleveland Browns | 3 | 14 | 0 | 12 | 29 |
Tennessee entered the game with a 2-11 record and a 2-4 road record. Cleveland entered at 3-10 with a 2-5 home record.
The records show that this was not a meeting between teams fighting for dominant postseason positioning. Yet the actual game was highly competitive, with the final two-point margin reflecting how evenly the scoring unfolded after Tennessee’s fast start.
Cam Ward Passing Stats
Cam Ward’s passing line was modest compared with Shedeur Sanders’ production.
Ward completed 14 of 28 passes for 117 yards. He averaged 4.2 yards per attempt and recorded two touchdown passes against one interception.
His official passing numbers were:
| Statistic | Cam Ward |
| Completions | 14 |
| Attempts | 28 |
| Completion Rate | 50.0% |
| Passing Yards | 117 |
| Yards per Attempt | 4.2 |
| Touchdowns | 2 |
| Interceptions | 1 |
| Sacks | 1 |
| Sack Yards Lost | 9 |
| QBR | 19.3 |
| Passer Rating | 70.1 |
The most important point is that Tennessee did not need Ward to produce a high-volume passing performance.
The Titans found another way to move the football.
Ward’s 117 passing yards were significantly lower than Cleveland’s passing total. However, Tennessee’s rushing attack generated 184 yards. That meant the offense could remain productive without depending heavily on downfield passing.
The two touchdown passes were also valuable because Tennessee converted limited passing production into scoring plays.
His 70.1 passer rating was not spectacular, and the 19.3 QBR indicates that his individual passing performance was not the primary reason Tennessee won. Instead, the quarterback’s contribution worked within a broader offensive plan built around the running game.
That distinction matters when interpreting quarterback statistics.
A quarterback does not always need to lead the box score for his team to win. In this game, Tennessee’s offensive balance allowed Ward to operate without carrying the entire workload through the air.
Shedeur Sanders Passing Stats
Shedeur Sanders produced one of the most productive passing performances in the game despite Cleveland’s two-point loss.
Sanders completed 23 of 42 attempts for 364 yards. He averaged 8.7 yards per attempt and threw three touchdown passes with one interception.
| Statistic | Shedeur Sanders |
| Completions | 23 |
| Attempts | 42 |
| Completion Rate | 54.8% |
| Passing Yards | 364 |
| Yards per Attempt | 8.7 |
| Touchdowns | 3 |
| Interceptions | 1 |
| Sacks | 2 |
| Sack Yards Lost | 13 |
| QBR | 54.7 |
| Passer Rating | 97.7 |
Sanders’ 364 passing yards were more than three times Ward’s total.
His 8.7 yards per attempt also shows that Cleveland was not simply relying on short completions. The Browns produced several significant gains through the passing game.
The most obvious example was Jerry Jeudy’s 60-yard reception. That play alone accounted for a major portion of Jeudy’s production and demonstrated Cleveland’s ability to create explosive offensive moments.
Harold Fannin Jr. was another major factor. He caught eight passes for 114 yards and one touchdown on 11 targets.
Sanders did throw one interception, matching Ward’s turnover total. The difference was that Sanders generated much more yardage before and after that mistake.
His 97.7 passer rating was considerably stronger than Ward’s 70.1. From an individual passing standpoint, Sanders had the more productive statistical performance.
Yet quarterback production cannot be separated from the team’s rushing performance and scoring efficiency.
Tony Pollard Dominates the Ground Game
Tony Pollard was arguably the most important individual offensive player in the game.
Pollard carried the ball 25 times for 161 yards and two touchdowns. He averaged 6.4 yards per carry and recorded a long run of 65 yards.
| Statistic | Tony Pollard |
| Carries | 25 |
| Rushing Yards | 161 |
| Yards per Carry | 6.4 |
| Rushing Touchdowns | 2 |
| Longest Run | 65 yards |
The 65-yard run stands out immediately.
Pollard averaged 6.4 yards every time he carried the football, which is an extremely efficient rushing performance across 25 attempts. His production also gave Tennessee something Cleveland struggled to match on the ground.
Pollard’s workload is equally important.
Twenty-five carries represent a substantial share of Tennessee’s rushing attempts. The Titans repeatedly trusted him to generate yardage rather than making the offense entirely dependent on Ward’s passing.
That approach worked.
Pollard finished with 161 rushing yards, which was nearly as much as Tennessee’s entire passing output of 117 yards.
His two touchdowns were also directly connected to the final result. In a game decided by two points, scoring efficiency from the running back position can become decisive.
Tennessee’s Complete Rushing Performance
Tennessee finished with 184 rushing yards on 35 attempts.
The Titans averaged 5.3 yards per carry and scored two rushing touchdowns.
| Player | Carries | Yards | Average | TD | Long |
| Tony Pollard | 25 | 161 | 6.4 | 2 | 65 |
| Tyjae Spears | 8 | 19 | 2.4 | 0 | 8 |
| Cam Ward | 2 | 4 | 2.0 | 0 | 2 |
| Team Total | 35 | 184 | 5.3 | 2 | 65 |
The contrast within the Tennessee rushing group is clear.
Pollard generated the overwhelming majority of the team’s rushing production. Spears contributed 19 yards on eight attempts, while Ward added four yards on two carries.
The Titans did not need multiple backs to produce huge numbers because Pollard handled the workload efficiently.
The 184-yard team total was also important because Cleveland’s offense had a major advantage in passing yards. Tennessee needed its ground game to offset that aerial disparity.
It did exactly that.
Cleveland’s Rushing Attack Struggles
Cleveland rushed for only 61 yards on 20 attempts.
The Browns averaged 3.1 yards per carry and recorded one rushing touchdown.
| Player | Carries | Yards | Average | TD | Long |
| Shedeur Sanders | 3 | 29 | 9.7 | 1 | 14 |
| Quinshon Judkins | 14 | 26 | 1.9 | 0 | 14 |
| Dylan Sampson | 2 | 4 | 2.0 | 0 | 4 |
| Malachi Corley | 1 | 2 | 2.0 | 0 | 2 |
| Team Total | 20 | 61 | 3.1 | 1 | 14 |
Quinshon Judkins carried the ball 14 times but gained only 26 yards.
That equals just 1.9 yards per carry.
The Browns therefore had a major imbalance between their passing and rushing production. Sanders himself was Cleveland’s most efficient runner by average, gaining 29 yards on three carries.
This is one of the clearest statistical differences between the teams.
Tennessee averaged 5.3 yards per rushing attempt.
Cleveland averaged 3.1.
That 2.2-yard difference per rushing attempt gave Tennessee a strong foundation for controlling offensive situations.
Tennessee Receiving Stats
Tennessee’s receiving numbers were much lower than Cleveland’s.
The Titans completed 14 receptions for 117 yards and two touchdowns on 25 targets.
| Player | Receptions | Yards | Average | TD | Long | Targets |
| Tyjae Spears | 2 | 28 | 14.0 | 0 | 24 | 4 |
| Chimere Dike | 5 | 24 | 4.8 | 1 | 19 | 8 |
| Chig Okonkwo | 2 | 20 | 10.0 | 0 | 11 | 2 |
| Van Jefferson | 2 | 17 | 8.5 | 0 | 11 | 4 |
| Elic Ayomanor | 1 | 14 | 14.0 | 1 | 14 | 3 |
| Gunnar Helm | 1 | 8 | 8.0 | 0 | 8 | 2 |
| David Martin-Robinson | 1 | 6 | 6.0 | 0 | 6 | 1 |
| James Proche II | 0 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Team Total | 14 | 117 | 8.4 | 2 | 24 | 25 |
Chimere Dike led Tennessee in receptions with five.
He also scored one touchdown.
However, his 24 receiving yards show that volume did not necessarily translate into significant yardage. Tennessee’s passing game was primarily complementary to the rushing attack.
Tyjae Spears produced the highest receiving average among Tennessee players with multiple receptions. His two catches went for 28 yards, including a 24-yard gain.
Elic Ayomanor caught one pass for 14 yards and scored a touchdown, making his single reception particularly valuable.
Cleveland Receiving Stats
Cleveland’s passing attack was the statistical highlight of the game.
The Browns finished with 23 receptions for 364 yards and three touchdowns on 38 targets.
| Player | Receptions | Yards | Average | TD | Long | Targets |
| Harold Fannin Jr. | 8 | 114 | 14.3 | 1 | 35 | 11 |
| Jerry Jeudy | 3 | 76 | 25.3 | 1 | 60 | 5 |
| Dylan Sampson | 5 | 64 | 12.8 | 0 | 31 | 6 |
| Quinshon Judkins | 1 | 58 | 58.0 | 0 | 58 | 3 |
| Cedric Tillman | 1 | 23 | 23.0 | 0 | 23 | 3 |
| Gage Larvadain | 2 | 18 | 9.0 | 0 | 14 | 3 |
| Jerome Ford | 2 | 10 | 5.0 | 0 | 9 | 3 |
| David Njoku | 1 | 1 | 1.0 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Blake Whiteheart | 0 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Isaiah Bond | 0 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Team Total | 23 | 364 | 15.8 | 3 | 60 | 38 |
Harold Fannin Jr. was Cleveland’s leading receiver.
His eight receptions, 114 yards, and one touchdown made him the most productive Browns pass catcher by both volume and total yardage.
Jerry Jeudy was especially dangerous on a per-catch basis.
He caught three passes for 76 yards, averaging 25.3 yards per reception. His longest catch went for 60 yards, making him one of Cleveland’s most important big-play threats.
Quinshon Judkins also produced an unusual receiving line.
He caught only one pass, but that reception went for 58 yards.
Dylan Sampson added five receptions for 64 yards, giving Cleveland another significant contributor from the backfield.
These numbers explain why Cleveland was able to score 29 points despite producing only 61 rushing yards.
Harold Fannin Jr. Provides Consistent Production
Fannin’s performance deserves special attention because his 114 receiving yards came on eight receptions.
He was targeted 11 times, which was the highest target total among Cleveland players.
That workload indicates that Sanders repeatedly looked in his direction.
Fannin averaged 14.3 yards per reception and recorded a 35-yard long reception. He also scored one touchdown.
Unlike a receiver who relies on one isolated explosive play, Fannin’s production was distributed across eight catches.
That made him one of Cleveland’s most reliable offensive outlets.
His performance is also a useful example of why receptions, targets, and yardage should be considered together. The 11 targets show opportunity, the eight catches show conversion, and the 114 yards demonstrate that those opportunities generated meaningful field position.
Jerry Jeudy Creates Explosive Plays
Jerry Jeudy’s numbers were less consistent in volume but more explosive in efficiency.
He caught three passes for 76 yards.
That gave him an average of 25.3 yards per reception.
His 60-yard reception was the longest catch recorded by either team.
A single play of that magnitude can dramatically change field position and scoring probability.
The Browns therefore had two different types of receiving production.
Fannin provided volume and consistency.
Jeudy provided explosive yardage.
Dylan Sampson added another layer with five catches for 64 yards.
Together, these players gave Cleveland a passing attack capable of generating large chunks of yardage even when the rushing game was struggling.
Defensive Player Stats
Defense played a major role despite the offensive numbers.
Tennessee recorded 64 total tackles, 38 solo tackles, two sacks, five tackles for loss, nine passes defended, and 13 quarterback hits.
Cleveland recorded 70 total tackles, 35 solo tackles, one sack, seven tackles for loss, five passes defended, and five quarterback hits.
Tennessee Defensive Leaders
| Player | Tackles | Solo | Sacks | TFL | PD | QB Hits |
| Cedric Gray | 10 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Jeffery Simmons | 7 | 2 | 1.5 | 2 | 1 | 3 |
| Amani Hooker | 6 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kevin Winston Jr. | 5 | 4 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 1 |
| Cody Barton | 5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 |
| Marcus Harris | 4 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jihad Ward | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 |
| Julius Chestnut | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Xavier Woods | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| Arden Key | 3 | 1 | 0.5 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
Cedric Gray led Tennessee with 10 total tackles and seven solo tackles.
Jeffery Simmons was particularly disruptive.
He recorded 1.5 sacks, two tackles for loss, one pass defended, and three quarterback hits.
Jihad Ward added four quarterback hits despite not recording a sack.
Xavier Woods made a major impact by intercepting Sanders.
The interception was returned 35 yards and did not result in a touchdown.
Cleveland Defensive Leaders
| Player | Tackles | Solo | Sacks | TFL | PD | QB Hits |
| Carson Schwesinger | 13 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| Devin Bush | 9 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
| Grant Delpit | 5 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Myles Garrett | 4 | 4 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 2 |
| Ronnie Hickman | 4 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Denzel Ward | 4 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mohamoud Diabate | 4 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Shelby Harris | 4 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Myles Harden | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| Tyson Campbell | 3 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Mason Graham | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
Carson Schwesinger led all Cleveland defenders with 13 tackles.
Devin Bush followed with nine tackles and also recorded Cleveland’s interception.
Myles Garrett was the most disruptive individual pass rusher for Cleveland.
Garrett recorded four tackles, one sack, three tackles for loss, one pass defended, and two quarterback hits.
His three tackles for loss were especially notable against a Tennessee offense that relied heavily on rushing production.
However, Cleveland finished with only one sack compared with Tennessee’s two.
Turnovers and Defensive Plays
Both teams recorded one interception.
Tennessee’s Xavier Woods intercepted Sanders and returned the ball 35 yards.
Cleveland’s Devin Bush intercepted Ward and returned the ball 44 yards.
Neither interception was returned for a touchdown.
Cleveland also recorded two team fumbles, with one lost.
Dylan Sampson was responsible for the lost fumble. Gage Larvadain also fumbled but recovered his own fumble.
These turnovers are important because they show that the game was not simply decided by total yardage.
Cleveland generated considerably more passing yardage, yet Tennessee found enough efficiency on offense and defense to win.
The Titans also produced 13 quarterback hits, compared with five from Cleveland.
That pressure difference is worth considering when evaluating how Tennessee limited Cleveland’s offense despite allowing 364 passing yards.
Special Teams Statistics
Special teams also contributed to the overall statistical picture.
Joey Slye was perfect for Tennessee.
He converted one field-goal attempt, including a 41-yard kick, and made all four extra-point attempts.
He finished with seven points.
Cleveland’s Andre Szmyt made his only field-goal attempt from 38 yards and converted both extra points.
He finished with five points.
Kick Returns
Chimere Dike returned one kickoff for 41 yards for Tennessee.
Jerome Ford handled five kickoff returns for Cleveland and gained 113 total yards. His average was 22.6 yards per return, with a long of 32 yards.
Punt Returns
Dike had one punt return for minus two yards.
Gage Larvadain returned four punts for Cleveland for 16 yards, averaging four yards per return.
Punting
Johnny Hekker punted eight times for Tennessee.
He accumulated 383 total yards, averaging 47.9 yards per punt. His longest punt traveled 54 yards, and two punts were placed inside the 20-yard line.
Corey Bojorquez punted six times for Cleveland for 222 yards.
His average was 37.0 yards, with a long of 42 yards and one punt inside the 20.
Tennessee therefore received a stronger statistical contribution from its punting game.
Why Tennessee Won Despite Losing the Passing Battle
This is perhaps the most important analytical question from the game.
Cleveland produced 364 passing yards.
Tennessee produced only 117.
That is a 247-yard difference in passing production.
Yet Tennessee won.
The explanation begins with rushing efficiency.
Tennessee produced 184 rushing yards.
Cleveland produced 61.
That created a 123-yard advantage for the Titans on the ground.
When the passing and rushing categories are viewed together, the offensive yardage gap becomes much smaller than the passing statistics initially suggest.
The Titans combined 117 passing yards with 184 rushing yards.
The Browns combined 364 passing yards with 61 rushing yards.
This means Tennessee generated 301 yards through passing and rushing, while Cleveland generated 425.
Cleveland therefore still had the overall yardage advantage based on the supplied passing and rushing totals.
But yardage alone did not determine the winner.
Tennessee scored 31 points from its offensive opportunities.
The Titans were especially effective on the ground, and Pollard’s two rushing touchdowns provided direct scoring value.
The Browns generated explosive passing plays, but their rushing attack averaged only 3.1 yards per attempt.
That forced Cleveland to rely heavily on Sanders and the passing game.
The Importance of the First Quarter
Tennessee’s 14-point first quarter changed the game.
Cleveland scored only three points during the opening period.
That created an 11-point advantage for Tennessee after one quarter.
Cleveland responded with 14 points in the second quarter while Tennessee scored nothing.
The Browns therefore entered halftime having erased the early scoring deficit.
The third quarter reversed the momentum again.
Tennessee scored seven points while Cleveland was held scoreless.
That gave Tennessee another lead entering the fourth quarter.
Cleveland scored 12 points in the final period and made the game extremely close.
The quarter-by-quarter sequence was:
- Tennessee jumps ahead 14-3.
- Cleveland responds with a 14-point second quarter.
- Tennessee retakes control with seven points in the third.
- Cleveland scores 12 in the fourth but falls two points short.
This is why the final score should not be viewed without the scoring timeline.
The Titans were not dominant throughout the game.
They were effective at producing points during key stretches.
Third-Down and Possession Implications
The supplied box score does not include a complete third-down conversion breakdown or time-of-possession figure, so those statistics should not be invented.
However, the offensive distribution allows us to identify an important strategic pattern.
Tennessee’s ability to run the football at 5.3 yards per attempt gave the Titans a practical way to sustain drives without asking Ward to throw frequently.
Cleveland’s offense operated differently.
The Browns attempted 42 passes compared with only 20 rushing attempts.
That 2.1-to-1 pass-to-rush attempt ratio illustrates how heavily the offense leaned toward the passing game.
Tennessee attempted 28 passes and 35 rushing attempts.
That was a much more run-oriented distribution.
The statistical evidence therefore points toward two different offensive identities in this game.
Tennessee prioritized the ground attack.
Cleveland relied heavily on the passing attack.
Neither approach was completely ineffective, but Tennessee’s approach produced the two-point victory.
A Closer Look at Offensive Efficiency
Raw totals can sometimes hide how efficiently a team produced its numbers.
Ward averaged only 4.2 yards per passing attempt.
Sanders averaged 8.7.
That is a significant difference.
But Pollard averaged 6.4 yards per rushing attempt, while Cleveland’s entire rushing offense averaged only 3.1.
The game therefore featured a direct tradeoff.
Cleveland was far more efficient through the air.
Tennessee was far more effective on the ground.
The Titans also converted their rushing production into two touchdowns.
Cleveland’s rushing attack produced one touchdown, but much of its scoring production came through the passing game.
This demonstrates why evaluating a football game requires more than asking which quarterback had the better statistics.
Sanders clearly had the stronger passing line.
Pollard clearly had the stronger rushing performance.
The final outcome reflected the combined value of those units rather than a single position.
Most Important Player Performances
Several players stand out when the full statistical picture is considered.
Tony Pollard
Pollard finished with 161 rushing yards and two touchdowns on 25 carries.
His 65-yard run was the longest rushing play in the game.
He was the foundation of Tennessee’s offensive success.
Shedeur Sanders
Sanders threw for 364 yards and three touchdowns.
He also added 29 rushing yards and a rushing touchdown.
His passing numbers were among the strongest individual statistics in the game despite the Browns losing.
Harold Fannin Jr.
Fannin recorded eight catches for 114 yards and one touchdown.
He led Cleveland in receptions, receiving yards, and targets.
Jerry Jeudy
Jeudy averaged 25.3 yards per reception and recorded a 60-yard catch.
His explosive production helped Cleveland move the ball quickly.
Jeffery Simmons
Simmons recorded 1.5 sacks, two tackles for loss, and three quarterback hits.
He was one of Tennessee’s most disruptive defensive players.
Carson Schwesinger
Schwesinger led the Browns with 13 tackles.
His tackle volume reflected the amount of defensive work Cleveland had to handle throughout the contest.
Xavier Woods
Woods recorded an interception and returned it 35 yards.
The turnover was one of Tennessee’s most important defensive plays.
Tennessee Titans vs Cleveland Browns Match Player Stats: What the Numbers Really Say
The tennessee titans vs cleveland browns match player stats reveal a game defined by contrast.
Cleveland’s passing attack was substantially more productive.
Sanders threw for 364 yards, while Tennessee’s Ward threw for 117.
Cleveland also had three passing touchdowns compared with Tennessee’s two.
But Tennessee controlled the rushing battle.
The Titans gained 184 rushing yards compared with Cleveland’s 61.
Pollard alone gained 161 yards.
That means Pollard’s rushing total was more than twice Cleveland’s entire team rushing total.
The Titans also generated more quarterback pressure.
Tennessee recorded 13 quarterback hits and two sacks.
Cleveland recorded five quarterback hits and one sack.
The turnover battle was even in interceptions, with each team recording one.
Cleveland lost one fumble, creating an additional turnover opportunity for Tennessee.
These details help explain why a team that was outgained through the air could still win the game.
Statistical Lessons From the Game
There are several broader lessons from this box score.
First, passing yardage does not automatically translate into victory.
Cleveland’s 364 passing yards were impressive, but the Browns still finished with fewer points.
Second, explosive plays can produce large yardage totals without guaranteeing consistent offensive success.
Cleveland had several major receiving gains, including Jeudy’s 60-yard catch and Judkins’ 58-yard reception.
Third, rushing efficiency can stabilize an offense.
Tennessee’s 5.3 yards per carry allowed the Titans to keep their offense productive despite limited passing output.
Fourth, quarterback statistics must be evaluated within offensive structure.
Sanders had the better passing numbers.
Ward’s team won.
That does not mean Ward outplayed Sanders as a passer. It means Tennessee’s overall game plan produced the better team result.
Finally, defensive pressure matters even when it does not produce a large sack total.
Tennessee recorded 13 quarterback hits.
That was eight more than Cleveland’s total.
Official Data and Statistical Verification
For readers who want to compare the supplied box-score figures with an official league source, the NFL official website provides official league information and game-related statistics.
The statistics presented in this article are based on the real game data supplied for the December 7, 2025 matchup. Where the supplied information does not provide a statistic, this article does not attempt to estimate or manufacture it.
That approach is especially important for sports content because box scores contain many interconnected numbers. A reliable article should distinguish between confirmed statistics and analytical interpretation.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who won the Tennessee Titans vs Cleveland Browns game on December 7, 2025?
The Tennessee Titans defeated the Cleveland Browns 31-29 on December 7, 2025.
How many passing yards did Shedeur Sanders have?
Shedeur Sanders completed 23 of 42 passes for 364 yards, three touchdowns, and one interception.
How many rushing yards did Tony Pollard have?
Tony Pollard rushed 25 times for 161 yards and two touchdowns. His longest run was 65 yards.
Who led the Browns in receiving?
Harold Fannin Jr. led Cleveland with eight receptions for 114 yards and one touchdown.
Who led Tennessee in tackles?
Cedric Gray led the Titans with 10 total tackles, including seven solo tackles.
How many interceptions were recorded in the game?
Each team recorded one interception. Xavier Woods intercepted Shedeur Sanders for Tennessee, while Devin Bush intercepted Cam Ward for Cleveland.
Conclusion
The Tennessee Titans’ 31-29 victory over the Cleveland Browns was a strong example of contrasting offensive styles.
Cleveland produced the bigger passing numbers. Shedeur Sanders threw for 364 yards and three touchdowns, while Harold Fannin Jr. and Jerry Jeudy supplied major receiving production.
Tennessee answered with a powerful rushing performance.
Tony Pollard rushed for 161 yards and two touchdowns, leading a Titans ground game that produced 184 yards at 5.3 yards per carry.
The defensive numbers added another important layer. Tennessee recorded two sacks and 13 quarterback hits, while Cleveland recorded one sack and five quarterback hits. Both teams intercepted the opposing quarterback once.
The final score of 31-29 reflects how closely the game was contested, but the player statistics explain why Tennessee prevailed. The Titans established their advantage through rushing efficiency, early scoring, defensive pressure, and timely production.
For anyone studying this matchup, the biggest takeaway is simple: the box score tells a much deeper story than the final score alone.
