Dallas Cowboys vs Chicago Bears Match Player Stats
The dallas cowboys vs chicago bears match player stats from September 21, 2025, tell a much deeper story than the 31-14 final score alone. Chicago controlled the game with four passing touchdowns from Caleb Williams, while Dallas struggled to turn its offensive production into points. The Cowboys moved the ball reasonably well, especially through the passing game and Javonte Williams on the ground, but three interceptions and a lost fumble created too many costly mistakes. Chicago, meanwhile, combined efficient passing, timely defensive plays, and strong field-position moments to build an early lead and protect it through the second half.
Dallas Cowboys vs Chicago Bears Match Player Stats
The final score was Chicago Bears 31, Dallas Cowboys 14. Dallas entered the game with a 1-2 record, while Chicago also moved to 1-2. The most important statistical difference was not simply total yardage. It was how efficiently each team converted its opportunities.
Dallas finished with 275 passing yards and 121 rushing yards, giving the Cowboys a substantial amount of offensive production. Chicago recorded 298 passing yards and 87 rushing yards.
That creates an interesting contrast.
Dallas actually produced more rushing yardage and accumulated respectable passing volume, but the Cowboys finished with only 14 points. Chicago generated 298 passing yards and scored 31 points because its passing attack produced four touchdowns without an interception.
The basic statistical picture is:
| Category | Dallas Cowboys | Chicago Bears |
| Final Score | 14 | 31 |
| Passing | 275 yards | 298 yards |
| Rushing | 121 yards | 87 yards |
| Passing TDs | 1 | 4 |
| Interceptions Thrown | 3 | 0 |
| Rushing TDs | 0 | 0 |
| Total Receiving Yards | 292 | 298 |
| Team Tackles | 60 | 77 |
| Sacks | 0 | 2 |
| QB Hits | 1 | 7 |
| Points | 14 | 31 |
The numbers show why box-score readers should avoid focusing on one category in isolation. Dallas had enough yardage to stay competitive statistically, but Chicago won the more important efficiency battle.
How the Game Developed
The quarter-by-quarter scoring provides an immediate explanation for the result.
Dallas scored:
- 3 points in the first quarter
- 11 points in the second quarter
- 0 points in the third quarter
- 0 points in the fourth quarter
Chicago scored:
- 14 points in the first quarter
- 10 points in the second quarter
- 7 points in the third quarter
- 0 points in the fourth quarter
Chicago therefore established a 14-3 lead after one quarter and extended it to 24-14 at halftime.
That early advantage mattered because Dallas never produced another point after halftime.
The Bears added seven points in the third quarter, pushing the margin to 31-14. Neither team scored in the fourth quarter, which meant Chicago could protect its lead without needing another scoring drive.
This scoring pattern is important when evaluating player performances. A player can accumulate yards after his team falls behind, but those yards do not necessarily indicate that the offense was operating efficiently when the game was still undecided.
First Quarter: Chicago Sets the Tone
The Bears opened with 14 points, while Dallas managed only three.
That immediately placed pressure on the Cowboys offense. Dallas had to spend much of the game attempting to close a deficit rather than operating from a comfortable game script.
Caleb Williams was especially important during this phase because Chicago’s passing attack was able to create scoring opportunities without giving the Cowboys defense extra possessions through interceptions.
Second Quarter: Dallas Responds, But Chicago Maintains Control
Dallas improved its scoring output in the second quarter, producing 11 points.
However, Chicago added another 10 points.
The result was a 24-14 halftime advantage for the Bears.
Dallas had not been completely shut down offensively. In fact, its passing and rushing numbers demonstrate that the offense was capable of moving the football. The problem was converting production into points while avoiding turnovers.
Second Half: Bears Protect the Advantage
Chicago added seven points in the third quarter.
Dallas failed to score in both the third and fourth quarters.
That is one of the clearest indicators of the game’s direction. Once Chicago reached a 31-14 lead, Dallas could not generate the sustained scoring response required to make the final period competitive.
Quarterback Stats and Passing Performance
Quarterback performance was the biggest statistical separator in this matchup.
For Dallas, Dak Prescott completed 31 of 40 passes for 251 yards, one touchdown, and two interceptions.
Joe Milton III added 3 completions on 5 attempts for 41 yards, with no touchdowns and one interception.
Together, Dallas quarterbacks finished:
- 34 completions
- 45 attempts
- 275 passing yards
- 1 touchdown
- 3 interceptions
Chicago’s Caleb Williams completed 19 of 28 passes for 298 yards, four touchdowns, and zero interceptions.
The contrast is striking.
Dak Prescott
Prescott’s 31 completions show that Dallas was able to complete passes consistently. A 31-of-40 line also represents a high completion volume.
However, the two interceptions were significant because they ended Dallas possessions without points and gave Chicago additional opportunities.
Prescott finished with:
| Statistic | Dak Prescott |
| Completions | 31 |
| Attempts | 40 |
| Completion Rate | 77.5% |
| Passing Yards | 251 |
| Passing TDs | 1 |
| Interceptions | 2 |
The completion percentage is strong on its own. But football statistics become more meaningful when viewed together. A high completion rate cannot completely offset multiple turnovers when the opposing quarterback is producing four touchdowns without an interception.
Joe Milton III
Milton attempted five passes and completed three for 41 yards.
His passing line was:
- 3/5
- 41 yards
- 0 touchdowns
- 1 interception
Because his sample was small, his numbers should not be interpreted in the same way as Prescott’s full-game workload.
Still, the interception contributed to Dallas’s total of three quarterback interceptions.
Caleb Williams
Williams produced the most decisive individual passing performance.
He completed 19 of 28 attempts for 298 yards, four touchdowns, and no interceptions.
His completion rate was approximately 67.9%.
More importantly, his 298 passing yards were accompanied by four touchdown passes.
That combination created a huge scoring advantage.
| Statistic | Caleb Williams |
| Completions | 19 |
| Attempts | 28 |
| Completion Rate | 67.9% |
| Passing Yards | 298 |
| Passing TDs | 4 |
| Interceptions | 0 |
Williams did not need to throw an unusually high number of passes to produce his yardage. He generated 298 yards on 28 attempts, which reflects an aggressive and productive passing profile.
Passing Efficiency Explains the Score
One of the most useful lessons from these dallas cowboys vs chicago bears match player stats is that passing volume and passing effectiveness are different things.
Dallas quarterbacks attempted 45 passes and completed 34.
Chicago’s quarterback attempted only 28 passes and completed 19.
Yet Chicago scored four passing touchdowns, while Dallas scored one.
That means the raw number of completions does not explain the outcome.
Dallas had more:
- Passing attempts
- Completions
- Combined quarterback workload
Chicago had more:
- Passing yards
- Passing touchdowns
- Passing efficiency in terms of scoring production
- Turnover security
This is why simply looking at completion totals can produce a misleading assessment.
Rushing Player Stats
Dallas had the stronger rushing total.
The Cowboys ran for 121 yards on 20 carries, averaging 6.1 yards per carry.
Chicago ran for 87 yards on 29 carries, averaging 3.0 yards per carry.
The numbers clearly favor Dallas in this category.
Javonte Williams Leads Dallas
Javonte Williams was Dallas’s leading rusher.
He recorded:
- 10 carries
- 76 yards
- 7.6 yards per carry
His average was substantially higher than Dallas’s overall rushing average of 6.1.
That suggests Williams was capable of creating significant yardage when given opportunities.
However, Dallas did not receive a rushing touchdown from the performance.
Williams also had one fumble that was lost, which became another important negative event for Dallas.
That creates an important balance in evaluating his performance.
On one side, he produced 76 yards at an impressive 7.6 yards per carry.
On the other, the lost fumble was costly.
A player can produce strong yardage and still have a major negative impact from one turnover.
D’Andre Swift Leads Chicago
D’Andre Swift was Chicago’s leading rusher with:
- 13 carries
- 33 yards
- 2.5 yards per carry
Chicago’s overall rushing numbers were modest.
The Bears had 29 rushing attempts for 87 yards, producing only 3.0 yards per carry.
That means Chicago did not win this game by dominating on the ground.
Instead, the Bears relied heavily on their passing game and defensive production.
Receiving Stats
The receiving numbers provide another useful way to understand the matchup.
Dallas recorded:
- 34 receptions
- 292 receiving yards
- 8.6 yards per reception
- 1 receiving touchdown
Chicago recorded:
- 19 receptions
- 298 receiving yards
- 15.7 yards per reception
- 4 receiving touchdowns
Dallas completed and caught more passes overall, but Chicago gained almost the same total yardage with far fewer receptions.
That difference is significant.
Dallas averaged 8.6 yards per reception.
Chicago averaged 15.7 yards per reception.
The Bears therefore generated much more yardage per completed reception.
Jake Ferguson’s High-Volume Performance
Jake Ferguson led Dallas in receptions and receiving yardage.
He finished with:
- 13 receptions
- 82 yards
- 0 touchdowns
His 13 receptions were the highest individual reception total listed for either team.
Ferguson was clearly an important part of Dallas’s passing volume.
However, the absence of a touchdown illustrates another key point.
High reception volume does not necessarily equal high scoring impact.
Ferguson’s 13 catches produced 82 yards, but Dallas’s only receiving touchdown came from George Pickens.
George Pickens Provides Dallas’ Receiving Touchdown
George Pickens recorded:
- 5 receptions
- 68 yards
- 1 touchdown
His touchdown accounted for Dallas’s only passing score.
Compared with Ferguson, Pickens had fewer receptions but a direct scoring contribution.
That difference demonstrates why receiving statistics should be evaluated across several categories instead of relying solely on catches.
Chicago’s Receiving Attack
Chicago’s passing game was remarkably efficient in terms of yardage and touchdowns.
The Bears finished with:
- 19 receptions
- 298 yards
- 15.7 yards per reception
- 4 touchdowns
Four different Chicago receivers recorded a touchdown:
- Luther Burden III
- Rome Odunze
- DJ Moore
- Cole Kmet
This distribution made the Bears difficult to reduce to one receiving target.
Luther Burden III
Luther Burden III led Chicago in receiving yardage with:
- 3 receptions
- 101 yards
- 1 touchdown
His 101 yards came on only three receptions.
That means he averaged approximately 33.7 yards per reception.
His performance was one of the clearest examples of Chicago’s explosive passing ability.
Four Different Receiving Touchdown Contributors
Chicago’s four passing touchdowns were distributed among:
- Luther Burden III
- Rome Odunze
- DJ Moore
- Cole Kmet
This is strategically important because Dallas could not simply eliminate one receiver and expect the scoring problem to disappear.
Chicago’s touchdowns came from multiple players, suggesting a diverse passing attack on this particular day.
Defensive Player Stats
The defensive statistics further explain why Chicago controlled the game.
Dallas recorded:
- 60 total tackles
- 37 solo tackles
- 0 sacks
- 4 tackles for loss
- 3 passes defended
- 1 quarterback hit
Chicago recorded:
- 77 total tackles
- 48 solo tackles
- 2 sacks
- 2 tackles for loss
- 6 passes defended
- 7 quarterback hits
The most obvious difference is pressure.
Chicago recorded 7 quarterback hits compared with only 1 from Dallas.
The Bears also produced two sacks while Dallas recorded none.
That pressure did not completely stop Prescott from completing passes, but it contributed to Chicago’s ability to disrupt Dallas’s offensive rhythm.
Tremaine Edmunds Changes the Turnover Battle
Tremaine Edmunds recorded two interceptions for Chicago.
Kevin Byard added another interception.
Chicago therefore finished with three interceptions.
Dallas recorded none.
This is arguably the single most important defensive statistic in the game.
Dallas’s quarterbacks threw three interceptions.
Chicago’s quarterback threw zero.
The Bears converted the turnover battle into an enormous advantage.
Turnover Margin
Dallas:
- 3 interceptions thrown
- 1 lost fumble
- 4 listed offensive turnovers
Chicago:
- 0 interceptions thrown
- Team recovered one fumble
- 0 listed offensive turnovers
That gives Chicago a major possession advantage.
Even when Dallas moved the football effectively, turnovers repeatedly interrupted its ability to finish drives.
Special Teams Statistics
Special teams were not the primary reason for the final result, but the numbers still provide useful context.
Dallas Kick Returns
Dallas recorded:
- 4 kick returns
- 93 yards
- 23.3-yard average
- 31-yard long
The Cowboys also received strong punt-return production from KaVontae Turpin.
Turpin recorded:
- 2 punt returns
- 28 yards
- 14.0-yard average
Chicago Kick Returns
Chicago recorded:
- 2 kick returns
- 41 yards
- 20.5-yard average
- 26-yard long
Devin Duvernay had:
- 2 punt returns
- 31 yards
- 15.5-yard average
Chicago therefore had the higher punt-return average, while Dallas had more kick-return opportunities and total kick-return yardage.
Kicking and Punting
Dallas kicker Brandon Aubrey was perfect on his field-goal attempts.
He made:
- 2 of 2 field goals
- Longest field goal: 53 yards
- 6 points
Chicago kicker Cairo Santos made:
- 1 of 1 field goals
- Longest field goal: 30 yards
- 4 of 4 extra points
- 7 total points
The kicking statistics show that both kickers converted their listed opportunities.
Punting Comparison
Dallas punter Bryan Anger recorded:
- 2 punts
- 102 total yards
- 51.0-yard average
- 60-yard long
Chicago punter Tory Taylor recorded:
- 4 punts
- 176 total yards
- 44.0-yard average
- 50-yard long
Dallas had fewer punts and a higher average, while Chicago had more total punt yardage because it punted four times.
What the Statistics Say About Dallas
The Cowboys’ numbers are more complicated than a simple 31-14 loss might suggest.
Dallas had several positive statistical areas.
The Cowboys:
- Ran for 121 yards
- Averaged 6.1 yards per carry
- Completed 34 passes
- Recorded 275 passing yards
- Had 292 receiving yards
- Produced 53-yard field-goal range from Aubrey
- Generated 93 kick-return yards
Those figures indicate that Dallas was not completely ineffective offensively.
The main problem was that production did not translate into enough points.
Three interceptions and a lost fumble dramatically reduced the value of that yardage.
The offense also failed to score during the entire second half.
That combination explains why the final score was much more favorable to Chicago than some of the raw offensive totals might initially suggest.
What the Statistics Say About Chicago
Chicago’s performance was built around efficiency.
The Bears did not dominate rushing yardage.
They did not need to.
Instead, they received:
- 298 passing yards
- 4 passing touchdowns
- 0 interceptions
- 3 defensive interceptions
- 7 quarterback hits
- 2 sacks
- 77 total tackles
Caleb Williams was at the center of the offensive success.
The receiving group also produced explosive plays, particularly Luther Burden III’s 101 yards on three catches.
Defensively, Tremaine Edmunds and Kevin Byard provided the turnovers that helped keep Dallas from converting its offensive yardage into points.
Dallas Cowboys vs Chicago Bears Match Player Stats: Key Takeaways
The most important lessons from the dallas cowboys vs chicago bears match player stats can be summarized through several statistical themes.
1. Turnovers Were the Biggest Difference
Dallas threw three interceptions.
Chicago threw none.
That alone created a huge advantage for the Bears.
Dallas also lost a fumble through Javonte Williams.
Chicago did not record a listed offensive turnover.
2. Chicago Won Through Passing Efficiency
The Bears generated 298 passing yards and four passing touchdowns.
Dallas generated 275 passing yards and one touchdown.
The yardage difference was only 23 yards, but the touchdown difference was three.
That is a much more meaningful gap.
3. Dallas Ran the Ball Better
Dallas averaged 6.1 yards per rushing attempt.
Chicago averaged 3.0.
Javonte Williams averaged 7.6 yards per carry individually.
Therefore, rushing production was one area where Dallas clearly performed better.
4. Chicago Created More Defensive Pressure
Chicago recorded:
- 2 sacks
- 7 quarterback hits
- 6 passes defended
Dallas recorded:
- 0 sacks
- 1 quarterback hit
- 3 passes defended
That defensive disruption helped Chicago control the game despite Dallas’s respectable offensive yardage.
5. Dallas Had More Receiving Volume
Dallas recorded 34 receptions compared with Chicago’s 19.
But Chicago averaged 15.7 yards per reception compared with Dallas’s 8.6.
This is an excellent example of why volume and efficiency should be analyzed together.
Player Performance Grades Based on the Box Score
A statistical review can also organize the major performances by impact.
Caleb Williams: Elite Statistical Impact
Williams’ 298 yards, four touchdowns, and zero interceptions make him the clear standout offensive player in the game.
His performance directly explains Chicago’s 31 points.
Dak Prescott: Accurate but Turnover-Prone
Prescott completed 31 of 40 passes for 251 yards.
His 77.5% completion rate was strong.
However, two interceptions reduced the overall value of his passing performance.
Javonte Williams: Strong Rushing, Costly Turnover
Williams averaged 7.6 yards per carry and produced 76 yards on 10 carries.
That was excellent rushing production.
The lost fumble, however, was a major negative.
Jake Ferguson: High Reception Volume
Ferguson’s 13 receptions and 82 yards made him Dallas’s leading receiver.
His production helped move the football, although he did not score.
Luther Burden III: Explosive Receiving
Burden III produced 101 yards and a touchdown on only three receptions.
His average of roughly 33.7 yards per reception demonstrates the explosive nature of his contribution.
Tremaine Edmunds: Defensive Difference-Maker
Two interceptions gave Edmunds one of the most influential defensive performances in the matchup.
Kevin Byard: Additional Turnover Creation
Byard’s interception added another possession-changing play for Chicago.
Why Total Yardage Does Not Tell the Whole Story
One of the most useful ways to interpret this game is to separate production from productive efficiency.
Dallas recorded 121 rushing yards and 275 passing yards.
That is 396 yards of listed offensive yardage.
Chicago recorded 87 rushing yards and 298 passing yards.
That is 385 yards of listed offensive yardage.
Dallas therefore actually produced more combined yardage based on the supplied rushing and passing totals.
Yet Chicago won 31-14.
This is a powerful reminder that total yardage does not automatically determine the winner.
The Bears turned their offensive yardage into touchdowns and avoided turnovers.
Dallas produced comparable yardage but gave the ball away repeatedly and failed to score after halftime.
In practical football analysis, this is why turnovers, touchdowns, field position, and efficiency deserve attention alongside yardage totals.
How to Read These Stats for Future Matchups
For readers who regularly search for NFL player statistics, the best approach is to avoid looking at one number.
A useful checklist is:
Start With Quarterback Efficiency
Look at:
- Completions
- Attempts
- Passing yards
- Touchdowns
- Interceptions
Then compare those numbers with the final score.
Check Turnovers
Turnovers often have a greater effect on a game than small differences in total yardage.
Review Rushing Efficiency
Do not only look at rushing yards.
Compare:
- Attempts
- Yards
- Average
- Touchdowns
- Fumbles
Study Receiving Volume and Explosiveness
A receiver with 13 catches is producing volume.
A receiver with three catches for 101 yards is producing explosiveness.
Both can be valuable, but they influence a game in different ways.
Evaluate Defensive Pressure
Sacks and quarterback hits can reveal pressure that a basic tackle count does not.
Chicago’s seven quarterback hits compared with Dallas’s one are particularly revealing in this matchup.
Frequently Asked Questions
What was the final score between the Dallas Cowboys and Chicago Bears?
The Chicago Bears defeated the Dallas Cowboys 31-14 on September 21, 2025.
Who had the best passing performance?
Caleb Williams had the strongest passing performance, completing 19 of 28 passes for 298 yards, four touchdowns, and no interceptions.
How many interceptions did Dak Prescott throw?
Dak Prescott threw two interceptions. Joe Milton III threw one, giving Dallas three interceptions from its quarterbacks.
Who was Dallas’ leading rusher?
Javonte Williams led Dallas with 10 carries for 76 yards, averaging 7.6 yards per carry.
Who led Chicago in receiving?
Luther Burden III led Chicago with 101 receiving yards on three catches, including one touchdown.
Which team won the turnover battle?
Chicago clearly won the turnover battle. Dallas quarterbacks threw three interceptions and Dallas also lost a fumble, while Chicago recorded no interceptions or lost fumbles in the supplied statistics.
Conclusion
The dallas cowboys vs chicago bears match player stats reveal a matchup in which the final score was driven more by efficiency and turnovers than by total offensive yardage.
Dallas produced 121 rushing yards and 275 passing yards, with Javonte Williams providing an efficient rushing performance and Jake Ferguson leading the team in receptions. Dak Prescott completed 31 of 40 passes, but two interceptions, combined with another interception from Joe Milton III and a lost fumble, created major obstacles.
Chicago’s offensive performance was more decisive. Caleb Williams threw for 298 yards and four touchdowns without an interception. Luther Burden III provided 101 receiving yards and a touchdown, while Rome Odunze, DJ Moore, and Cole Kmet also recorded touchdown receptions.
The defensive statistics were equally important. Chicago recorded three interceptions, two sacks, seven quarterback hits, and six passes defended. Dallas did not record a sack and had only one quarterback hit.
Perhaps the clearest lesson from the game is that yardage alone cannot explain winning football. Dallas actually produced more combined passing and rushing yardage from the supplied totals, yet Chicago converted its opportunities more effectively, protected the football, created turnovers, and built a lead that Dallas could not overcome.
For anyone studying NFL box scores, this matchup is a useful example of why player statistics should be viewed as a connected picture. Passing efficiency, turnover creation, rushing efficiency, receiving explosiveness, defensive pressure, and scoring distribution all work together to explain what happened on the field.
