New England Patriots vs Texans Match Player Stats
The new england patriots vs texans match player stats from the AFC Divisional Playoffs on January 19, 2026, tell the story of a game decided by passing efficiency, defensive takeaways, and timely scoring. The New England Patriots defeated the Houston Texans 28-16, using three touchdown passes from Drake Maye and a defense that recorded four interceptions to secure the victory. Houston quarterback C.J. Stroud threw for 212 yards and one touchdown, but his four interceptions made it difficult for the Texans to turn their offensive opportunities into points.
The final score alone does not explain how New England gained control of the contest. Houston finished with more passing yards than the Patriots, yet New England converted its passing opportunities into touchdowns more efficiently. The Patriots also produced 105 rushing yards, compared with Houston’s 48, and returned one interception for a touchdown. These differences show why total yardage must be considered alongside turnovers, scoring efficiency, and the timing of important plays.
This breakdown examines the quarterback performances, rushing and receiving leaders, defensive statistics, special teams, quarter-by-quarter scoring, and the most important lessons from the game. All player statistics below follow the supplied ESPN box-score data. The analysis distinguishes recorded numbers from interpretations of what those numbers reveal.
New England Patriots vs Texans Match Player Stats: Final Score and Game Overview
The Patriots entered the divisional playoff matchup with a 14-3 overall record, while the Texans arrived at 12-5. New England won 28-16, advancing its postseason campaign through a performance that combined offensive finishing with strong defensive ball production.
Official website of the New England Patriots
28
New England Patriots
14-3 entering game
FINAL
Jan 19, 2026
Patriots win
Logos Download | Houston Texans
16
Houston Texans
12-5 entering game
Quarter-by-quarter scoring
| Team | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | Total |
| Patriots | 7 | 14 | 0 | 7 | 28 |
| Texans | 3 | 7 | 6 | 0 | 16 |
Source: supplied ESPN box-score data for the January 19, 2026, divisional playoff game.
Key game statistics at a glance
| Statistical category | Patriots | Texans |
| Final score | 28 | 16 |
| Passing yards | 179 | 212 |
| Rushing yards | 105 | 48 |
| Total passing completions | 16 | 20 |
| Passing touchdowns | 3 | 1 |
| Interceptions thrown | 1 | 4 |
| Defensive interceptions | 4 | 1 |
| Sacks recorded by defense | 3 | 5 |
| Total tackles | 67 | 76 |
| Passes defended | 14 | 6 |
| Quarterback hits | 9 | 2 |
The Patriots’ most important statistical advantage was their ability to turn passing plays into touchdowns while avoiding the turnover problems that affected Houston. New England also held a 57-yard advantage in rushing production. Houston’s defensive front generated more sacks, but its secondary did not produce enough takeaways to offset the turnovers committed by its own offense.
The defensive interception total deserves particular attention. New England recorded four interceptions, including a pick-six by Marcus Jones. Houston recorded one interception. That difference created a major advantage in possession value and scoring opportunities.
For the official box score and individual player records, consult the ESPN game box score.
Quarter-by-Quarter Game Analysis
The scoring pattern explains how New England built its lead, why Houston remained competitive for part of the game, and how the final quarter ended the Texans’ comeback hopes.
First quarter: New England establishes an early advantage
The Patriots scored seven points in the opening quarter, while Houston managed three. The 7-3 score gave New England a four-point lead without creating a decisive separation.
Houston’s opening field goal kept the game close. However, New England’s touchdown gave its offense an early scoring advantage and placed pressure on the Texans to respond with touchdowns rather than settle for field goals.
The first quarter also established a pattern that became more important later: Houston needed to protect the football and maximize its possessions. Against a team capable of scoring quickly, losing opportunities through turnovers would become especially costly.
Second quarter: Patriots take control with 14 points
The second quarter was the defining scoring period. New England added 14 points, while Houston scored seven. The Patriots entered halftime with a 21-10 advantage.
This quarter created the foundation for the final result. New England’s offense found the end zone twice, taking its total to three touchdowns for the game. Houston also scored a touchdown, but its seven points were insufficient to match the Patriots’ production.
A 21-10 halftime lead offered New England more flexibility. The Patriots could continue attacking when opportunities appeared while relying on their defense to prevent Houston from producing a sustained scoring run.
For Houston, the challenge became more difficult. The Texans needed to close an 11-point gap against a defense that would eventually record four interceptions. Their subsequent offensive possessions had to produce points without giving New England additional opportunities.
Third quarter: Houston scores, but the Patriots stay ahead
The third quarter ended with Houston adding six points and New England scoring none. The Patriots’ lead narrowed from 11 points to five, leaving the score at 21-16.
Houston’s six-point quarter represented progress on the scoreboard, but it did not erase the impact of the first-half deficit. The Texans needed to convert their momentum into a lead, and the supplied scoring data shows that they could not complete that task.
New England’s scoreless third quarter also highlights an important distinction in football analysis. A team can struggle to score during an individual quarter and still maintain control of the game if its earlier production creates enough separation and its defense continues to limit the opponent.
The five-point margin made the fourth quarter competitive. A Houston touchdown could have changed the situation considerably, so New England still needed to finish the contest with discipline.
Fourth quarter: New England adds the decisive touchdown
The Patriots scored seven points in the final quarter, while Houston failed to score. That result produced the final 28-16 margin.
New England’s touchdown restored a two-possession advantage and gave the Patriots a more comfortable position late in the game. Houston, meanwhile, finished without a fourth-quarter point despite having reduced the deficit to five during the previous period.
The final quarter demonstrates why scoring distribution matters. Houston’s third-quarter improvement was not enough to overcome the Patriots’ earlier lead, and the Texans could not sustain their scoring response when the game reached its decisive stage.
What the scoring sequence tells us
| Quarter | Patriots points | Texans points | Patriots lead at quarter end |
| First | 7 | 3 | 4 |
| Second | 14 | 7 | 11 |
| Third | 0 | 6 | 5 |
| Fourth | 7 | 0 | 12 |
New England’s 14-point second quarter was its strongest scoring period. Houston’s best quarter by points was the second, when it also scored seven, although its six-point third quarter helped narrow the gap.
The broader lesson is that a team’s scoring peak does not always arrive late in a game. New England created its biggest advantage before halftime, then used its defense and a fourth-quarter touchdown to preserve the lead.
Quarterback Stats: Drake Maye vs. C.J. Stroud
Quarterback production is central to understanding the result. Both quarterbacks recorded more than 170 passing yards, but their efficiency, touchdown totals, and interception numbers differed substantially.
Drake Maye’s passing performance
The Patriots quarterback completed 16 of 27 passes for 179 yards, three touchdowns, and one interception.
| Drake Maye statistic | Result |
| Completions | 16 |
| Attempts | 27 |
| Completion percentage | 59.3% |
| Passing yards | 179 |
| Yards per attempt | 6.6 |
| Passing touchdowns | 3 |
| Interceptions | 1 |
| Times sacked | 5 |
| Sack yards lost | 36 |
| ESPN QBR | 20.7 |
| Passer rating | 100.7 |
Maye’s 179 passing yards were lower than Stroud’s 212, but the Patriots quarterback threw three touchdown passes compared with Stroud’s one. His 100.7 passer rating also exceeded Stroud’s 28.0 rating.
This contrast illustrates why passing yards alone do not measure quarterback effectiveness. A quarterback can accumulate substantial yardage without consistently finishing possessions, while another can produce fewer yards but convert key opportunities into touchdowns.
Maye averaged 6.6 yards per attempt. That figure indicates more passing yardage per attempt than Houston’s 4.5 yards, although yards per attempt does not account for every factor affecting a passing game.
Maye was not without problems. He was sacked five times for a combined loss of 36 yards and recorded four fumbles, two of which were lost, according to the supplied data. He also threw one interception.
Those numbers matter because they show that New England did not win through a flawless quarterback performance. The offensive line allowed pressure, and ball security was a concern. The difference was that Maye’s three passing touchdowns helped the Patriots maintain a scoring advantage despite those mistakes.
The recorded ESPN QBR of 20.7 is notably low despite Maye’s 100.7 passer rating. These metrics use different evaluation methods and should not be treated as interchangeable. Passer rating focuses on selected passing outcomes, while ESPN QBR uses a different model of quarterback contribution. Without the underlying play-by-play calculations, the discrepancy should be reported rather than explained through speculation.
C.J. Stroud’s passing performance
Stroud completed 20 of 47 attempts for 212 yards, one touchdown, and four interceptions.
| C.J. Stroud statistic | Result |
| Completions | 20 |
| Attempts | 47 |
| Completion percentage | 42.6% |
| Passing yards | 212 |
| Yards per attempt | 4.5 |
| Passing touchdowns | 1 |
| Interceptions | 4 |
| Times sacked | 3 |
| Sack yards lost | 19 |
| ESPN QBR | 22.2 |
| Passer rating | 28.0 |
Stroud completed four more passes and gained 33 more passing yards than Maye. However, he attempted 20 more passes and threw three additional interceptions.
His completion rate of 42.6% was substantially below Maye’s 59.3%. That difference indicates that Houston had difficulty completing passes consistently, even though its quarterback finished with the higher passing-yardage total.
Stroud averaged 4.5 yards per attempt, meaning Houston generated relatively little yardage for the number of passing opportunities it used. His four interceptions were an even greater problem because each one ended a Houston possession and gave New England an opportunity to take advantage of the turnover.
The four interceptions should not automatically be attributed entirely to the quarterback’s decision-making. Interceptions can result from several factors, including inaccurate throws, defensive anticipation, receiver errors, and pressure. The supplied statistics establish the number of interceptions but do not independently establish the cause of each one.
Nevertheless, the overall result is clear. Four interceptions, one passing touchdown, and a 28.0 passer rating made Stroud’s statistical line far less effective than Maye’s in terms of scoring outcomes.
Direct quarterback comparison
| Metric | Drake Maye | C.J. Stroud |
| Completion rate | 59.3% | 42.6% |
| Passing yards | 179 | 212 |
| Yards per attempt | 6.6 | 4.5 |
| Passing touchdowns | 3 | 1 |
| Interceptions | 1 | 4 |
| Passer rating | 100.7 | 28.0 |
| Sacks taken | 5 | 3 |
The central quarterback takeaway: Stroud produced more passing yards, but Maye generated more touchdowns with fewer attempts and fewer interceptions. That difference was more important to the final score than the raw yardage comparison.
The comparison also highlights a useful analytical principle. Completion percentage, yards per attempt, touchdowns, and turnovers work best when evaluated together. No single number fully captures quarterback performance, particularly when sacks, fumbles, field position, and defensive scoring also influence the result.
Rushing Statistics: New England Controls the Ground Game
New England produced 105 rushing yards on 32 attempts, while Houston gained 48 yards on 22 attempts. The Patriots therefore recorded 57 more rushing yards and averaged 3.3 yards per carry compared with Houston’s 2.2.
Neither team scored a rushing touchdown in the supplied statistics. New England’s advantage came from accumulating more yards and distributing carries across its backfield.
Patriots rushing leaders
| Player | Carries | Yards | Average | Longest run | TDs |
| Rhamondre Stevenson | 16 | 70 | 4.4 | 20 | 0 |
| TreVeyon Henderson | 12 | 25 | 2.1 | 6 | 0 |
| Drake Maye | 4 | 10 | 2.5 | 8 | 0 |
| Team total | 32 | 105 | 3.3 | 20 | 0 |
Rhamondre Stevenson led New England with 70 rushing yards on 16 carries. His 4.4-yard average was the strongest among the listed Patriots players with meaningful rushing volume.
Stevenson’s longest run covered 20 yards, providing the team’s longest rushing gain. Although he did not score a rushing touchdown, his yardage helped New England maintain a more productive ground attack than Houston.
Henderson carried the ball 12 times for 25 yards. His 2.1-yard average was lower than Stevenson’s, and his longest run was six yards. Maye added 10 yards on four carries, giving New England another source of rushing production.
The team total of 105 yards should not be interpreted as overwhelming rushing dominance. A 3.3-yard average is relatively modest, and New England did not score on the ground. Still, the Patriots’ greater rushing volume and total yardage gave them a meaningful advantage in a game where their passing offense also scored three touchdowns.
Texans rushing leaders
| Player | Carries | Yards | Average | Longest run | TDs |
| Woody Marks | 14 | 17 | 1.2 | 8 | 0 |
| Nick Chubb | 4 | 14 | 3.5 | 7 | 0 |
| C.J. Stroud | 2 | 11 | 5.5 | 10 | 0 |
| Cade Stover | 2 | 6 | 3.0 | 4 | 0 |
| Team total | 22 | 48 | 2.2 | 10 | 0 |
Woody Marks led Houston with 17 rushing yards on 14 carries. His 1.2-yard average is the most revealing figure in the Texans’ rushing statistics because it shows how little ground the team gained from its most frequently used runner.
Marks’ longest run was eight yards, but his overall production remained limited. Nick Chubb gained 14 yards on four attempts, averaging 3.5 yards per carry. Stroud contributed 11 rushing yards on two attempts, while Stover recorded six yards on two carries.
The Texans’ 48-yard team total suggests that their ground game did not consistently create favorable situations. Limited rushing output can make an offense more dependent on passing, particularly when it is trailing and needs to recover points.
That does not mean the rushing statistics alone explain Stroud’s interceptions. Passing decisions and defensive coverage also matter. However, Houston’s low rushing average and the need to attempt 47 passes show how heavily its offense relied on the passing game.
Why the rushing gap mattered
New England’s 105 rushing yards did not win the game by themselves, but they helped balance its offense. Houston gained only 48 yards on the ground, leaving a much greater share of its offensive production dependent on Stroud.
The Patriots also had 10 more rushing attempts than Houston. More attempts gave New England additional chances to gain yards without requiring Maye to throw on every offensive play.
The key lesson is not simply that the team with more rushing yards wins. Instead, rushing production can reduce offensive pressure, improve flexibility, and help a team remain competitive when its passing game encounters sacks or turnovers.
Receiving Statistics: The Players Who Made the Difference
The receiving numbers reveal how New England converted its passing opportunities into points while Houston struggled to produce touchdowns consistently.
The Patriots completed 16 passes for 179 yards and three touchdowns. Houston completed 20 passes for 212 yards and one touchdown. Although the Texans gained more total receiving yards, New England averaged 11.2 yards per reception compared with Houston’s 10.6.
The difference was not enormous in average yardage per catch. The more important distinction was touchdown production and the cost of Houston’s interceptions.
Patriots receiving leaders
| Player | Receptions | Targets | Yards | Average | Longest | TDs |
| Kayshon Boutte | 3 | 5 | 75 | 25.0 | 32 | 1 |
| Stefon Diggs | 4 | 6 | 40 | 10.0 | 14 | 1 |
| DeMario Douglas | 2 | 2 | 36 | 18.0 | 28 | 1 |
| Austin Hooper | 1 | 2 | 14 | 14.0 | 14 | 0 |
| Rhamondre Stevenson | 4 | 4 | 11 | 2.8 | 9 | 0 |
| Hunter Henry | 1 | 2 | 5 | 5.0 | 5 | 0 |
| TreVeyon Henderson | 1 | 2 | -2 | -2.0 | -2 | 0 |
| Kyle Williams | 0 | 3 | 0 | N/A | N/A | 0 |
Average means receiving yards per reception. N/A indicates that no catch was recorded.
Kayshon Boutte leads New England in receiving yards
Boutte was New England’s leading receiver with 75 yards on three receptions. He averaged 25.0 yards per catch, recorded a longest reception of 32 yards, and scored one touchdown.
His production was especially notable because it came on only five targets. Boutte accounted for a large share of the Patriots’ 179 receiving yards despite recording fewer catches than Diggs or Stevenson.
A 25.0-yard average can indicate that a receiver created substantial gains on limited opportunities. However, average yards per catch does not establish whether those yards came from deep routes, yards after the catch, or a combination of both. The available statistics support the conclusion that Boutte was New England’s most productive receiver by yardage, but more detailed play-by-play information would be needed to explain the exact mechanics of his performance.
Stefon Diggs provides touchdown production
Diggs recorded four receptions for 40 yards and one touchdown on six targets. His 10.0-yard average was lower than Boutte’s, but he contributed one of the Patriots’ three passing touchdowns.
His four catches tied Stevenson for the highest reception total among the listed New England players. Diggs’ performance demonstrates why receiving yards and touchdown production should be considered separately. A receiver does not need to lead the team in yardage to contribute significantly to the final score.
DeMario Douglas adds an efficient contribution
Douglas finished with two receptions for 36 yards and a touchdown on two targets. His 18.0-yard average showed strong production relative to his limited number of opportunities.
A receiver who catches every targeted pass can help an offense maintain efficiency. Douglas’ two catches also produced one touchdown, making his contribution particularly valuable in a game where New England scored three times through the air.
The available numbers do not reveal the routes or coverage assignments involved, so it would be inaccurate to assign his production to a specific tactical adjustment without additional evidence.
Other Patriots receiving contributions
Stevenson caught four passes for 11 yards, giving him a combined role in both the rushing and passing games. His receiving average of 2.8 yards per catch was modest, but his four receptions provided Maye with an outlet option.
Hooper added 14 yards on one reception, while Henry caught one pass for five yards. Henderson recorded one reception for minus-two yards, meaning the play ended two yards behind the point where the catch was recorded.
Kyle Williams received three targets but did not record a catch in the supplied statistics. Target counts can indicate where an offense attempted to direct the football, but they do not establish whether an incomplete pass resulted from quarterback accuracy, coverage, receiver separation, or another factor.
Texans receiving leaders
| Player | Receptions | Targets | Yards | Average | Longest | TDs |
| Jayden Higgins | 6 | 10 | 59 | 9.8 | 16 | 0 |
| Dalton Schultz | 2 | 2 | 47 | 23.5 | 42 | 0 |
| Xavier Hutchinson | 4 | 13 | 44 | 11.0 | 23 | 0 |
| Harrison Bryant | 3 | 6 | 21 | 7.0 | 9 | 0 |
| Christian Kirk | 2 | 6 | 20 | 10.0 | 10 | 1 |
| Woody Marks | 2 | 3 | 19 | 9.5 | 13 | 0 |
| Cade Stover | 1 | 3 | 2 | 2.0 | 2 | 0 |
| Nick Chubb | 0 | 1 | 0 | N/A | N/A | 0 |
| Jaylin Noel | 0 | 1 | 0 | N/A | N/A | 0 |
Jayden Higgins leads Houston in receptions and receiving yards
Higgins caught six passes for 59 yards on 10 targets. He led the Texans in both catches and receiving yards, but his 9.8-yard average did not produce a touchdown.
His six receptions made him a regular contributor to Houston’s passing attack. However, the Texans’ four interceptions meant that receiving production did not consistently translate into sustained scoring opportunities.
Higgins’ longest reception was 16 yards. That figure was lower than Schultz’s 42-yard longest catch, suggesting that Higgins’ production was more evenly distributed across shorter gains than Houston’s biggest single reception. The supplied data does not provide the full distribution of every catch, so that observation should be limited to the listed longest receptions and averages.
Dalton Schultz creates Houston’s biggest receiving gain
Schultz caught two passes for 47 yards on two targets. He averaged 23.5 yards per reception, with a longest catch of 42 yards.
Schultz’s average was the highest among Houston’s listed receivers with catches. His performance shows that the Texans could generate significant gains through the air, even though their overall passing game struggled to turn those opportunities into touchdowns.
The distinction between explosive gains and consistent offensive success is important. A long reception can move the ball quickly, but the offense still needs to sustain drives, protect possession, and finish with points. Schultz’s 47 yards were valuable, yet he did not record a touchdown.
Xavier Hutchinson receives frequent targets
Hutchinson caught four passes for 44 yards on 13 targets. His 11.0-yard average was respectable, but the 13 targets indicate that he was involved frequently in Houston’s passing attempts.
Four receptions from 13 targets means nine targets did not result in a recorded catch. That gap does not prove that Hutchinson personally made mistakes. Incomplete passes can result from several causes, and the supplied data does not assign responsibility for each unsuccessful target.
Still, the numbers reveal an important feature of Houston’s passing performance: substantial passing volume did not translate into a high completion rate or enough scoring.
Christian Kirk supplies Houston’s receiving touchdown
Kirk recorded two catches for 20 yards and one touchdown on six targets. His 10.0-yard average was similar to Higgins’ and Diggs’ averages, but his touchdown was the distinguishing element.
Kirk was Houston’s only listed receiver with a touchdown. His score helped the Texans reach 16 points, but one receiving touchdown was not enough to match New England’s three passing scores.
Comparing the receiving units
The Patriots’ receivers recorded 179 yards and three touchdowns on 26 targets. Houston’s receivers recorded 212 yards and one touchdown on 45 targets.
This comparison offers one of the clearest explanations for the result. Houston used 19 more targets to produce 33 additional receiving yards, but New England scored two more passing touchdowns.
The difference does not mean that every Patriots reception was more valuable than every Texans reception. Rather, New England extracted more scoring production from a smaller number of passing opportunities.
Defensive Stats: Four Interceptions Change the Game
Defense was the most decisive statistical category in the matchup. New England recorded four interceptions, 14 passes defended, nine quarterback hits, and three sacks. Houston recorded one interception, six passes defended, two quarterback hits, and five sacks.
Houston’s five sacks show that its defensive front was capable of disrupting the Patriots’ passing game. However, New England’s four interceptions created a much larger difference in turnover production.
Team defensive comparison
| Defensive category | Patriots | Texans |
| Total tackles | 67 | 76 |
| Solo tackles | 38 | 41 |
| Sacks | 3 | 5 |
| Tackles for loss | 6 | 9 |
| Passes defended | 14 | 6 |
| Quarterback hits | 9 | 2 |
| Interceptions | 4 | 1 |
| Defensive touchdowns | 1 | 0 |
Why New England’s interceptions mattered more than sack totals
Houston recorded two more sacks than New England. On that measure, the Texans generated more direct quarterback takedowns.
But sacks and interceptions affect games in different ways. A sack generally costs the offense yardage and can make a subsequent conversion more difficult. An interception ends the offense’s possession and transfers the ball to the opposing team.
New England’s four interceptions were especially damaging because Stroud threw only one touchdown. Houston could not consistently offset the turnovers with scoring production.
The Patriots also defended 14 passes, more than twice Houston’s six. Passes defended are not identical to interceptions, but they help illustrate how frequently New England disrupted passing attempts without necessarily gaining possession.
The nine quarterback hits recorded by New England, compared with Houston’s two, provide another useful distinction. Although the Texans registered more sacks, the Patriots recorded more quarterback hits overall. This suggests that the defensive impact cannot be understood by counting sacks alone.
Carlton Davis III records two interceptions
Davis recorded two interceptions for New England, according to the supplied defensive statistics. He was the only listed Patriots defender with multiple interceptions.
Two interceptions from one defender can be a major contribution in a game where the opposing quarterback throws four picks in total. Each interception prevented Houston from completing its intended offensive sequence and provided New England with another possession.
The box-score data does not identify the exact circumstances of each interception, so it would be inappropriate to claim that both resulted from a particular coverage scheme or quarterback mistake.
Marcus Jones returns an interception for a touchdown
Marcus Jones recorded one interception, returned it 26 yards, and scored a defensive touchdown. That play is a major part of the statistical explanation for New England’s 28 points.
A defensive touchdown differs from a conventional offensive touchdown because the defense scores directly after taking possession away from the opponent. It can also change momentum immediately, as the offense does not need to move the ball downfield to produce the score.
The supplied data confirms Jones’ interception return of 26 yards and one defensive touchdown. It does not establish the exact quarter or game-clock situation of the return, so those details should not be assumed without checking the play-by-play record.
Craig Woodson adds another interception
Woodson recorded one interception for New England, completing the Patriots’ team total of four when combined with Davis’ two interceptions and Jones’ one. The supplied player figures also list Woodson with zero fumbles.
The Texans’ only listed interception came from Ja’Marcus Ingram, who recorded no return yards or defensive touchdown. His interception was a positive contribution for Houston, but it was not enough to match New England’s turnover production.
Houston’s defensive strengths and limitations
The Texans recorded 76 tackles, 41 solo tackles, five sacks, and nine tackles for loss. All four figures show that Houston’s defense was active in stopping plays behind or near the line of scrimmage.
However, Houston generated only two quarterback hits and six passes defended in the supplied data. It also finished without a defensive touchdown.
These figures do not mean Houston’s defense alone was responsible for the loss. New England’s offensive execution and the Texans’ turnovers both influenced the result. A more complete evaluation would combine defensive play-by-play, field position, third-down conversions, and time of possession.
The practical takeaway is that Houston generated some backfield disruption but failed to create the same volume of possession-changing plays as New England.
Turnovers and Ball Security: The Hidden Cost of Mistakes
The interception difference is only part of the turnover story. Both teams also recorded fumbles, and those figures reveal another area where possession security mattered.
| Turnover category | Patriots | Texans |
| Interceptions thrown | 1 | 4 |
| Defensive interceptions | 4 | 1 |
| Team fumbles | 4 | 2 |
| Fumbles lost | 2 | 1 |
| Listed defensive touchdowns | 1 | 0 |
The supplied data lists four New England team fumbles, with two lost, compared with two Houston team fumbles, with one lost. The individual player entries identify Maye with four fumbles and two lost, Will Campbell with one fumble and none lost, and Woody Marks with one fumble and one lost.
These individual entries do not add neatly to the team totals, so they should be treated with caution. The team-level figures and individual entries may reflect different recording conventions or a source-data inconsistency. For accurate reporting, the safest approach is to preserve the supplied figures while avoiding claims that depend on reconciling them.
Despite its own fumble problems, New England won the turnover battle on interceptions. The Patriots intercepted four passes while throwing one, a net difference of three interceptions in their favor.
Houston’s four interceptions thrown were the most obvious possession-related weakness in the matchup. Even a productive passing drive cannot guarantee points, and a turnover can erase the potential value of multiple successful plays.
Why turnovers are more than a box-score statistic
Turnovers can affect several parts of a game at once:
- Possession: The team committing the turnover loses the opportunity to continue its drive.
- Scoring potential: The opposing team receives a chance to begin its own offensive sequence.
- Field position: The location of the turnover influences how much ground the new offense must cover.
- Game strategy: A team trailing late may need to pass more often, potentially increasing exposure to defensive pressure.
- Momentum: A takeaway can change the immediate emotional and tactical situation.
These effects help explain why the Patriots could win despite producing fewer passing yards. Their defense repeatedly stopped Houston’s possessions, and their offense converted its opportunities into more passing touchdowns.
Special Teams: Kicking, Punting, and Returns
Special teams were another part of the matchup, although the supplied statistics point to defense and offensive finishing as the clearest explanations for the result.
Kicking statistics
| Kicker | Field goals | Extra points | Total points |
| Ka’imi Fairbairn, Texans | 3/3 | 1/1 | 10 |
| Andy Borregales, Patriots | 0/0 | 4/4 | 4 |
Fairbairn converted all three field-goal attempts, including a longest field goal of 51 yards, and added one extra point. His 10 points made him a significant contributor to Houston’s total.
Borregales did not attempt a field goal but converted all four extra-point attempts. His four points followed New England’s four recorded touchdowns, including the defensive touchdown.
These statistics illustrate the difference between field-goal production and touchdown production. Houston received 10 points from its kicker, while New England’s listed kicking points came entirely from extra points. The Patriots’ ability to score touchdowns reduced their need for field goals.
Punting statistics
| Punter | Punts | Total yards | Average | Longest punt | Inside the 20 |
| Tommy Townsend, Texans | 5 | 294 | 58.8 | 72 | 1 |
| Bryce Baringer, Patriots | 8 | 333 | 41.6 | 55 | 3 |
Townsend averaged 58.8 yards per punt, substantially more than Baringer’s 41.6-yard average. Townsend also recorded a 72-yard longest punt, compared with Baringer’s 55 yards.
However, distance alone does not determine punting value. Baringer placed three punts inside the 20-yard line, while Townsend placed one there. Pinning an opponent deep can limit the space available for an offensive drive, even if the punt travels a shorter distance.
The Patriots punted eight times compared with Houston’s five. That difference may reflect the number and outcomes of their respective possessions, but punt counts alone cannot establish time of possession or the exact quality of every drive.
Kick returns and punt returns
Houston recorded four kick returns for 88 yards, averaging 22.0 yards per return. New England also recorded four kick returns, gaining 89 yards at an average of 22.3 yards.
The nearly identical totals suggest that kick returns were not a major statistical separator in the supplied data.
On punt returns, Houston’s Jaylin Noel recorded three returns for 29 yards, averaging 9.7 yards per return. New England’s Marcus Jones recorded four returns for 53 yards, averaging 13.3 yards per return, with a longest return of 24 yards.
Jones’ punt-return production added another special-teams contribution to a game in which he also scored on an interception return. The combined statistical picture shows that he influenced the result through more than one phase of play.
Special teams did not provide a single overwhelming advantage comparable to New England’s interception total. Nevertheless, field position, accurate kicking, and return yardage are useful supporting details when evaluating the full team performance.
What the Match Player Statistics Reveal About Both Teams
The most useful way to interpret a box score is to connect individual performances to the final result. A long list of yards, catches, sacks, and interceptions becomes more meaningful when the numbers are considered together.
1. New England converted passing opportunities into touchdowns
The Patriots recorded 179 passing yards and three passing touchdowns. Houston gained 212 passing yards but produced only one passing touchdown.
The difference was two touchdowns despite Houston’s 33-yard advantage in passing production. This is a strong example of why efficiency and scoring outcomes matter alongside total yardage.
New England also recorded a 6.6-yard average per passing attempt, compared with Houston’s 4.5. Although that measure does not capture every aspect of quarterback performance, it supports the broader conclusion that the Patriots produced more passing yardage per attempt.
2. Houston’s passing volume came with significant risk
Stroud attempted 47 passes, compared with Maye’s 27. Houston needed considerably more passing attempts to gain its 212 yards.
High passing volume is not automatically a problem. Teams often pass more when trailing, and the game situation can influence a quarterback’s workload. However, four interceptions made Houston’s approach costly.
A team that relies heavily on passing needs to balance attempts with protection, completion rate, and ball security. Houston struggled with all three areas to varying degrees, recording a 42.6% completion rate and three sacks alongside the four interceptions.
3. New England gained more from its rushing attack
The Patriots recorded 105 rushing yards, while the Texans finished with 48. Stevenson accounted for 70 of New England’s yards, making him the leading rusher on either team.
The Patriots’ rushing advantage was useful because it gave the offense another way to move the ball. Houston’s 2.2-yard average, by comparison, meant its ground game provided limited production per carry.
Neither team recorded a rushing touchdown, so the ground game was a supporting factor rather than the main source of scoring.
4. Defensive takeaways were the biggest difference
New England intercepted four passes and scored one defensive touchdown. Houston recorded one interception and no defensive touchdowns.
That turnover gap was more significant than the difference in sacks. Houston’s five sacks demonstrated pressure, but New England’s three sacks were accompanied by four interceptions and nine quarterback hits.
The Patriots’ defense did not need to dominate every defensive statistic to have the greater impact on the final score. It needed to prevent Houston from completing drives and capitalize on mistakes, and the interception total shows how effectively it did so.
5. Individual receiving leaders served different purposes
Boutte led New England with 75 receiving yards, while Diggs and Douglas each recorded a touchdown. Houston’s Higgins led his team with 59 yards, and Schultz produced the longest reception at 42 yards.
These contributions highlight the difference between being the leading receiver by yardage and being the player responsible for a scoring play. Both forms of production matter, but touchdowns have a direct effect on the scoreboard.
6. The final result was not determined by one statistic alone
The Patriots also took five sacks, recorded fumbles, and scored no rushing touchdowns. Houston, meanwhile, produced more passing yards, made three field goals, and recorded five sacks.
Those facts prevent an overly simplistic conclusion. New England did not dominate every phase of the game. It won because its strengths, particularly touchdown production and defensive interceptions, outweighed its weaknesses.
This is the central principle behind useful sports statistics analysis: evaluate the relationships between numbers instead of treating each category as an isolated measure of success.
How to Read an NFL Box Score Correctly
For readers researching football statistics, understanding the main terms makes the numbers easier to interpret.
- Completions and attempts: Completions measure successful passes, while attempts include completed and incomplete passes. Sacks are usually tracked separately.
- Completion percentage: The number of completions divided by pass attempts, multiplied by 100.
- Yards per attempt: Passing yards divided by passing attempts. It indicates how much passing yardage an offense generates per attempt.
- Passer rating: A standardized passing metric calculated from completion percentage, yards per attempt, touchdowns, and interceptions. It is not the same as ESPN QBR.
- QBR: ESPN’s separate quarterback metric, designed to evaluate quarterback contribution using a different methodology.
- Yards per carry: Rushing yards divided by rushing attempts.
- Yards per reception: Receiving yards divided by catches.
- Targets: The number of times a receiver is targeted by a pass.
- Sacks: Plays in which a quarterback is tackled behind the line of scrimmage on a qualifying passing play.
- Interceptions: Passes caught by the opposing defense, ending the intercepted team’s possession.
- Passes defended: Defensive plays that disrupt a pass, including plays that prevent a completion.
- Fumbles lost: Fumbles that result in the opposing team gaining possession.
These definitions are useful when comparing players across games or examining a team’s performance over an entire season. They also help prevent common analytical errors, such as treating a higher passing-yardage total as proof of a better quarterback performance.
Frequently Asked Questions
1. What was the final score of the Patriots vs Texans playoff game?
The New England Patriots defeated the Houston Texans 28-16 in the supplied box-score data for the AFC Divisional Playoffs dated January 19, 2026.
2. How many passing touchdowns did Drake Maye record?
Drake Maye threw three touchdown passes. He completed 16 of 27 attempts for 179 yards, with one interception and a passer rating of 100.7.
3. How many interceptions did C.J. Stroud throw?
C.J. Stroud threw four interceptions while completing 20 of 47 passes for 212 yards and one touchdown. His recorded passer rating was 28.0.
4. Who was the leading receiver for the Patriots?
Kayshon Boutte led New England with 75 receiving yards on three catches. He averaged 25.0 yards per reception and scored one touchdown.
5. Who led the Texans in receiving yards?
Jayden Higgins led Houston with 59 receiving yards on six catches from 10 targets. Dalton Schultz finished with 47 yards and recorded the game’s longest listed Texans reception, a 42-yard catch.
6. Which team had more rushing yards?
New England had 105 rushing yards on 32 attempts, while Houston had 48 yards on 22 attempts. Rhamondre Stevenson led the Patriots with 70 rushing yards, and Woody Marks led the Texans with 17.
Conclusion
The New England Patriots’ 28-16 victory over the Houston Texans was shaped by efficient passing, a productive rushing attack, and a defense that repeatedly disrupted Houston’s offense. Drake Maye threw three touchdown passes, while C.J. Stroud finished with four interceptions despite gaining more passing yards.
New England also held a 105-48 advantage in rushing yards, and Kayshon Boutte led all Patriots receivers with 75 yards. For Houston, Jayden Higgins led the receiving group with 59 yards, while Dalton Schultz produced the team’s longest listed reception of 42 yards.
Defensively, the Patriots recorded four interceptions, 14 passes defended, and a touchdown by Marcus Jones on an interception return. Houston generated five sacks but could not match New England’s turnover production or passing touchdown total.
The most important lesson from these statistics is that winning football depends on more than accumulating yards. Scoring efficiency, possession security, defensive takeaways, and execution in decisive moments all contribute to the final result. Taken together, the numbers explain how New England secured the 12-point victory despite Houston finishing with more passing yards.
