Carolina Panthers vs Los Angeles Rams Match Player Stats
The carolina panthers vs los angeles rams match player stats from the January 11, 2026 NFC Wild Card Playoffs tell the story of one of the most competitive postseason games of the season. The Los Angeles Rams defeated the Carolina Panthers 34-31, but the final score alone does not explain how evenly the game developed. Both teams scored 17 points in the second half, while Carolina produced a strong response after entering halftime behind 17-14.
For readers studying the box score, the most important detail is that this was not simply a game won by one dominant statistical category. The Rams combined 304 passing yards from Matthew Stafford with 116 rushing yards as a team, while the Panthers generated 264 passing yards from Bryce Young and 83 rushing yards on the ground. Los Angeles also received a major receiving performance from Puka Nacua, while Carolina’s Jalen Coker delivered one of the most productive individual performances of the game.
The result came down to execution across several areas rather than a huge statistical gap. Los Angeles finished with 34 points, Carolina finished with 31, and both teams produced 17 points after halftime. That balance makes this matchup particularly useful for understanding how individual player production translates into a close playoff result.
Carolina Panthers vs Los Angeles Rams Match Player Stats: Game Overview
The matchup took place on January 11, 2026, in the NFC Wild Card Playoffs. The Rams entered the game with a 12-5 record, including a 5-4 mark away from home. Carolina entered at 8-9 and had a 5-3 home record.
The final score was:
| Team | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | Final |
| Los Angeles Rams | 7 | 10 | 3 | 14 | 34 |
| Carolina Panthers | 0 | 14 | 3 | 14 | 31 |
The scoring pattern immediately shows why the game was so competitive.
Los Angeles controlled the opening quarter, taking a 7-0 lead. Carolina answered strongly in the second quarter with 14 points, but the Rams also scored 10 to maintain a three-point halftime advantage.
The third quarter was quiet offensively, with each team scoring only three points. That left the Rams ahead 20-17 entering the final quarter.
The fourth quarter then became the decisive period. Both teams scored 14 points, but the Rams retained their three-point advantage and finished with the 34-31 victory.
From an analytical perspective, the quarter-by-quarter scoring is important because it shows that Carolina did not collapse late. The Panthers matched Los Angeles in second-half scoring. The difference was the Rams’ ability to establish a lead earlier and preserve it through the final stages.
Matthew Stafford’s Passing Performance
Matthew Stafford was the Rams’ passing leader and one of the central figures in the game.
His passing line was:
| Statistic | Matthew Stafford |
| Completions | 24 |
| Attempts | 42 |
| Completion rate | 57.1% |
| Passing yards | 304 |
| Average | 7.2 yards |
| Touchdowns | 3 |
| Interceptions | 1 |
| Sacks | 1 for 9 yards |
| QBR | 48.7 |
| Passer rating | 93.8 |
Stafford completed 24 of 42 attempts for 304 yards and three touchdowns. His 7.2 yards per attempt indicates that the Rams were able to generate meaningful yardage through the passing game rather than relying exclusively on short completions.
The three touchdown passes were particularly important because Carolina’s offense was productive enough to score 31 points. In a three-point playoff game, touchdown efficiency becomes extremely valuable.
Stafford was not perfect. He threw one interception and was sacked once for a nine-yard loss. His completion percentage was also just over 57 percent. However, the overall production still gave Los Angeles a significant passing contribution.
The 304 passing yards are especially notable because the Rams’ total rushing production was 116 yards. That combination meant Los Angeles could remain productive without becoming one-dimensional.
Bryce Young’s Passing Performance
Bryce Young led the Panthers through the air and finished with 264 passing yards.
His statistical line was:
| Statistic | Bryce Young |
| Completions | 21 |
| Attempts | 40 |
| Completion rate | 52.5% |
| Passing yards | 264 |
| Average | 6.6 yards |
| Touchdowns | 1 |
| Interceptions | 1 |
| Sacks | 2 for 14 yards |
| QBR | 71.4 |
| Passer rating | 71.2 |
Young completed 21 of 40 attempts and averaged 6.6 yards per attempt. He threw one touchdown and one interception.
The Panthers quarterback was pressured more heavily than Stafford based on the supplied sack statistics. Young was sacked twice for a combined 14 yards, while Stafford was sacked once for nine yards.
That difference is small in absolute terms, but in a one-score playoff game, negative plays can have an outsized effect. A sack can remove valuable field position, increase the difficulty of the next play and potentially push an offense out of scoring range.
Young’s 264 passing yards were still a significant contribution. Carolina’s offensive production was not based solely on its running game. The Panthers moved the ball effectively enough to score 31 points, and their passing attack remained productive throughout the contest.
Passing Comparison: Stafford vs Young
A direct comparison provides a useful snapshot of the quarterback battle.
| Category | Matthew Stafford | Bryce Young |
| Completions | 24 | 21 |
| Attempts | 42 | 40 |
| Yards | 304 | 264 |
| Yards per attempt | 7.2 | 6.6 |
| Touchdowns | 3 | 1 |
| Interceptions | 1 | 1 |
| Sacks | 1 | 2 |
| Sack yards | 9 | 14 |
| QBR | 48.7 | 71.4 |
| Passer rating | 93.8 | 71.2 |
Stafford held the advantage in passing yards, touchdowns, yards per attempt and passer rating.
Young, however, produced enough offense to keep Carolina within one possession throughout the game. His 264 passing yards combined with the Panthers’ rushing production helped create a 31-point offensive total.
One of the most important distinctions is touchdown production. Stafford threw three touchdown passes compared with one from Young. In a 34-31 game, that difference is highly relevant.
Kyren Williams and the Rams Running Game
Kyren Williams led the Rams in rushing with 13 carries for 57 yards.
His rushing line was:
| Statistic | Kyren Williams |
| Carries | 13 |
| Rushing yards | 57 |
| Average | 4.4 yards |
| Touchdowns | 0 |
| Longest run | 8 yards |
Williams averaged 4.4 yards per carry and produced 57 yards on 13 attempts.
The Rams as a team recorded 29 carries for 116 yards, an average of 4.0 yards per carry. The team also recorded one rushing touchdown.
This is an important part of the overall offensive picture. Los Angeles did not need a massive individual rushing performance because the passing attack carried much of the yardage burden.
Williams’ 57 yards represented a meaningful portion of the Rams’ rushing output, but the larger story is balance. Los Angeles finished with 116 rushing yards and 304 passing yards, giving the offense multiple ways to move the football.
Chuba Hubbard Leads Carolina’s Ground Game
Chuba Hubbard was the Panthers’ rushing leader.
His line included:
| Statistic | Chuba Hubbard |
| Carries | 13 |
| Rushing yards | 46 |
| Average | 3.5 yards |
| Touchdowns | 2 |
| Longest run | 8 yards |
Hubbard carried the ball 13 times for 46 yards and scored two touchdowns.
His average of 3.5 yards per carry was lower than Williams’ 4.4, but Hubbard made a major impact in the most valuable area of rushing production: touchdowns.
Carolina finished with 22 team rushing attempts for 83 yards, averaging 3.8 yards per carry. The Panthers scored three rushing touchdowns as a team.
That is a significant detail. Although Carolina gained fewer rushing yards than Los Angeles, the Panthers were highly productive when it came to converting rushing opportunities into touchdowns.
Rushing Comparison
The rushing numbers show two different forms of offensive value.
| Category | Rams | Panthers |
| Team carries | 29 | 22 |
| Team rushing yards | 116 | 83 |
| Average | 4.0 | 3.8 |
| Team rushing touchdowns | 1 | 3 |
| Leading rusher | Kyren Williams | Chuba Hubbard |
| Leading rusher yards | 57 | 46 |
The Rams had the clear advantage in rushing volume and yardage.
Los Angeles carried the ball seven more times and gained 33 more rushing yards. The Panthers, however, produced three rushing touchdowns compared with one for the Rams.
That contrast illustrates why yardage alone cannot explain the game. Carolina was more efficient at turning rushing production into touchdowns, while Los Angeles generated more total rushing yardage.
Puka Nacua’s 111-Yard Receiving Performance
Puka Nacua was the Rams’ leading receiver and one of the game’s most productive offensive players.
His receiving statistics were:
| Statistic | Puka Nacua |
| Receptions | 10 |
| Targets | 18 |
| Receiving yards | 111 |
| Average | 11.1 yards |
| Touchdowns | 1 |
| Longest reception | 18 yards |
Nacua caught 10 passes for 111 yards and a touchdown on 18 targets.
The 18 targets stand out immediately. Stafford consistently looked toward Nacua, and the receiver responded with double-digit receptions and more than 100 receiving yards.
His 11.1 yards per reception also shows that his production was not purely based on very short throws. Nacua averaged more than 11 yards every time he made a catch.
The touchdown was another crucial contribution in a game decided by three points.
Nacua’s performance also helps explain how Stafford reached 304 passing yards. The Rams quarterback had a clear high-volume receiving option capable of producing both first downs and scoring plays.
Jalen Coker’s Breakout Performance for Carolina
Jalen Coker produced the highest receiving yardage total among the Panthers’ listed players.
His line was:
| Statistic | Jalen Coker |
| Receptions | 9 |
| Targets | 12 |
| Receiving yards | 134 |
| Average | 14.9 yards |
| Touchdowns | 1 |
| Longest reception | 52 yards |
Coker caught nine passes for 134 yards and one touchdown.
His 14.9 yards per reception was higher than Nacua’s 11.1, and his longest reception went for 52 yards. That explosive play ability gave Carolina a major source of offensive upside.
Coker’s nine receptions also accounted for a substantial portion of Young’s 21 completions.
The numbers suggest that Coker was not simply a secondary contributor. He was one of the main engines of the Panthers’ passing attack.
In a close playoff game, a 134-yard receiving performance deserves particular attention because it shows that Carolina had the ability to create explosive offensive plays even while facing a strong Rams team.
Receiving Comparison: Nacua vs Coker
The two leading receivers produced excellent statistical performances, but their profiles were slightly different.
| Category | Puka Nacua | Jalen Coker |
| Receptions | 10 | 9 |
| Targets | 18 | 12 |
| Receiving yards | 111 | 134 |
| Average | 11.1 | 14.9 |
| Touchdowns | 1 | 1 |
| Longest reception | 18 | 52 |
Nacua caught one more pass and received six more targets.
Coker gained 23 more yards despite seeing fewer targets. His 52-yard longest reception was also much more explosive than Nacua’s longest catch of 18 yards.
This is one of the most interesting comparisons in the box score. Nacua provided consistent volume, while Coker delivered greater average production and a much bigger explosive play.
Both receivers scored once, making their contributions directly relevant to the final result.
Carolina’s Receiving Team Production
The Panthers completed 21 passes for 264 yards.
Their receiving team total was:
| Category | Panthers |
| Receptions | 21 |
| Receiving yards | 264 |
| Average | 12.6 yards |
| Touchdowns | 1 |
| Longest reception | 52 yards |
| Targets | 37 |
The 12.6-yard average per reception is a healthy figure and reflects Carolina’s ability to create meaningful gains through the air.
The 52-yard longest reception also shows that the Panthers had explosive-play potential.
However, the team completed only 21 of 40 pass attempts, which resulted in a completion rate of 52.5 percent. That combination suggests a passing attack capable of creating big gains but not consistently converting every attempt into a completion.
Rams Receiving Team Production
The Rams finished with:
| Category | Rams |
| Receptions | 24 |
| Receiving yards | 304 |
| Average | 12.7 yards |
| Touchdowns | 3 |
| Longest reception | 36 yards |
| Targets | 42 |
The Rams had three more receptions than Carolina and 40 more receiving yards.
The average per reception was almost identical between the two teams, with Los Angeles at 12.7 yards and Carolina at 12.6.
The major difference was touchdown production. Los Angeles recorded three receiving touchdowns compared with one for Carolina.
That four-touchdown difference across the two passing games was not present, of course, because the Rams’ overall touchdown production included their passing scores, while Carolina also generated three rushing touchdowns. Still, Stafford’s ability to finish passing opportunities with touchdowns was a key distinction.
Defensive Production
The defensive statistics also show a relatively close contest.
| Category | Rams Defense | Panthers Defense |
| Total tackles | 58 | 68 |
| Solo tackles | 35 | 41 |
| Sacks | 2 | 1 |
| Tackles for loss | 3 | 2 |
| Passes defended | 6 | 8 |
| QB hits | 8 | 6 |
Carolina recorded more total tackles and solo tackles, while Los Angeles produced more sacks and quarterback hits.
The Rams had 58 total tackles compared with 68 for the Panthers. That does not automatically mean Carolina played better defense. A higher tackle total can reflect how often an opponent completes plays and how many defensive opportunities are created.
Los Angeles recorded two sacks and eight quarterback hits. Carolina produced one sack and six quarterback hits.
The pressure statistics therefore lean toward the Rams, particularly because quarterback pressure can influence offensive efficiency without always appearing as a turnover.
Turnovers and Ball Security
Each team recorded one interception.
Cobie Durant intercepted a pass for the Rams and returned it 11 yards without scoring.
Mike Jackson recorded an interception for Carolina and had no return yardage.
The turnover comparison was therefore balanced in terms of interceptions.
The supplied fumble information adds another detail. Troy Reeder was listed with zero fumbles and zero lost fumbles for the Rams, while the Rams recovered one team fumble.
For Carolina, Trevor Etienne was credited with one fumble that was lost, and the Panthers recovered zero fumbles.
That lost fumble represents another form of possession risk. In a three-point game, every turnover can become more important because the margin for error is small.
Special Teams Production
Special teams also contributed to the overall statistical profile.
For Los Angeles, Ronnie Rivers recorded three kick returns for 73 yards, averaging 24.3 yards per return. His longest return went 29 yards.
Carolina’s kick return team recorded five returns for 107 yards, averaging 21.4 yards per return. Trevor Etienne had three returns for 63 yards, while Xavier Legette had two returns for 44 yards.
The Panthers therefore had greater total kick return volume and yardage, but the Rams had the better average per return.
On punt returns, Xavier Smith recorded one return for minus two yards for Los Angeles. Trevor Etienne had one punt return for zero yards for Carolina.
These numbers did not produce a major statistical advantage for either team, but they show that field-position opportunities existed throughout the game.
Kicking Comparison
The kicking performance was perfect for both teams based on the supplied statistics.
Harrison Mevis went 2-for-2 on field goals and 4-for-4 on extra points, scoring 10 points for Los Angeles. His longest field goal was 46 yards.
Ryan Fitzgerald went 1-for-1 on field goals and 4-for-4 on extra points, scoring seven points for Carolina. His longest field goal was also 46 yards.
| Kicking Statistic | Harrison Mevis | Ryan Fitzgerald |
| Field goals | 2/2 | 1/1 |
| Field goal percentage | 100% | 100% |
| Longest FG | 46 yards | 46 yards |
| Extra points | 4/4 | 4/4 |
| Total points | 10 | 7 |
Neither kicker missed an attempt.
That reliability matters because both teams were able to convert their available kicking opportunities.
Punting Numbers
The Rams used Ethan Evans as their punter.
Evans recorded four punts for 182 yards, averaging 45.5 yards per punt. He placed three punts inside the 20-yard line, with a longest punt of 52 yards.
Sam Martin handled punting for Carolina and recorded three punts for 163 yards. His average was 54.3 yards per punt, with three punts inside the 20 and a longest punt of 58 yards.
Martin had the higher average and longer maximum punt, while Evans had one additional punt.
Both punters recorded three punts inside the 20, making the inside-the-20 statistic identical.
What the Score Distribution Reveals
The quarter-by-quarter numbers are among the most useful pieces of the entire box score.
Los Angeles scored 7 points in the first quarter, 10 in the second, 3 in the third and 14 in the fourth.
Carolina scored 0 in the first, 14 in the second, 3 in the third and 14 in the fourth.
This means:
Rams first half: 17 points
Rams second half: 17 points
Panthers first half: 14 points
Panthers second half: 17 points
The Rams were consistent across halves, scoring exactly 17 points in each.
Carolina improved after a scoreless opening quarter and then matched Los Angeles in second-half scoring.
That is an important distinction. The Panthers did not lose because they were completely outplayed in the second half. Instead, the Rams’ early advantage proved significant because both teams finished the second half with identical 17-point totals.
The Most Important Statistical Differences
When reviewing the carolina panthers vs los angeles rams match player stats, several differences stand above the rest.
1. Stafford produced three passing touchdowns
Stafford threw three touchdown passes, while Young threw one.
That was the clearest quarterback production advantage.
2. The Rams gained more total rushing yardage
Los Angeles ran for 116 yards compared with 83 for Carolina.
The Rams also averaged 4.0 yards per carry compared with 3.8 for the Panthers.
3. Carolina had more rushing touchdowns
The Panthers scored three rushing touchdowns, while Los Angeles scored one.
This helped Carolina compensate for its lower rushing yardage.
4. Coker created explosive receiving production
Jalen Coker gained 134 yards and averaged 14.9 yards per reception.
His 52-yard longest catch was one of the most explosive plays represented in the supplied statistics.
5. Nacua provided volume and consistency
Puka Nacua caught 10 passes on 18 targets for 111 yards and a touchdown.
His heavy target volume made him a central component of the Rams passing game.
6. Rams pressure was slightly stronger
Los Angeles recorded two sacks and eight quarterback hits.
Carolina recorded one sack and six quarterback hits.
7. The game was decided by only three points
The final margin was 34-31.
That makes every scoring opportunity, turnover, sack and explosive play more meaningful than it would be in a comfortable win.
Why the Rams Won Despite Carolina’s Strong Offensive Response
The final score provides the simplest explanation: Los Angeles scored 34 points and Carolina scored 31.
The deeper explanation comes from how those points were accumulated.
The Rams established a 7-0 first-quarter advantage. Carolina responded with 14 points in the second quarter, but Los Angeles scored 10 and carried a 17-14 lead into halftime.
Both teams then scored three points in the third quarter.
In the fourth, both teams scored 14.
That means the Rams’ three-point halftime lead survived a second half in which neither side gained an advantage on the scoreboard.
This is an important lesson from close games. A team does not necessarily need to dominate the final two quarters to win. Establishing an advantage early can be just as important when the opponent is capable of matching the scoring pace later.
A Practical Way to Read This Box Score
Readers often look at the final score first and then search for the player with the most yards. A better approach is to examine the game in layers.
First, look at scoring.
The Rams won 34-31.
Second, compare quarterback efficiency and production.
Stafford produced 304 yards and three touchdowns. Young produced 264 yards and one touchdown.
Third, examine the rushing balance.
Los Angeles gained 116 yards. Carolina gained 83.
Fourth, identify the biggest receiving contributors.
Nacua produced 111 yards and one touchdown. Coker produced 134 yards and one touchdown.
Fifth, examine defensive pressure and turnovers.
The Rams produced two sacks and one interception. The Panthers produced one sack and one interception.
Finally, examine the scoring by quarter.
That final step explains why the game remained close even though Los Angeles had several statistical advantages.
What the Player Statistics Tell Us About Carolina
Carolina’s numbers show a team capable of competing offensively.
Young threw for 264 yards, Coker gained 134 receiving yards, and Hubbard scored two rushing touchdowns. The Panthers also scored 31 points.
The team produced 83 rushing yards and 264 passing yards.
The biggest concern from the supplied numbers is consistency in the passing game. Young completed 21 of 40 attempts, while the Panthers also surrendered two sacks.
At the same time, Carolina generated explosive receiving production and three rushing touchdowns.
The result is a statistical profile that looks much more competitive than the final three-point margin might suggest.
What the Player Statistics Tell Us About Los Angeles
The Rams showed strong offensive balance.
Stafford threw for 304 yards and three touchdowns. Williams contributed 57 rushing yards, while the team produced 116 rushing yards overall.
Nacua was a major receiving threat with 111 yards and a touchdown.
The Rams also created slightly more quarterback pressure, recording two sacks and eight quarterback hits.
The most important strength was the ability to score 17 points in each half.
That consistency allowed Los Angeles to absorb Carolina’s second-quarter comeback and still finish with the victory.
Key Takeaways for Fans and Analysts
The most useful takeaways from the game include:
- Los Angeles won 34-31 in the NFC Wild Card Playoffs.
- Matthew Stafford passed for 304 yards and three touchdowns.
- Bryce Young passed for 264 yards and one touchdown.
- Kyren Williams led Rams rushing with 57 yards.
- Chuba Hubbard led Panthers rushing with 46 yards and two touchdowns.
- Puka Nacua caught 10 passes for 111 yards and one touchdown.
- Jalen Coker caught nine passes for 134 yards and one touchdown.
- The Rams produced 116 rushing yards.
- The Panthers produced 83 rushing yards.
- Los Angeles recorded two sacks and eight quarterback hits.
- Carolina recorded one sack and six quarterback hits.
- Each team recorded one interception.
- Both teams scored 17 points in the second half.
- The final margin was three points.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who won the Panthers vs Rams game?
The Los Angeles Rams defeated the Carolina Panthers 34-31 in the NFC Wild Card Playoffs on January 11, 2026.
How many passing yards did Matthew Stafford have?
Matthew Stafford completed 24 of 42 passes for 304 yards, three touchdowns and one interception.
How many passing yards did Bryce Young have?
Bryce Young completed 21 of 40 passes for 264 yards, one touchdown and one interception.
Who was the Rams’ leading receiver?
Puka Nacua led the Rams with 10 receptions for 111 yards and one touchdown.
Who was the Panthers’ leading receiver?
Jalen Coker led Carolina with nine receptions for 134 yards and one touchdown.
Who led the Rams in rushing?
Kyren Williams led Los Angeles with 13 carries for 57 yards, averaging 4.4 yards per carry.
Conclusion
The carolina panthers vs los angeles rams match player stats show a playoff game decided by narrow margins rather than overwhelming statistical dominance.
Los Angeles had the stronger passing production, with Matthew Stafford throwing for 304 yards and three touchdowns. The Rams also gained 116 rushing yards and received a major contribution from Puka Nacua, who finished with 111 receiving yards and a touchdown.
Carolina answered with its own standout performances. Bryce Young threw for 264 yards, Jalen Coker produced 134 receiving yards, and Chuba Hubbard scored two rushing touchdowns. The Panthers also scored 31 points and matched the Rams with 17 second-half points.
The defensive numbers were similarly competitive. Los Angeles recorded two sacks, six passes defended and eight quarterback hits, while Carolina registered one sack, eight passes defended and six quarterback hits. Each team intercepted one pass.
Ultimately, the deciding factor was the Rams’ ability to establish an early advantage and maintain it. Los Angeles led 17-14 at halftime, and neither team gained an advantage in second-half scoring because both scored 17 points.
For anyone studying the game beyond the final score, the box score provides a clear example of why football statistics need context. Yardage, touchdowns, quarterback efficiency, explosive receptions, rushing production, pressure and scoring distribution all contribute to the story. In this case, the Rams combined enough advantages across those categories to finish with a 34-31 postseason victory.
