by When examining the steelers vs Baltimore Ravens match player stats, we witness another chapter in one of football’s most intense rivalries.
This recent clash ended with a decisive 28-14 victory for the Baltimore Ravens, a score that tells only part of the story behind this compelling divisional matchup.
The game featured contrasting offensive philosophies, individual brilliance, and tactical adjustments that deserve deeper examination.
Football rivalries are defined by their memorable moments, and this game provided several worth analyzing.
The Ravens built their victory on the back of a punishing ground attack led by Derrick Henry’s exceptional performance, while the Steelers showed resilience through Russell Wilson’s efficient passing despite their inability to establish any rushing presence.
These contrasting approaches created a fascinating tactical battle that illuminated each team’s strengths and weaknesses.
For anyone looking to understand modern NFL football, this matchup serves as an excellent case study.
The Ravens demonstrated how a balanced offense built around a dominant running game can control tempo and wear down even a historically strong defense like Pittsburgh’s.
Steelers Vs Baltimore Ravens Match Player Stats
Meanwhile, the Steelers showcased the limitations of a one-dimensional attack, regardless of how efficient that dimension might be.
Let’s dive deeper into the numbers, performances, and strategic elements that defined this compelling division rivalry game.
Final Score: The Story in Numbers
The progression of scoring reveals how this game unfolded:
| Team | 1Q | 2Q | 3Q | 4Q | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Steelers | 0 | 0 | 14 | 0 | 14 |
| Baltimore Ravens | 7 | 14 | 7 | 0 | 28 |
This quarter-by-quarter breakdown tells a clear story of three distinct game phases:
- Ravens’ early dominance (first half) – Baltimore established control with three unanswered touchdowns, building a commanding 21-0 lead by halftime
- Steelers’ attempted comeback (third quarter) – Pittsburgh showed life with two touchdown drives while Baltimore added one score of their own
- Defensive stalemate (fourth quarter) – Neither team scored as Baltimore focused on clock management while protecting their lead
The scoreless fourth quarter highlights the Ravens’ commitment to their game plan—with a comfortable lead, they prioritized ball control over additional scoring opportunities, effectively eliminating any chance of a Pittsburgh comeback.
Steelers Player Stats: Searching for Balance
Passing: Wilson’s Efficiency
| Player | Completions/Attempts | Yards | Touchdowns | Interceptions | Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Russell Wilson | 20/29 | 270 | 2 | 0 | 121.3 |
| Justin Fields | 0/1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 39.6 |
Russell Wilson delivered one of his finest performances since joining Pittsburgh, completing 69% of his passes for 270 yards and two touchdowns without throwing an interception. His 121.3 passer rating reflects this efficiency. Even more impressive was Wilson’s ability to distribute the ball effectively—five different receivers recorded catches of 25+ yards, demonstrating his capacity to find matchup advantages across the field.
Justin Fields saw limited action with just one passing attempt, suggesting Pittsburgh had specific packages designed for him that simply didn’t materialize into significant playing time given the game’s flow.
Rushing and Receiving: Imbalanced Attack
| Player | Carries | Rushing Yards | Rushing TDs | Receptions | Receiving Yards | Receiving TDs |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Najee Harris | 6 | 17 | 0 | 3 | 41 | 0 |
| Jaylen Warren | 2 | 6 | 0 | 4 | 19 | 0 |
| Russell Wilson | 3 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Pat Freiermuth | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 15 | 0 |
| Darnell Washington | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 9 | 0 |
| George Pickens | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 87 | 1 |
| Van Jefferson | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 37 | 1 |
| Mike Williams | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 37 | 0 |
| Calvin Austin III | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 25 | 0 |
The most glaring issue for Pittsburgh was their complete inability to establish any ground game. Lead back Najee Harris managed just 17 yards on 6 carries (2.8 yards per attempt), while the entire team accumulated only 29 rushing yards. This lack of balance created several problems:
- Made the offense predictable in key situations, particularly on third downs
- Prevented Pittsburgh from effectively controlling the clock
- Allowed Baltimore’s pass rushers to focus on reaching Wilson without worrying about contain responsibilities
- Limited the effectiveness of play-action passes, which typically rely on a credible running threat
In the passing game, George Pickens emerged as Wilson’s primary target, turning 5 receptions into 87 yards and a touchdown. Van Jefferson made the most of his opportunities with a touchdown among his 2 catches, while Mike Williams contributed a crucial 37-yard reception that helped spark Pittsburgh’s brief third-quarter resurgence.
Defense: Valiant Effort Despite Challenges
| Player | Total Tackles | Solo Tackles | Sacks | Tackles for Loss |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Elandon Roberts | 14 | 7 | 0 | 0 |
| Patrick Queen | 10 | 4 | 0 | 1 |
| Cameron Heyward | 10 | 3 | 0 | 2 |
| Minkah Fitzpatrick | 9 | 5 | 0 | 0 |
| Joey Porter Jr. | 6 | 6 | 0 | 0 |
Pittsburgh’s defense faced an enormous challenge against Baltimore’s multi-faceted rushing attack. Linebacker Elandon Roberts led the unit with 14 tackles, frequently serving as the last line of defense against Derrick Henry after the powerful back had already gained substantial yardage.
Patrick Queen and Cameron Heyward each contributed 10 tackles, with Heyward adding 2 tackles for loss that momentarily disrupted Baltimore’s offensive rhythm. Safety Minkah Fitzpatrick registered 9 tackles, often having to come up in run support more than ideal for a free safety.
The complete absence of sacks highlights one of Pittsburgh’s primary defensive shortcomings in this contest. Without creating consistent pressure on Lamar Jackson, they allowed him to operate comfortably both as a passer and when deciding to run. This lack of disruption was particularly costly on third downs, where Baltimore converted 8 of 12 opportunities (67%).
Kicking and Punting: Special Teams Bright Spot
| Player | Field Goals | Extra Points |
|---|---|---|
| Chris Boswell | 0/0 | 2/2 |
| Player | Punts | Yards | Inside 20 | Longest |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Corliss Waitman | 5 | 257 | 5 | 60 |
While the kicking game had minimal impact with Boswell simply converting both extra points, punter Corliss Waitman delivered an outstanding performance. Averaging 51.4 yards on 5 punts with all 5 placed inside Baltimore’s 20-yard line, Waitman consistently helped Pittsburgh win the field position battle even as they struggled in other facets of the game. His longest punt traveled 60 yards, demonstrating his ability to flip field position when the Steelers needed it most.
Baltimore Ravens Player Stats: Complete Performance
Passing: Jackson’s Precision
| Player | Completions/Attempts | Yards | Touchdowns | Interceptions | Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lamar Jackson | 16/21 | 175 | 2 | 0 | 132 |
Lamar Jackson’s passing statistics perfectly illustrate the concept of quality over quantity. While 175 yards might seem modest, his 76% completion rate, 2 touchdowns, zero interceptions, and stellar 132 passer rating tell the story of a quarterback in complete command. Jackson didn’t need to throw often because:
- The running game was dominating
- When he did throw, he was extremely efficient
- His passes came at critical moments, particularly in the red zone and on third downs
- The threat of his running ability created favorable passing situations
This performance represents Jackson’s continued evolution into a complete quarterback who understands when to rely on different aspects of his skill set depending on what the game situation demands.
Rushing and Receiving: Ground Dominance
| Player | Carries | Rushing Yards | Rushing TDs | Receptions | Receiving Yards | Receiving TDs |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Derrick Henry | 26 | 186 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Lamar Jackson | 15 | 81 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Justice Hill | 6 | 12 | 0 | 4 | 13 | 1 |
| Mark Andrews | 2 | 5 | 0 | 2 | 27 | 0 |
| Isaiah Likely | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 53 | 0 |
| Rashod Bateman | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 24 | 1 |
The Ravens’ rushing attack was simply overwhelming, with Derrick Henry leading the charge by gaining 186 yards on 26 carries (7.15 yards per attempt) with 2 touchdowns. Lamar Jackson complemented this with 81 yards on 15 carries of his own. Together, they accounted for 267 rushing yards—more than the Steelers’ total offensive output.
The brilliance of Baltimore’s ground game lies in its dual-threat nature:
- Henry’s power running between the tackles forces defenses to commit additional players to the box
- Jackson’s threat as a runner creates hesitation among edge defenders
- This combination creates impossible choices for defenders—commit to Henry inside and Jackson can keep around the edge; focus on containing Jackson and Henry finds space between the tackles
In the passing game, tight end Isaiah Likely led receivers with 53 yards on 3 catches, while Rashod Bateman and Justice Hill each caught touchdown passes. The distribution of receiving production across six different players demonstrates Baltimore’s commitment to taking what the defense gives them rather than forcing the ball to specific targets.
Defense: Timely Pressure
| Player | Total Tackles | Solo Tackles | Sacks | Tackles for Loss |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ar’Darius Washington | 7 | 5 | 0 | 0 |
| Roquan Smith | 5 | 3 | 0 | 0 |
| Nnamdi Madubuike | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
| Marlon Humphrey | 4 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| Michael Pierce | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
Safety Ar’Darius Washington led the Ravens with 7 tackles, while linebacker Roquan Smith added 5 tackles and provided crucial leadership in defensive alignments. However, the most impactful defensive performance came from Nnamdi Madubuike, who recorded 2 sacks at critical moments that killed promising Steelers drives.
The 3 total sacks recorded by Baltimore’s defense represent a significant contrast to Pittsburgh’s lack of quarterback pressure. These timely sacks forced Pittsburgh into unfavorable third-and-long situations and prevented them from establishing rhythm during the first half.
Cornerback Marlon Humphrey recorded 4 tackles while providing solid coverage against Pittsburgh’s receivers. His ability to maintain tight coverage gave the Ravens’ pass rush additional time to reach Wilson on several occasions.
Kicking and Punting: Steady Special Teams
| Player | Field Goals | Extra Points |
|---|---|---|
| Justin Tucker | 0/0 | 4/4 |
| Player | Punts | Yards | Inside 20 | Longest |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jordan Stout | 4 | 183 | 1 | 49 |
Kicker Justin Tucker converted all 4 extra point attempts while not being called upon for any field goal tries, a testament to Baltimore’s red zone efficiency. Punter Jordan Stout averaged nearly 46 yards on his 4 punts, helping maintain field position throughout the contest. While not as spectacular as his counterpart on the Steelers, Stout delivered a reliable performance that supported Baltimore’s ball-control approach.
Game Summary & Key Highlights: Tactical Battle
Ravens’ Dominant First Half
Baltimore’s commanding 21-0 halftime lead was built through methodical execution:
- Time of possession dominance – The Ravens controlled the ball for over 20 minutes in the first half
- Third-down efficiency – Converting 6 of 7 third-down attempts allowed Baltimore to sustain drives
- Red-zone execution – All three first-half possessions that reached Pittsburgh’s territory resulted in touchdowns
- Defensive discipline – Baltimore limited Pittsburgh to just 89 total yards before halftime
- Tactical diversity – While Henry was the featured weapon, Baltimore mixed in just enough passing and Jackson runs to keep the defense guessing
This first-half performance set the tone for the entire game and created a deficit too significant for Pittsburgh to overcome despite their subsequent improvement.
Steelers’ Comeback Attempt
After a dismal first half, Pittsburgh showed character with a spirited third-quarter effort:
- Increased tempo – The Steelers employed more no-huddle offense, preventing Baltimore from making defensive substitutions
- Explosive plays – Wilson connected on passes of 29, 37, and 25 yards during their scoring drives
- Red-zone efficiency – Both drives that reached Baltimore territory resulted in touchdowns
- Defensive adjustments – Pittsburgh’s front seven showed improved gap discipline against the run
- Momentum shift – The quick scores energized both the team and the home crowd, briefly making the game competitive
This resurgence demonstrated Pittsburgh’s resilience and Wilson’s ability to lead the offense when given adequate protection, but ultimately proved insufficient against Baltimore’s consistent execution.
Derrick Henry’s Special Night
Henry’s performance was a master class in physical running:
- Vision and patience – Henry consistently found cutback lanes and waited for blocks to develop
- Contact balance – His ability to remain upright through initial contact resulted in numerous extra yards
- Explosive bursts – Despite his size, Henry showed remarkable acceleration once he identified running lanes
- Endurance – His effectiveness didn’t diminish throughout the game despite 26 carries
- Situational awareness – In the fourth quarter, Henry focused on securing the ball and staying inbounds to help run clock
This performance ranks among the most impressive individual rushing displays in recent Ravens-Steelers history and highlights why Baltimore prioritized acquiring Henry in the offseason.
The Best of the Best: Defensive Standouts
Several defensive players made significant impacts beyond what traditional statistics capture:
- Nnamdi Madubuike’s third-down disruption – Both of his sacks came in critical situations that ended Steelers drives
- Roquan Smith’s communication – His ability to recognize Pittsburgh’s formations and adjust Baltimore’s defensive alignments prevented several potential big plays
- Cameron Heyward’s interior presence – Despite Pittsburgh’s struggles, Heyward created consistent penetration that occasionally disrupted Baltimore’s rushing attack
- Marlon Humphrey’s coverage – His tight coverage on George Pickens for much of the game forced Wilson to look elsewhere until adjustments were made
- Elandon Roberts’ relentless pursuit – Despite often meeting Henry after substantial gains, Roberts never stopped fighting to limit additional yardage
These individual performances highlight the chess match between coaching staffs as they attempted to create favorable matchups throughout the contest.
Never-Ending Efforts: Bright Spots in Defeat
Despite the loss, several aspects of Pittsburgh’s performance merit recognition:
- Russell Wilson’s efficiency demonstrated his continued value when provided adequate protection
- George Pickens’ development as a primary receiving threat shows promise for Pittsburgh’s passing game
- Corliss Waitman’s punting excellence helped the Steelers maintain some field position advantage
- Third-quarter adjustments showcased the coaching staff’s ability to identify and address issues mid-game
- Red-zone efficiency (2-for-3) indicated that when Pittsburgh did create opportunities, they capitalized
However, these contributions ultimately couldn’t overcome the fundamental imbalance in offensive approach between the two teams.
FAQs: Deeper Understanding
Who was the standout player of the match?
Derrick Henry undoubtedly earned standout status with his dominant 186-yard, 2-touchdown performance. Averaging over 7 yards per carry against a traditionally stout Steelers defense, Henry’s punishing running style became the game’s defining feature. His performance is particularly impressive considering Pittsburgh’s historical reputation for strong run defense.
What made Henry’s performance special wasn’t just the raw numbers but how he accumulated them—consistently breaking tackles, finding cutback lanes, and wearing down defenders as the game progressed. His ability to gain positive yardage even when initial holes weren’t available demonstrated his elite vision and patience. In the fourth quarter, when Baltimore needed to control the clock, Henry remained effective despite Pittsburgh knowing runs were coming, the ultimate testament to a runner’s dominance.
How did the Steelers perform in the passing game?
Despite the loss, the Steelers’ passing attack showed considerable promise. Russell Wilson completed 69% of his passes for 270 yards and 2 touchdowns without an interception, earning an impressive 121.3 passer rating. This efficiency indicates Wilson remains capable of high-level quarterback play when given adequate protection.
The receiving corps showed depth and versatility, with George Pickens (5 catches, 87 yards, TD) emerging as a legitimate number one option while Van Jefferson, Mike Williams, and Calvin Austin III all contributed significant receptions. The distribution across nine different receivers demonstrates Wilson’s willingness to work through progressions rather than locking onto primary targets.
However, this aerial success was undermined by a complete lack of balance. Pittsburgh’s inability to establish any rushing threat (29 total yards) made them predictable in key situations, particularly on third downs where they converted just 38% of opportunities. This one-dimensionality ultimately prevented a successful comeback despite Wilson’s efficient passing.
What tactical adjustments defined the game’s flow?
Several crucial adjustments influenced how this game unfolded:
- Baltimore’s early commitment to establishing Henry set up everything else in their game plan. By the second quarter, Pittsburgh was committing additional defenders to stop the run, creating favorable passing situations.
- Pittsburgh’s third-quarter tempo increase caught Baltimore temporarily off-guard. By using no-huddle offense, the Steelers prevented the Ravens from making situational substitutions, creating mismatches in coverage.
- Baltimore’s counter-adjustment to Pittsburgh’s tempo involved simplifying defensive calls and relying more on base personnel packages capable of defending both run and pass.
- Pittsburgh’s increased use of pre-snap motion in the third quarter helped Wilson identify coverage and created clearer reads against Baltimore’s secondary.
- Baltimore’s fourth-quarter commitment to ball control rather than additional scoring opportunities demonstrated situational awareness and game management expertise.
These tactical chess moves highlight the sophisticated planning and in-game adjustments that define modern NFL coaching.
What historical context makes this rivalry special?
The Ravens-Steelers rivalry represents one of the NFL’s most physical and compelling matchups for several reasons:
- Divisional implications – These games often determine AFC North supremacy and playoff positioning
- Defensive tradition – Both franchises built their identities around physical, intimidating defenses
- Stylistic similarities – Both teams traditionally emphasize physical running games and strong front-seven play
- Star power – The rivalry has featured Hall of Fame caliber players on both sides throughout its history
- Close contests – Prior to this relatively one-sided affair, most recent matchups had been decided by one score
This historical context adds significance to Baltimore’s convincing victory, potentially signaling a power shift within the division. While Pittsburgh has often held the upper hand in this rivalry historically, Baltimore’s current roster construction and performance in this game suggest they may have established a new competitive advantage in this storied matchup.
What does this performance indicate about both teams’ playoff prospects?
This game provided valuable insights regarding both teams’ postseason potential:
For Baltimore, the convincing victory reinforces their status as legitimate contenders. Their formula—controlling games through a dominant rushing attack complemented by efficient passing and opportunistic defense—has historically translated well to playoff football. The addition of Derrick Henry gives them a physical dimension that can succeed even in adverse weather conditions or against elite defenses. If they can maintain this balanced approach, Baltimore appears well-positioned for January success.
For Pittsburgh, the loss exposes concerning weaknesses that must be addressed before they can be considered serious contenders. The complete inability to establish a rushing attack makes their offense too predictable against quality defenses. Similarly, their struggles to contain Baltimore’s ground game raise questions about their ability to compete against physical teams in winter conditions. While Russell Wilson’s efficient passing provides hope, Pittsburgh needs significantly more balance to threaten top AFC teams in potential playoff matchups.
Also Check:
- Manchester United F.C. Vs Brentford F.C. Timeline
- West Ham Vs A.F.C. Bournemouth Timeline
- Feyenoord Vs Bayer Leverkusen Lineups
- Nottingham Forest Vs Aston Villa Lineups Timeline
- Newcastle United F.C. Vs Liverpool F.C. Timeline
- Chivas de Guadalajara vs Club America Lineups
- Brazil National Football Team vs Argentina National Football Team Lineups
- Dallas Cowboys Vs Philadelphia Eagles Match Player Stats
Conclusion: Divergent Paths Forward
This matchup between the Baltimore Ravens and Pittsburgh Steelers revealed much about where these franchises currently stand. The Ravens demonstrated why they’re considered legitimate contenders, showcasing a complete team built around a devastating ground game, efficient passing, and opportunistic defense. Their balanced approach and ability to control games through physical dominance provides a template for postseason success.
For the Steelers, this defeat highlights concerning issues that require immediate attention. Despite Russell Wilson’s efficient passing performance, the complete inability to establish any running game created a one-dimensional attack that proved insufficient against a quality opponent. Defensively, their front seven’s struggles against the run raise questions about their ability to compete against physical teams.
The 28-14 final score serves as both validation for Baltimore’s offseason strategy and a wake-up call for Pittsburgh. The addition of Derrick Henry has transformed Baltimore’s already potent ground game into an almost unstoppable force when paired with Lamar Jackson’s dual-threat capabilities. Meanwhile, Pittsburgh must find ways to create more balance offensively while improving their run defense if they hope to remain competitive in the AFC North.
As this storied rivalry continues to evolve, both teams leave this matchup with clear evidence of their strengths and weaknesses. Baltimore can build on this dominant performance as they pursue championship aspirations, while Pittsburgh returns to the drawing board with tangible goals for improvement. In the NFL’s most physical division, this game serves as another reminder that balanced, physical football still provides the most reliable path to success.
