Seahawks vs Los Angeles Rams Match Player Stats
The Seahawks vs Los Angeles Rams match player stats tell the story of one of the most exciting NFC Championship games of the 2025 NFL season. Played on January 26, 2026, the Seattle Seahawks defeated the Los Angeles Rams 31 to 27, securing the NFC title after a back-and-forth battle filled with explosive passing plays, clutch touchdowns, and standout individual performances.
Rather than being decided by a single moment, this matchup showcased how elite quarterback play, efficient receiving corps, disciplined defensive execution, and ball security shaped the outcome. Both teams entered the game with impressive regular-season records, and the statistics reflected why they had reached the conference championship. From Sam Darnold’s composed performance under pressure to Matthew Stafford’s remarkable passing display, nearly every offensive drive carried significance.
This article takes a detailed look at every major statistical category, highlights the top performers, explains what the numbers reveal beyond the box score, and breaks down how Seattle earned its place in the Super Bowl.
Match Overview
| Category | Result |
| Event | NFC Championship |
| Date | January 26, 2026 |
| Venue | Seattle Seahawks Home Field |
| Final Score | Seattle Seahawks 31, Los Angeles Rams 27 |
| Seahawks Record | 14-3 (6-2 Home) |
| Rams Record | 12-5 (5-4 Away) |
The game featured momentum swings throughout the first three quarters. Seattle established an early lead, Los Angeles answered before halftime, and both offenses traded touchdowns during an exciting third quarter. Neither team scored in the fourth quarter, making every earlier possession even more valuable.
Seattle’s ability to protect the football ultimately proved to be one of the biggest differences between the two teams.
Seahawks vs Los Angeles Rams Match Player Stats Breakdown
The Seahawks vs Los Angeles Rams match player stats reveal an evenly matched contest where both offenses produced impressive numbers. Seattle finished with a balanced attack, while Los Angeles relied heavily on explosive passing plays to remain competitive.
Final Team Statistics
| Category | Seahawks | Rams |
| Final Score | 31 | 27 |
| Passing Yards | 346 | 374 |
| Passing TD | 3 | 3 |
| Team Rushing Yards | 75 | 114 |
| Team Rushing TD | 1 | 0 |
| Total Receiving Yards | 346 | 374 |
| Fumbles | 2 | 4 |
| Fumbles Lost | 0 | 1 |
| Sacks Made | 1 | 3 |
| Interceptions | 0 | 0 |
At first glance, the Rams actually generated more offensive yardage through both the air and on the ground. However, Seattle made fewer costly mistakes and converted its scoring opportunities more effectively.
Quarter-by-Quarter Analysis
First Quarter
| Team | Points |
| Seahawks | 10 |
| Rams | 3 |
Seattle immediately controlled the pace of the game. Early offensive efficiency allowed the Seahawks to build a seven-point advantage while the defense prevented the Rams from sustaining multiple scoring drives.
Second Quarter
| Team | Points |
| Seahawks | 7 |
| Rams | 10 |
Los Angeles responded with aggressive downfield passing. Matthew Stafford began finding open receivers consistently, allowing the Rams to reduce Seattle’s lead before halftime.
Third Quarter
| Team | Points |
| Seahawks | 14 |
| Rams | 14 |
The third quarter became an offensive showcase. Both quarterbacks threw accurately, receivers created explosive plays, and each team matched the other’s scoring output.
Fourth Quarter
Neither offense managed to score during the final period.
Although points disappeared from the scoreboard, defensive intensity increased dramatically. Every possession became more valuable as Seattle protected its narrow lead until the final whistle.
Quarterback Performance Analysis
Quarterback play defined this championship matchup. Both starters delivered performances worthy of an NFC Championship game.
Sam Darnold Performance
| Statistic | Value |
| Completions | 25 |
| Attempts | 36 |
| Passing Yards | 346 |
| Touchdowns | 3 |
| Interceptions | 0 |
| Sacks Taken | 3 |
| Sack Yards Lost | 25 |
| QBR | 82.8 |
| Passer Rating | 127.8 |
Sam Darnold displayed confidence from the opening drive. He spread the football across multiple receiving options while avoiding risky throws that could have shifted momentum.
Three touchdown passes without an interception demonstrated efficient decision-making throughout the game. Even after absorbing three sacks, Darnold remained composed and consistently delivered accurate throws in key situations.
Perhaps the most impressive aspect of his performance was his ability to protect possession. In a championship environment where one turnover can determine the winner, finishing with zero interceptions proved invaluable.
Matthew Stafford Performance
| Statistic | Value |
| Completions | 22 |
| Attempts | 35 |
| Passing Yards | 374 |
| Touchdowns | 3 |
| Interceptions | 0 |
| Sacks Taken | 1 |
| Sack Yards Lost | 9 |
| QBR | 82.8 |
| Passer Rating | 127.6 |
Matthew Stafford produced one of his strongest performances of the season.
His 374 passing yards led all players, and his ability to stretch Seattle’s secondary kept the Rams within striking distance throughout the contest.
Despite throwing for more yards than Darnold, Stafford’s effort ultimately fell just short because Los Angeles failed to capitalize on every opportunity. His stat line remains outstanding, especially considering he completed three touchdown passes without committing a turnover.
Comparing the Quarterbacks
| Category | Sam Darnold | Matthew Stafford |
| Passing Yards | 346 | 374 |
| Passing TD | 3 | 3 |
| Interceptions | 0 | 0 |
| Passer Rating | 127.8 | 127.6 |
| QBR | 82.8 | 82.8 |
The comparison shows just how evenly matched the quarterbacks were.
Stafford generated slightly more yardage, while Darnold finished with the marginally higher passer rating. Neither quarterback threw an interception, making this one of the cleanest championship passing performances in recent memory.
Running Game Analysis
Although passing dominated the headlines, the rushing attacks still played meaningful roles.
Seattle Seahawks Rushing Statistics
Kenneth Walker III led Seattle’s ground game.
| Statistic | Value |
| Carries | 19 |
| Rushing Yards | 62 |
| Touchdowns | 1 |
| Long Run | 11 |
Walker consistently gained difficult yards between the tackles. His rushing touchdown added an important scoring dimension to Seattle’s offense, even though the team’s overall rushing average remained modest.
Seattle finished with:
- 26 rushing attempts
- 75 rushing yards
- 2.9 yards per carry
- 1 rushing touchdown
While the numbers were not overwhelming, the Seahawks used the running game effectively to maintain offensive balance.
Los Angeles Rams Rushing Statistics
Blake Corum emerged as the Rams’ leading rusher.
| Statistic | Value |
| Carries | 9 |
| Rushing Yards | 55 |
| Average | 6.1 |
| Long Run | 19 |
Corum averaged more than six yards per carry, showing impressive efficiency despite receiving relatively few opportunities.
Overall, Los Angeles recorded:
- 22 rushing attempts
- 114 rushing yards
- 5.2 yards per carry
- No rushing touchdowns
From a pure statistical perspective, the Rams were more effective on the ground. However, Seattle converted its lone rushing touchdown, making its rushing production more impactful on the scoreboard.
What the Running Statistics Reveal
One interesting takeaway from the Seahawks vs Los Angeles Rams match player stats is that rushing efficiency did not directly determine the winner.
The Rams averaged significantly more yards per carry and accumulated more total rushing yards. Yet Seattle’s rushing touchdown, combined with mistake-free football, delivered greater overall value.
This illustrates an important lesson often seen in playoff football. Productive rushing numbers help, but converting drives into points and avoiding turnovers matter even more.
Receiving Leaders Shine
The passing game produced several remarkable individual performances.
Both teams featured receivers capable of changing the game with explosive catches, and each delivered on the biggest stage.
In the next section, we will examine the receiving leaders, defensive performances, special teams contributions, complete player-by-player statistical analysis, frequently asked questions, conclusion, meta description, and final publishing suggestions.
Wide Receiver Performances and Passing Game Impact
The receiving numbers from this championship matchup show why both offenses were able to move the ball consistently. The Seahawks vs Los Angeles Rams match player stats highlight two elite receiving performances that shaped the offensive battle.
Both teams finished with three receiving touchdowns, proving that their passing attacks were the primary source of scoring production.
Los Angeles Rams Receiving Statistics
Puka Nacua Dominates Seattle Secondary
Puka Nacua was the biggest offensive weapon for Los Angeles.
| Statistic | Value |
| Receptions | 9 |
| Receiving Yards | 165 |
| Touchdowns | 1 |
| Targets | 14 |
| Long Reception | 44 yards |
Nacua consistently created separation and became Matthew Stafford’s most reliable target. His 165 receiving yards were the highest among all players in the game.
The Rams frequently relied on him during important passing situations because he could win both underneath routes and deeper opportunities. His 44-yard reception demonstrated his ability to create explosive plays against a competitive Seattle secondary.
Other Rams Receiving Touchdowns
Los Angeles received additional scoring contributions from multiple players.
Davante Adams
| Statistic | Value |
| Receiving Touchdown | 1 |
| Touchdown Distance | 89 yards |
Adams provided one of the biggest plays of the game with an 89-yard touchdown reception. This type of explosive production showed the Rams’ ability to change momentum instantly.
Kyren Williams
| Statistic | Value |
| Receiving Touchdown | 1 |
| Touchdown Distance | 22 yards |
Williams added another touchdown through the passing game, giving Los Angeles three receiving scores.
Rams Team Receiving Numbers
| Category | Total |
| Receptions | 22 |
| Receiving Yards | 374 |
| Average | 17.0 |
| Receiving Touchdowns | 3 |
The Rams’ receiving group produced explosive efficiency. Averaging 17 yards per reception shows how aggressively Los Angeles attacked Seattle’s defense.
Seattle Seahawks Receiving Statistics
Jaxon Smith-Njigba Leads Seattle Attack
Seattle’s top receiving performer was Jaxon Smith-Njigba.
| Statistic | Value |
| Receptions | 10 |
| Receiving Yards | 153 |
| Touchdowns | 1 |
| Targets | 12 |
| Long Reception | 42 yards |
Smith-Njigba was the centerpiece of Seattle’s passing game. His ability to consistently gain yards after the catch helped the Seahawks maintain offensive rhythm.
His 10 receptions showed strong chemistry with Sam Darnold and demonstrated his importance in high-pressure situations.
Other Seahawks Receiving Touchdowns
Cooper Kupp
| Statistic | Value |
| Receiving Touchdown | 1 |
| Touchdown Distance | 36 yards |
Kupp contributed a crucial touchdown reception, adding championship experience and reliable hands to Seattle’s offense.
Jake Bobo
| Statistic | Value |
| Receiving Touchdown | 1 |
| Touchdown Distance | 17 yards |
Bobo’s touchdown provided another scoring option and showed Seattle’s ability to generate production beyond its primary targets.
Seahawks Team Receiving Numbers
| Category | Total |
| Receptions | 25 |
| Receiving Yards | 346 |
| Average | 13.8 |
| Receiving Touchdowns | 3 |
Seattle completed more receptions than Los Angeles, but the Rams generated more yards per catch due to their aggressive downfield approach.
Receiving Comparison
| Category | Seahawks | Rams |
| Receptions | 25 | 22 |
| Receiving Yards | 346 | 374 |
| Average Per Catch | 13.8 | 17.0 |
| Touchdowns | 3 | 3 |
The comparison shows two different offensive identities.
Seattle focused on volume and consistency. The Seahawks moved the chains through frequent completions.
The Rams focused on explosive opportunities. Their higher yards-per-reception average came from several major plays, including Davante Adams’ 89-yard touchdown.
Defensive Player Statistics
Championship games are often decided by defensive stops, turnovers, and pressure on the quarterback. While both offenses performed well, each defense had moments that influenced the final result.
Seattle Seahawks Defensive Performance
Ernest Jones IV led Seattle’s defense.
| Statistic | Value |
| Tackles | 8 |
Jones played an important role in limiting Los Angeles’ ability to create additional scoring opportunities.
Seattle’s defensive statistics:
| Category | Total |
| Total Tackles | 60 |
| Sacks | 1 |
| Tackles For Loss | 1 |
| Pass Deflections | 7 |
| QB Hits | 3 |
The Seahawks did not dominate statistically in terms of pressure, but they remained disciplined and prevented major mistakes.
Their secondary contributed seven pass deflections, helping limit some of Stafford’s opportunities despite his strong passing numbers.
Los Angeles Rams Defensive Performance
Omar Speights was the defensive leader for Los Angeles.
| Statistic | Value |
| Tackles | 11 |
| Tackles For Loss | 1 |
Speights consistently found himself around the football and helped slow Seattle’s offensive rhythm.
The Rams defense produced stronger pressure numbers:
| Category | Total |
| Total Tackles | 65 |
| Sacks | 3 |
| Tackles For Loss | 8 |
| Pass Deflections | 5 |
| QB Hits | 7 |
Los Angeles generated more disruption in the backfield, recording three sacks compared with Seattle’s one.
However, pressure alone was not enough because the Rams failed to create turnovers.
Turnover Battle: The Hidden Difference
One of the most important parts of the game was ball security.
| Category | Seahawks | Rams |
| Fumbles | 2 | 4 |
| Fumbles Lost | 0 | 1 |
| Interceptions Thrown | 0 | 0 |
The Rams committed four fumbles and lost one. Seattle also fumbled twice but recovered both.
In a four-point game, this difference mattered.
The Seahawks did not give away extra possessions, while Los Angeles created unnecessary risks that reduced its margin for error.
Special Teams Performance
Special teams often receives less attention than offense and defense, but championship games can be influenced by field position and kicking accuracy.
Rams Special Teams Statistics
Harrison Mevis Kicking
| Statistic | Value |
| Field Goals | 2/2 |
| Long Field Goal | 50 yards |
| Extra Points | 3/3 |
| Total Points | 9 |
Mevis delivered a perfect kicking performance and provided valuable points for Los Angeles.
Ethan Evans Punting
| Statistic | Value |
| Punts | 2 |
| Total Yards | 84 |
| Average | 42.0 |
| Inside 20 | 1 |
| Long Punt | 43 yards |
Los Angeles also received solid punting production.
Seahawks Special Teams Statistics
Jason Myers Kicking
| Statistic | Value |
| Field Goals | 1/1 |
| Long Field Goal | 27 yards |
| Extra Points | 4/4 |
| Total Points | 7 |
Myers converted every opportunity presented to him.
Michael Dickson Punting
| Statistic | Value |
| Punts | 5 |
| Total Yards | 226 |
| Average | 45.2 |
| Inside 20 | 5 |
| Long Punt | 56 yards |
Dickson’s ability to consistently pin Los Angeles deep was one of Seattle’s important field-position advantages.
Key Factors That Decided the Game
The box score shows two excellent teams, but several details separated Seattle from Los Angeles.
1. Seattle Protected the Football
The Seahawks avoided losing possession despite two fumbles.
The Rams generated more offensive yardage, but turnovers reduced the value of their production.
2. Seattle Converted Touchdowns Efficiently
Seattle scored 31 points from:
- Three passing touchdowns
- One rushing touchdown
- One field goal
The offense consistently turned opportunities into points.
3. Rams Explosive Plays Were Not Enough
Los Angeles created huge moments through players like Puka Nacua and Davante Adams.
However, explosive plays must be combined with consistent execution. The Rams struggled to maintain control after mistakes.
4. Field Position Favored Seattle
Michael Dickson’s five punts inside the 20-yard line helped Seattle control where the Rams started drives.
Field position does not always appear in basic statistics, but it can influence offensive decision-making throughout a game.
Lessons From the Matchup
The Seahawks vs Los Angeles Rams match player stats provide several important lessons about playoff football.
Balanced Offense Creates Stability
Seattle did not rely on one player. The Seahawks received production from:
- Sam Darnold through the passing game
- Kenneth Walker III on the ground
- Jaxon Smith-Njigba as a receiving leader
- Additional touchdown contributors
This balance made the offense harder to predict.
Passing Efficiency Matters More Than Volume
Matthew Stafford threw for more yards, but both quarterbacks finished with nearly identical efficiency ratings.
The difference came from how each team managed possessions.
Defensive Numbers Need Context
The Rams recorded more sacks and tackles, but Seattle’s defense made enough plays at important moments.
A defense does not always need dominant statistics. It needs timely stops.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who was the top passer in the Seahawks vs Los Angeles Rams match?
Matthew Stafford led the game in passing yards with 374 yards, completing 22 of 35 attempts with three touchdowns and no interceptions.
How did Sam Darnold perform against the Rams?
Sam Darnold completed 25 of 36 passes for 346 yards, three touchdowns, and no interceptions. He finished with a 127.8 passer rating.
Who was the leading receiver in the game?
Puka Nacua led all receivers with nine receptions for 165 yards and one touchdown. Jaxon Smith-Njigba led Seattle with 10 receptions for 153 yards and one touchdown.
Which team had the better rushing performance?
The Rams had more efficient rushing production, finishing with 114 yards on 22 carries. Seattle recorded 75 rushing yards on 26 attempts but scored one rushing touchdown.
Did either team record an interception?
No. Both quarterbacks finished the game without throwing an interception.
What was the biggest difference between the two teams?
Ball security was a major factor. The Rams had four fumbles and lost one, while Seattle had two fumbles but recovered both.
Conclusion
The Seahawks’ victory over the Rams was a complete team performance where efficiency, execution, and ball security mattered more than raw yardage totals. Both quarterbacks delivered outstanding performances, and both receiving groups produced championship-level plays.
The Rams showed impressive offensive firepower, especially through Matthew Stafford and Puka Nacua, while Seattle responded with balanced scoring, reliable quarterback play, and better possession control.
The final Seahawks vs Los Angeles Rams match player stats demonstrate how closely matched championship games can be. Small differences in turnovers, field position, and finishing drives often determine the outcome when two elite teams compete.
