Baltimore Ravens vs Minnesota Vikings Match Player Stats
Baltimore Ravens vs Minnesota Vikings match player stats from the August 22, 2026 NFL preseason meeting show a game shaped by defensive pressure, efficient Baltimore quarterback play, and several strong individual performances in the passing game. Baltimore finished with a 13-3 victory, improving to 2-0 in the preseason, while Minnesota moved to 1-1. The final score was low, but the underlying numbers provide much more detail about how the game developed and which players produced the most notable statistical contributions.
For readers looking beyond the scoreboard, this matchup is particularly useful because preseason games often distribute playing time across multiple quarterbacks, running backs, receivers, and defensive players. That makes the box score more than a simple record of who scored. It can reveal which players created explosive plays, which quarterbacks protected the football, where defensive pressure came from, and how special teams influenced field position.
The numbers supplied for this game show two offenses with different statistical profiles. Baltimore completed 21 of 30 passes for 184 yards with one touchdown and no interceptions. Minnesota completed 25 of 38 attempts for 234 yards, but the Vikings did not throw a touchdown and surrendered five sacks. Baltimore also intercepted one pass, while Minnesota recorded no interceptions.
Baltimore Ravens vs Minnesota Vikings Match Player Stats: Game Overview
The Ravens won 13-3 on August 22, 2026, in an NFL preseason matchup that featured a clear defensive edge for Baltimore.
Final Score
| Team | Score | Record After Game |
| Baltimore Ravens | 13 | 2-0 |
| Minnesota Vikings | 3 | 1-1 |
The scoring total tells only part of the story. Baltimore’s offense generated one touchdown through the passing game and added six points from two field goals. Minnesota’s only points came from a 52-yard field goal.
Baltimore’s ability to avoid turnovers was important. The Ravens threw no interceptions and recorded no fumbles lost. Minnesota, by comparison, threw one interception and lost one fumble.
That produced a two-turnover difference in Baltimore’s favor.
The Ravens also created more direct pressure on opposing quarterbacks. Their defense recorded five sacks and nine quarterback hits. Minnesota had one sack and six quarterback hits.
Those numbers help explain why a game with Minnesota holding the advantage in total passing yardage still ended with the Vikings scoring only three points.
Passing Statistics
Quarterback statistics are among the most useful parts of the box score because they show not only completion percentage and yardage but also how efficiently each passer handled pressure and turnovers.
Baltimore Quarterbacks
Baltimore’s quarterbacks combined for 21 completions on 30 attempts for 184 yards, one touchdown, and zero interceptions.
| Quarterback | Comp/Att | Yards | Avg. | TD | INT | Rating |
| Joe Fagnano | 15/20 | 123 | 6.2 | 1 | 0 | 106.9 |
| Tyler Huntley | 5/8 | 63 | 7.9 | 0 | 0 | 87.0 |
| Austin Reed | 1/2 | 7 | 3.5 | 0 | 0 | 58.3 |
Joe Fagnano produced the largest passing workload for Baltimore. He completed 15 of 20 attempts, giving him a 75% completion rate, while throwing for 123 yards and one touchdown without an interception.
His listed 106.9 passer rating was also the highest among Baltimore’s three quarterbacks.
Tyler Huntley completed five of eight attempts for 63 yards. His 7.9 yards per attempt was higher than Fagnano’s 6.2, although his smaller sample means the figures need to be interpreted in context.
Austin Reed attempted only two passes, completing one for seven yards. His involvement was limited, so the statistical sample is much smaller than those of Fagnano and Huntley.
One of the most notable themes across Baltimore’s passing statistics is ball security. None of the three quarterbacks threw an interception.
Minnesota Quarterbacks
Minnesota completed 25 of 38 passes for 234 yards, but the Vikings finished without a passing touchdown and threw one interception.
| Quarterback | Comp/Att | Yards | Avg. | TD | INT | Rating |
| Max Brosmer | 11/17 | 98 | 5.8 | 0 | 1 | 55.5 |
| Carson Wentz | 9/11 | 92 | 8.4 | 0 | 0 | 101.5 |
| J.J. McCarthy | 5/10 | 81 | 8.1 | 0 | 0 | 77.5 |
Carson Wentz recorded Minnesota’s highest listed passer rating at 101.5. He completed nine of 11 passes for 92 yards and avoided an interception.
J.J. McCarthy completed five of 10 attempts for 81 yards. His 8.1 yards per attempt indicates that the completed passes produced reasonable yardage, although the 50% completion rate limited overall efficiency.
Max Brosmer completed 11 of 17 attempts for 98 yards but threw the Vikings’ only interception. His listed passer rating was 55.5.
The quarterback numbers also show why total passing yards can be misleading when viewed without the rest of the box score. Minnesota’s 234 passing yards exceeded Baltimore’s 184, yet Baltimore produced the game’s only touchdown and won comfortably.
The Impact of Sacks and Pressure
One of the clearest statistical differences between the teams was quarterback pressure.
Baltimore recorded five sacks for a combined 37 yards of sack yardage. Minnesota recorded one sack for nine yards.
The Vikings’ passing line therefore came with substantial negative plays. Five sacks can erase otherwise productive offensive gains and make it harder for a team to maintain drives.
Baltimore’s defense also recorded nine quarterback hits compared with six for Minnesota.
The pressure numbers provide important context for the 13-3 result. Minnesota gained more passing yards overall, but Baltimore was more effective at disrupting the passing game.
Baltimore Defensive Leaders
Keondre Jackson led the listed Baltimore defensive performances with eight tackles, including six solo tackles. He also recorded one sack and two tackles for loss.
Dominic DeLuca recorded three tackles, three solo tackles, one sack, one tackle for loss, two passes defended, and two quarterback hits.
Jay Higgins IV finished with four tackles, including three solo tackles.
Baltimore’s defense recorded 68 total tackles, 44 solo tackles, five sacks, six tackles for loss, five passes defended, and nine quarterback hits.
Silas Walters also made the game’s lone Baltimore interception. He returned the interception three yards and did not score.
Minnesota Defensive Leaders
Minnesota recorded 57 total tackles, including 34 solo tackles. The Vikings also registered one sack, two tackles for loss, four passes defended, and six quarterback hits.
Jacob Thomas led the listed Minnesota defenders with six tackles and four solo tackles.
Jacob Roberts also recorded six tackles, including three solo tackles.
Jake Golday finished with five tackles and four solo tackles.
The difference in defensive disruption is important. Minnesota had more tackles than Baltimore’s listed individual leaders in some cases, but Baltimore generated more sacks and the only interception.
Rushing Statistics
Neither team produced a rushing touchdown, and both rushing attacks were relatively modest.
Baltimore ran the ball 22 times for 58 yards, an average of 2.6 yards per carry. Minnesota recorded 18 rushing attempts for 65 yards, averaging 3.6 yards per carry.
Baltimore Rushing
| Player | Carries | Yards | Average | TD | Long |
| Jonathan Ward | 10 | 35 | 3.5 | 0 | 6 |
| Joe Fagnano | 2 | 10 | 5.0 | 0 | 8 |
| Tyler Huntley | 3 | 10 | 3.3 | 0 | 4 |
Jonathan Ward handled the largest rushing workload for Baltimore with 10 carries for 35 yards.
Fagnano contributed 10 rushing yards on two attempts, including an eight-yard long run. Huntley added 10 yards on three carries.
The overall Baltimore rushing average of 2.6 yards per attempt was not particularly high, but the offense did not need to rely exclusively on the ground game to produce its points.
Minnesota Rushing
| Player | Carries | Yards | Average | TD | Long |
| Zavier Scott | 7 | 28 | 4.0 | 0 | 9 |
| Demond Claiborne | 8 | 18 | 2.3 | 0 | 9 |
| Jermar Jefferson | 2 | 15 | 7.5 | 0 | 15 |
Jermar Jefferson produced Minnesota’s best listed yards-per-carry figure, gaining 15 yards on two attempts. His 15-yard run was also the longest rushing play among the listed Minnesota players.
Zavier Scott carried seven times for 28 yards, averaging 4.0 yards per attempt.
Demond Claiborne had the largest listed workload with eight carries but gained 18 yards.
Minnesota’s team rushing total of 65 yards was seven yards higher than Baltimore’s 58.
Receiving Statistics
The receiving numbers reveal one of the most interesting contrasts in the matchup.
Baltimore’s team receiving line was 21 receptions for 193 yards, one touchdown, and a 27-yard long reception.
Minnesota recorded 25 receptions for 271 yards without a touchdown, with a 50-yard long reception.
Baltimore Receiving Leaders
| Player | Receptions | Yards | Average | TD | Long | Targets |
| Josh Cuevas | 3 | 46 | 15.3 | 0 | 23 | 4 |
| Devontez Walker | 2 | 32 | 16.0 | 0 | 27 | 3 |
| Dayton Wade | 3 | 30 | 10.0 | 0 | 15 | 3 |
| LaJohntay Wester | 5 | 24 | 4.8 | 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Jonathan Ward | 1 | 15 | 15.0 | 0 | 15 | 1 |
Josh Cuevas led the listed Baltimore receivers in yardage with 46 yards on three catches. His 15.3 yards per reception showed that Baltimore could generate meaningful gains without a large reception total.
Devontez Walker averaged 16.0 yards per reception on two catches. His 27-yard reception was the longest listed Baltimore reception.
Dayton Wade caught three passes for 30 yards.
LaJohntay Wester had five receptions, the highest listed total among Baltimore players, and scored the team’s passing touchdown. His five catches came on seven targets.
That distinction is useful when reading the box score. Wester did not lead the group in yardage, but he made the reception that directly affected the scoreboard.
Jonathan Ward also contributed as a receiver, catching one pass for 15 yards.
Minnesota Receiving Leaders
| Player | Receptions | Yards | Average | TD | Long | Targets |
| Tai Felton | 3 | 66 | 22.0 | 0 | 50 | 4 |
| Jeshaun Jones | 5 | 63 | 12.6 | 0 | 36 | 6 |
| Dillon Bell | 6 | 51 | 8.5 | 0 | 18 | 9 |
| Bryson Nesbit | 1 | 16 | 16.0 | 0 | 16 | 2 |
Tai Felton produced Minnesota’s most explosive listed receiving performance. He caught three passes for 66 yards, averaging 22.0 yards per reception. His 50-yard reception was the longest listed offensive play through the air in the game.
Jeshaun Jones caught five passes for 63 yards, while Dillon Bell recorded six receptions for 51 yards.
Dillon Bell’s nine targets were the highest listed target total among Minnesota receivers.
Bryson Nesbit caught one pass for 16 yards.
The receiving statistics show that Minnesota was capable of creating explosive passing plays. The problem was turning those gains into touchdowns.
Why the Passing Yardage Did Not Match the Score
One of the most useful lessons from this game is that yardage totals do not automatically translate into points.
Minnesota finished with 234 passing yards compared with Baltimore’s 184. The Vikings also had 271 team receiving yards compared with Baltimore’s 193.
Yet Baltimore scored 13 points and Minnesota scored three.
There are several statistical reasons.
First, Baltimore protected the football. The Ravens threw zero interceptions and lost no fumbles.
Second, Baltimore generated five sacks and one interception on defense.
Third, Minnesota’s passing attack did not produce a touchdown despite its higher yardage total.
Fourth, the Ravens converted their scoring opportunities more effectively. Baltimore made both of its field-goal attempts and scored a touchdown. Minnesota made its only field-goal attempt but did not reach the end zone.
This is why player statistics should be viewed as a collection of connected numbers rather than isolated achievements.
Turnovers and Field Position
Turnovers were another major separator.
Baltimore
- 0 interceptions thrown
- 0 fumbles lost
- 1 defensive interception
- 1 fumble recovery listed
- 5 sacks
- 9 quarterback hits
Minnesota
- 1 interception thrown
- 1 fumble lost
- 0 defensive interceptions
- 1 sack
- 6 quarterback hits
The Ravens therefore created two takeaways while giving the Vikings no equivalent turnover advantage through interceptions or lost fumbles.
Turnovers matter because they can immediately change possession and field position. In a low-scoring game, a single extra possession can have a larger practical effect than several additional passing yards.
Special Teams Statistics
Special teams played a meaningful role in the low-scoring contest.
Kicking
Baltimore’s Tyler Loop converted both field-goal attempts, including a long of 49 yards. He also made his only extra-point attempt.
| Kicker | FG | Long FG | XP |
| Tyler Loop | 2/2 | 49 yards | 1/1 |
| Will Reichard | 1/1 | 52 yards | 0/0 |
Minnesota’s Will Reichard converted a 52-yard field goal.
Both kickers were perfect on their listed field-goal attempts.
Punting
Baltimore punted six times for 332 yards, an average of 55.3 yards per punt. The longest punt was 60 yards, and two punts were placed inside the 20-yard line.
Minnesota punted five times for 248 yards, averaging 49.6 yards. The Vikings recorded three punts inside the 20-yard line, with a 65-yard long.
Ryan Eckley handled Baltimore’s listed punting statistics.
Johnny Hekker recorded three punts for Minnesota, totaling 165 yards, while Brett Thorson recorded two punts for 83 yards.
The punting numbers suggest both teams had opportunities to influence field position even when drives failed to reach scoring range.
Return Game
Baltimore recorded one kickoff return for 29 yards, with LaJohntay Wester responsible for the return.
The Ravens also had two punt returns for 31 yards, averaging 15.5 yards per return.
Minnesota had four kickoff returns for 79 yards, averaging 19.8 yards, with a long of 24 yards.
The Vikings recorded four punt returns for 47 yards, averaging 11.8 yards.
No kickoff or punt return produced a touchdown.
Baltimore Ravens vs Minnesota Vikings Match Player Stats: Key Statistical Takeaways
The box score offers several useful conclusions without needing to rely only on the final score.
1. Baltimore’s defense created the biggest statistical advantage
Five sacks, nine quarterback hits, and one interception gave Baltimore a clear advantage in defensive disruption.
Minnesota’s offense still accumulated passing yards, but the negative plays prevented those yards from consistently becoming scoring opportunities.
2. Joe Fagnano had an efficient passing line
Fagnano completed 75% of his passes and produced 123 yards, one touchdown, and zero interceptions.
His listed 106.9 passer rating was the highest among Baltimore’s quarterbacks.
3. Minnesota produced explosive receiving plays
Tai Felton averaged 22.0 yards per reception and recorded a 50-yard catch.
Jeshaun Jones also exceeded 60 receiving yards.
The Vikings therefore demonstrated big-play potential even though they failed to score a touchdown.
4. LaJohntay Wester affected both offense and special teams
Wester caught five passes for 24 yards and scored Baltimore’s receiving touchdown.
He also returned a kickoff 29 yards.
His statistical contribution extended beyond one category.
5. Turnovers favored Baltimore
Baltimore finished with one defensive interception and no turnovers lost.
Minnesota threw one interception and lost one fumble.
In a three-score game, that difference is especially relevant.
6. Minnesota had more offensive yardage but fewer points
Minnesota’s passing and receiving totals were higher than Baltimore’s team totals, yet the Vikings scored only three points.
That contrast illustrates why offensive volume and scoring efficiency should not be treated as interchangeable measures.
What the Game Says About Individual Performance
Preseason statistics need context because player roles, snap counts, substitutions, and game plans can differ substantially from regular-season usage.
A player with a high reception total may have received more opportunities simply because of the rotation. A quarterback may have faced a different defensive group than another quarterback. A running back may have played primarily in a specific situation.
For that reason, the most responsible way to interpret these numbers is to describe what happened rather than make unsupported predictions about future roles.
Fagnano’s 15 completions and one touchdown establish a strong statistical performance in this game. They do not, by themselves, establish what Baltimore’s quarterback depth chart will look like later.
Likewise, Felton’s 66 receiving yards and 50-yard reception demonstrate explosive production in this matchup. They do not automatically establish future regular-season production.
This distinction is particularly important when analyzing preseason box scores.
How to Read the Box Score Like an Analyst
For readers who regularly search for NFL player statistics, there is a useful order for evaluating a game.
Start with the score
The final score provides the basic outcome.
Check turnovers
Turnovers often explain why a team with fewer yards can still control the game.
Examine pressure
Sacks and quarterback hits show whether the defense was able to disrupt passing plays.
Separate volume from efficiency
Passing attempts, rushing attempts, receptions, and targets show opportunity. Average yards, completion percentage, and passer rating provide additional context.
Look for explosive plays
Long receptions and long runs can reveal where the biggest chunks of yardage came from.
Review special teams
Field goals, punts, kick returns, and punt returns can influence field position and scoring opportunities.
This approach produces a more complete interpretation than simply identifying the player with the most yards.
Important Statistical Context
The supplied box-score data contains team-level totals that are broader than the individual player lines shown in the same dataset.
For example, Baltimore’s team receiving total is listed as 21 receptions for 193 yards, while the individual receiving lines provided here account for only part of that production. Minnesota’s team receiving total is listed as 25 receptions for 271 yards, while the individual receiving entries shown here also represent only part of the team total.
That does not mean the team totals are incorrect. It means the available player-level table does not include every receiver who contributed.
The same principle applies when reading a partial list of defensive players. Individual entries should not automatically be added together and treated as the complete team defense unless all players are represented.
Using the supplied team totals for team-level analysis and the supplied individual lines for player-specific analysis avoids creating numbers that are not present in the source data.
A Statistical Comparison of the Two Teams
| Category | Baltimore | Minnesota |
| Final Score | 13 | 3 |
| Passing | 21/30, 184 yards | 25/38, 234 yards |
| Passing TDs | 1 | 0 |
| Passing INTs | 0 | 1 |
| Rushing | 22 carries, 58 yards | 18 carries, 65 yards |
| Receiving | 21 receptions, 193 yards | 25 receptions, 271 yards |
| Sacks Recorded | 5 | 1 |
| Quarterback Hits | 9 | 6 |
| Defensive Interceptions | 1 | 0 |
| Field Goals | 2/2 | 1/1 |
| Punts | 6 | 5 |
| Turnovers Lost | 0 | 2 |
The comparison shows why the final score cannot be explained by yardage alone.
Minnesota generated more passing yards, rushing yards, and receiving yards. Baltimore nevertheless created more defensive disruption, avoided turnovers, scored the game’s only touchdown, and converted both field-goal opportunities.
What the Numbers Mean for Preseason Analysis
Preseason football requires a different analytical mindset from regular-season football.
A preseason box score is most useful for identifying what happened during the game. It is less reliable as a standalone tool for predicting future production.
For example, the game gives us clear statistical evidence that:
- Fagnano completed 15 of 20 passes.
- Fagnano threw one touchdown and no interceptions.
- Wester caught the Ravens’ receiving touchdown.
- Felton produced 66 receiving yards.
- Minnesota’s offense generated 234 passing yards.
- Baltimore’s defense recorded five sacks.
- Silas Walters recorded an interception.
- Tyler Loop converted both field goals.
- Will Reichard converted a 52-yard field goal.
Those are direct statistical observations.
What cannot be established from this box score alone is how many regular-season snaps each player will receive, what future game plans will look like, or how these performances will translate to a different level of competition.
That distinction keeps the analysis grounded in evidence.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who won the Ravens vs Vikings preseason game on August 22, 2026?
The Baltimore Ravens defeated the Minnesota Vikings 13-3 in the August 22, 2026 NFL preseason matchup.
Who was Baltimore’s leading passer?
Joe Fagnano was Baltimore’s leading passer in the supplied statistics. He completed 15 of 20 passes for 123 yards, one touchdown, and zero interceptions.
Who led Minnesota in receiving?
Tai Felton led the listed Minnesota receivers with three receptions for 66 yards. He averaged 22.0 yards per reception and recorded a 50-yard reception.
How many sacks did Baltimore record?
Baltimore recorded five sacks for 37 yards. The Ravens also recorded nine quarterback hits.
Did either team throw an interception?
Yes. Minnesota threw one interception, while Baltimore quarterbacks threw none. Silas Walters recorded Baltimore’s defensive interception.
Who kicked the field goals?
Tyler Loop made both of Baltimore’s field-goal attempts, including a 49-yard kick. Will Reichard made Minnesota’s only field goal, a 52-yard attempt.
Conclusion
The Baltimore Ravens vs Minnesota Vikings match player stats from August 22, 2026 provide a strong example of why NFL box scores need to be read beyond the final score.
Baltimore won 13-3 despite Minnesota producing more passing and receiving yardage. The difference came through several connected areas: Baltimore protected the football, created five sacks, recorded an interception, scored the game’s only touchdown, and converted both of its field-goal attempts.
Joe Fagnano led the Ravens’ passing production with 123 yards and a touchdown on 15 completions. LaJohntay Wester scored the receiving touchdown while also contributing in the return game. Keondre Jackson led the listed Baltimore defensive performers with eight tackles and a sack, while Dominic DeLuca added another sack.
Minnesota’s statistical highlights included Tai Felton’s 66 receiving yards and 50-yard catch, Jeshaun Jones’ 63 yards, and Carson Wentz’s 101.5 passer rating on nine completions from 11 attempts. The Vikings also averaged more yards per rushing attempt than Baltimore.
The central lesson from the game is that offensive yardage, individual production, turnovers, defensive pressure, and scoring efficiency all tell different parts of the same story. Looking at those categories together provides a more accurate understanding of how Baltimore secured the 13-3 preseason victory.
For anyone reviewing Baltimore Ravens vs Minnesota Vikings match player stats, the most useful approach is therefore to examine individual production alongside team efficiency, defensive pressure, turnovers, and special teams rather than relying on one headline statistic.
