Pittsburgh Steelers vs New York Jets Match Player Stats
The Pittsburgh Steelers vs New York Jets Match Player Stats from the August 22, 2026 NFL preseason game tell a much clearer story than the final score alone. The New York Jets defeated the Pittsburgh Steelers 17-0, but the most useful part of the box score is understanding how that shutout developed. New York was more efficient through the air, protected the football, created two interceptions, and produced four sacks. Pittsburgh moved the ball on the ground reasonably well, but its passing attack struggled to generate consistent production and finished with two interceptions.
This preseason matchup was also valuable because both teams used multiple quarterbacks. The Jets received passing contributions from Cade Klubnik, Bailey Zappe, Geno Smith, and Brady Cook, while Pittsburgh relied on Drew Allar and Will Howard. That makes the individual numbers especially important for evaluating depth, quarterback efficiency, offensive execution, and defensive pressure.
The final statistics show a game in which New York controlled the most important areas without producing an overwhelming rushing performance. The Jets completed 24 of 31 passes for 226 yards, two touchdowns, and no interceptions. Pittsburgh completed 21 of 38 passes for 144 yards, no touchdowns, and two interceptions.
The difference was particularly striking in passer efficiency. New York finished with a 120.2 passer rating, compared with only 46.4 for Pittsburgh. That gap helps explain why the Jets were able to score 17 points while the Steelers were held scoreless.
Game Overview
The Jets entered the game with a 1-1 preseason record, including a 1-0 record on the road. Pittsburgh also entered at 1-1, with a 1-1 home record.
The scoreboard remained relatively quiet after the opening quarter. New York scored seven points in the first quarter, then added 10 points in the fourth quarter. Pittsburgh failed to score in every quarter.
| Team | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | Final |
| New York Jets | 7 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 17 |
| Pittsburgh Steelers | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
The scoreline shows a shutout, but the statistical picture is more nuanced.
New York produced:
- 226 passing yards
- 62 rushing yards
- 239 receiving yards
- 2 passing touchdowns
- 0 interceptions thrown
- 4 sacks
- 2 defensive interceptions
Pittsburgh produced:
- 144 passing yards
- 98 rushing yards
- 184 receiving yards
- 0 passing touchdowns
- 2 interceptions thrown
- 2 sacks
- 0 defensive interceptions
One of the most important observations is that Pittsburgh actually ran for more yards than New York. The Steelers recorded 98 rushing yards on 26 carries, while the Jets managed 62 yards on 24 attempts.
That means the shutout was not simply the result of Pittsburgh being unable to run the football. The larger problem came through the passing game, where Pittsburgh struggled to turn opportunities into productive drives.
Pittsburgh Steelers vs New York Jets Match Player Stats: Passing Analysis
Passing efficiency was arguably the biggest statistical separator in this game.
New York completed 24 of 31 passes for 226 yards. The Jets averaged 7.7 yards per passing attempt and produced two touchdowns without throwing an interception. Their recorded passer rating was 120.2.
Pittsburgh completed 21 of 38 passes for 144 yards. The Steelers averaged only 4.8 yards per attempt, threw two interceptions, and failed to produce a touchdown. Their passer rating was 46.4.
The contrast is significant.
| Passing Category | Jets | Steelers |
| Completions/Attempts | 24/31 | 21/38 |
| Passing Yards | 226 | 144 |
| Yards per Attempt | 7.7 | 4.8 |
| Touchdowns | 2 | 0 |
| Interceptions | 0 | 2 |
| Sacks | 2 | 4 |
| Passer Rating | 120.2 | 46.4 |
New York attempted seven fewer passes than Pittsburgh but gained 82 more passing yards. That illustrates the difference in efficiency.
Pittsburgh’s 21 completions may initially look respectable, but the 144-yard total indicates that many completions did not create substantial yardage. New York, by comparison, generated significantly more production per attempt.
The Jets also avoided the most damaging passing mistake: the interception. Pittsburgh threw two.
Cade Klubnik
Cade Klubnik completed 10 of 14 passes for 75 yards.
His completion rate was approximately 71.4 percent, giving him a relatively efficient statistical line. While he did not lead the Jets in passing yards, his 10 completions provided a large portion of the team’s early passing production.
The most important aspect of Klubnik’s performance is his accuracy. Completing 10 of 14 attempts means he missed only four throws in the recorded statistics.
Bailey Zappe
Bailey Zappe completed 6 of 8 passes for 68 yards.
That represents a completion rate of 75 percent. Although his total passing volume was lower than Klubnik’s, Zappe was highly accurate on his attempts.
The 68 yards also placed him close to Klubnik in total passing production despite attempting six fewer passes.
Geno Smith
Geno Smith completed all seven of his pass attempts for 65 yards and one touchdown.
A perfect 7-for-7 line stands out immediately. Smith also recorded one of New York’s two passing touchdowns.
His performance combined accuracy with scoring production. Seven completions for 65 yards means he averaged approximately 9.3 yards per completion.
Brady Cook
Brady Cook completed 1 of 2 passes for 31 yards and one touchdown.
The completion itself produced substantial yardage, and it resulted in a touchdown. His two attempts therefore generated an unusually high amount of production on limited volume.
Drew Allar
Drew Allar completed 11 of 23 passes for 110 yards.
He led Pittsburgh in passing yards and completions. However, the 23 attempts produced only 110 yards, which translates to approximately 4.8 yards per attempt.
His completion rate was approximately 47.8 percent.
That combination of modest yardage and low completion efficiency limited Pittsburgh’s ability to sustain an effective passing attack.
Will Howard
Will Howard completed 10 of 15 passes for 74 yards and threw two interceptions.
His completion rate was approximately 66.7 percent, which is considerably better than Allar’s completion percentage. However, the two interceptions were extremely costly because Pittsburgh finished the game with no offensive touchdowns.
Howard’s statistical line demonstrates why completion percentage alone cannot determine quarterback effectiveness. He completed two-thirds of his passes, but the turnovers severely damaged the offense.
Rushing Performance
Pittsburgh’s rushing statistics were actually better than New York’s.
The Steelers carried the ball 26 times for 98 yards, averaging 3.8 yards per carry. Their longest run was seven yards, and they did not score a rushing touchdown.
The Jets carried 24 times for 62 yards, averaging 2.6 yards per attempt. Their longest run was 16 yards, but they also failed to produce a rushing touchdown.
| Rushing Category | Jets | Steelers |
| Attempts | 24 | 26 |
| Yards | 62 | 98 |
| Average | 2.6 | 3.8 |
| Touchdowns | 0 | 0 |
| Long | 16 | 7 |
This is an important part of the game that can be overlooked when looking only at the 17-0 score.
Pittsburgh gained 36 more rushing yards despite losing the game by 17 points.
The Steelers therefore cannot attribute the shutout entirely to a lack of rushing production. Instead, the overall offensive problem was the inability to combine that rushing output with an effective passing game.
Kaleb Johnson
Kaleb Johnson was Pittsburgh’s leading rusher.
He recorded 10 carries for 39 yards, averaging 3.9 yards per carry. His longest run was five yards.
Johnson accounted for a significant portion of Pittsburgh’s rushing workload. His 10 attempts represented nearly 38.5 percent of the team’s 26 rushing attempts.
His performance was steady rather than explosive. The 39-yard total was useful, but the five-yard long indicates that Pittsburgh did not consistently create big plays on the ground.
Chip Trayanum
Chip Trayanum led the Jets in rushing with six carries for 20 yards.
He averaged 3.3 yards per carry, with an eight-yard longest run.
His six carries represented one quarter of New York’s 24 rushing attempts.
The Jets did not dominate on the ground, but they did not need to. Their passing efficiency and defensive performance supplied the larger advantage.
Receiving Statistics
The receiving numbers provide another interesting comparison.
New York recorded 24 receptions for 239 yards, averaging 10.0 yards per reception. The Jets had 30 total targets and two receiving touchdowns.
Pittsburgh recorded 21 receptions for 184 yards, averaging 8.8 yards per reception. The Steelers had 36 targets and no receiving touchdowns.
| Receiving Category | Jets | Steelers |
| Receptions | 24 | 21 |
| Receiving Yards | 239 | 184 |
| Average | 10.0 | 8.8 |
| Touchdowns | 2 | 0 |
| Targets | 30 | 36 |
| Long | 44 | 38 |
The target difference is particularly revealing.
Pittsburgh generated six more targets than New York but finished with 55 fewer receiving yards. The Steelers also needed 36 targets to produce 21 receptions, while New York produced 24 receptions on only 30 targets.
That suggests the Jets were more efficient at converting passing opportunities into completions and yardage.
Quincy Skinner Jr.
Quincy Skinner Jr. was New York’s top receiver.
He caught four passes for 47 yards and one touchdown. He averaged 11.8 yards per reception and recorded a 31-yard long reception.
His touchdown made him one of the key contributors to the Jets’ scoring production.
Four receptions may not appear like a huge number, but in a game featuring several quarterbacks and multiple receiving options, Skinner’s combination of yardage and scoring impact was important.
Lake McRee
Lake McRee led Pittsburgh in receiving yards.
He recorded two receptions for 46 yards, averaging 23.0 yards per catch. His longest reception went for 38 yards.
McRee’s production is especially interesting because he needed only two receptions to reach 46 yards.
That means Pittsburgh did have the ability to create explosive passing plays. The issue was consistency. One or two big gains were not enough to compensate for the overall lack of passing efficiency.
Defensive Impact
The defensive statistics strongly favor New York.
The Jets recorded:
- 76 total tackles
- 42 solo tackles
- 4 sacks
- 5 tackles for loss
- 9 passes defended
- 5 quarterback hits
- 2 interceptions
Pittsburgh recorded:
- 70 total tackles
- 37 solo tackles
- 2 sacks
- 7 tackles for loss
- 5 passes defended
- 6 quarterback hits
- 0 interceptions
The most obvious difference is turnovers.
New York intercepted Pittsburgh twice. Pittsburgh did not intercept any Jets passes.
That creates a direct relationship between the defensive statistics and the final score. New York’s defense created extra possessions while its offense avoided giving possessions away.
Andre Cisco
Andre Cisco recorded one interception for New York and returned it 23 yards.
That was the longer of the Jets’ two interception returns.
A defensive interception does more than simply appear in the turnover column. It ends an opposing drive immediately and can provide favorable field position.
Cisco’s 23-yard return therefore added value beyond the interception itself.
Samuel Womack III
Samuel Womack III also intercepted a Pittsburgh pass.
His interception return covered seven yards.
Together, Cisco and Womack produced New York’s two defensive takeaways.
The Steelers finished with no interceptions, meaning the turnover battle was decisively in New York’s favor.
Sack and Pressure Comparison
The Jets also generated more sacks.
New York recorded four sacks for a total of 13 sack yards.
Pittsburgh recorded two sacks for 40 sack yards.
Although Pittsburgh’s two sacks resulted in more combined sack yardage, New York’s four sacks indicate greater frequency in getting the quarterback to the ground.
The Jets also recorded five quarterback hits, while Pittsburgh recorded six.
That means Pittsburgh did create pressure, but the overall defensive result was less productive because the Steelers failed to generate interceptions and allowed two offensive touchdowns.
The defensive lesson is that pressure statistics need to be evaluated alongside turnovers and points allowed. A team can produce quarterback hits without necessarily controlling the game.
The Turnover Battle
Turnovers were one of the clearest explanations for the final result.
New York threw zero interceptions and recorded two defensive interceptions.
Pittsburgh threw two interceptions and recorded zero defensive interceptions.
| Turnover Category | Jets | Steelers |
| Offensive Interceptions | 0 | 2 |
| Defensive Interceptions | 2 | 0 |
| Fumbles | 2 | 1 |
| Fumbles Lost | 0 | 0 |
Neither team lost a fumble.
That means the entire interception difference remained intact without being offset by lost fumbles.
In practical terms, New York protected the football better and created turnovers on defense. Pittsburgh did neither through interceptions.
This is one of the strongest statistical reasons the Jets were able to win despite Pittsburgh having the better rushing total.
Special Teams Statistics
Special teams also contributed to the overall game profile.
New York returned one kickoff for 27 yards. Pittsburgh returned three kickoffs for 80 yards.
The Steelers therefore had more kickoff return opportunities and more total kickoff return yardage.
Punt returns were more balanced.
New York returned five punts for 51 yards, averaging 10.2 yards per return. Pittsburgh also returned five punts but gained 43 yards, averaging 8.6 yards per return.
New York therefore held an eight-yard advantage in total punt return yardage.
Kicking
New York went 1-for-2 on field-goal attempts and converted both extra-point attempts.
The Jets’ successful field goal covered 39 yards.
Pittsburgh attempted one field goal and missed it. The Steelers did not attempt an extra point because they failed to score a touchdown.
The Jets therefore received five points from their kicking unit.
Punting Comparison
Both teams punted six times.
New York produced 287 total punting yards, averaging 47.8 yards per punt. Its longest punt was 61 yards, and two punts landed inside the 20-yard line.
Pittsburgh produced 303 total punting yards, averaging 50.5 yards per punt. Its longest punt was 57 yards, with one punt inside the 20.
| Punting Category | Jets | Steelers |
| Punts | 6 | 6 |
| Total Yards | 287 | 303 |
| Average | 47.8 | 50.5 |
| Long | 61 | 57 |
| Inside 20 | 2 | 1 |
Pittsburgh had the stronger raw punting average, but New York had more punts inside the 20.
That distinction matters because punting is not simply about maximum distance. Field position is also important.
Why Did the Steelers Lose 17-0?
The Pittsburgh Steelers vs New York Jets Match Player Stats point to several interconnected reasons.
1. Pittsburgh’s passing game lacked efficiency
The Steelers completed 21 of 38 passes for 144 yards.
That is only 4.8 yards per attempt.
New York produced 7.7 yards per attempt.
The 2.9-yard difference per passing attempt was substantial.
2. Pittsburgh threw two interceptions
Will Howard was responsible for two interceptions.
New York converted those defensive opportunities into a major advantage even though the provided statistics do not assign a specific scoring drive to each turnover.
3. New York scored two passing touchdowns
The Jets produced two passing touchdowns while Pittsburgh produced zero passing touchdowns.
That directly affected the scoreboard.
4. New York protected the football
The Jets threw no interceptions.
Their two fumbles were not lost.
Pittsburgh also did not lose its one fumble, but the two interceptions still created the decisive turnover difference.
5. Pittsburgh’s rushing advantage was not enough
The Steelers gained 98 rushing yards compared with New York’s 62.
That advantage could not compensate for the passing disparity and turnover gap.
6. The Jets generated more sacks
Four sacks compared with Pittsburgh’s two gave New York another defensive edge.
The Jets combined pressure with interceptions, which made their defensive performance much more impactful.
What the Stats Say About the Quarterbacks
Because this was a preseason game, quarterback statistics should be interpreted carefully.
Multiple quarterbacks played for both teams, and the number of attempts varied significantly.
Still, several trends stand out.
New York’s quarterbacks collectively completed 24 of 31 attempts for 226 yards, two touchdowns, and zero interceptions.
Pittsburgh’s quarterbacks completed 21 of 38 attempts for 144 yards, zero touchdowns, and two interceptions.
The difference is not merely completion percentage.
New York completed approximately 77.4 percent of its passes as a team. Pittsburgh completed approximately 55.3 percent.
That is a gap of more than 22 percentage points.
The Jets also generated more yards despite attempting fewer passes.
This combination of accuracy, efficiency, and ball security was one of the defining characteristics of the game.
What the Receiving Numbers Reveal
The receiving statistics tell a similar story.
New York produced 239 receiving yards on 30 targets.
Pittsburgh produced 184 receiving yards on 36 targets.
New York therefore gained more receiving yards while using fewer targets.
The Jets also recorded two receiving touchdowns.
Pittsburgh had none.
Lake McRee’s 38-yard reception demonstrates that Pittsburgh was capable of creating explosive plays. However, the team did not sustain enough of those plays to generate points.
Quincy Skinner Jr.’s four catches for 47 yards and a touchdown represented a more complete combination of production and scoring impact.
Important Statistical Takeaways
The most useful way to understand the box score is to look beyond one category.
Passing efficiency favored New York
New York averaged 7.7 yards per attempt compared with Pittsburgh’s 4.8.
Rushing favored Pittsburgh
The Steelers gained 98 rushing yards compared with the Jets’ 62.
Receiving efficiency favored New York
The Jets averaged 10.0 yards per reception compared with 8.8 for Pittsburgh.
Turnovers favored New York
The Jets intercepted Pittsburgh twice and threw zero interceptions themselves.
Defensive takeaways favored New York
New York recorded two interceptions and nine passes defended.
Sack production favored New York
The Jets recorded four sacks compared with Pittsburgh’s two.
Special teams were mixed
Pittsburgh had the better punting average and more kickoff return yards, while New York had more punt return yards and the only successful field goal.
Pittsburgh Steelers vs New York Jets Match Player Stats: What Fans Should Focus On
When reviewing preseason player statistics, the most useful approach is not simply identifying the player with the most yards.
Instead, consider workload, efficiency, turnovers, scoring impact, and consistency.
For Pittsburgh, Kaleb Johnson’s 39 rushing yards on 10 attempts show a meaningful workload. Drew Allar led the team with 110 passing yards, while Lake McRee produced 46 receiving yards on only two catches.
However, Will Howard’s two interceptions were a major negative statistical factor.
For New York, Cade Klubnik led the team with 75 passing yards, while Bailey Zappe added 68 and Geno Smith produced 65 yards with a perfect completion record and a touchdown.
Quincy Skinner Jr. was the leading receiver, and Chip Trayanum led the team in rushing.
On defense, Andre Cisco and Samuel Womack III each recorded an interception.
That distribution demonstrates that the Jets did not depend on one player to produce every major statistical category. Different players contributed in different areas.
A Closer Look at Offensive Efficiency
One of the most valuable lessons from this game is that total yardage does not always determine the winner.
Pittsburgh actually had the better rushing numbers.
Yet New York scored 17 points and Pittsburgh scored zero.
Why?
Because offensive efficiency is built from several connected elements.
The Jets were more accurate passing the ball. They averaged more yards per passing attempt. They scored two passing touchdowns. They avoided interceptions. They also benefited from defensive takeaways.
Pittsburgh’s 98 rushing yards were useful, but they did not translate into points.
This is an important distinction when interpreting football statistics. Yardage measures movement, while points measure successful conversion of opportunities.
The Significance of the Fourth Quarter
New York scored 10 points in the fourth quarter after scoring seven in the first.
Pittsburgh failed to score in the final quarter or any other period.
The fourth-quarter production ultimately turned a seven-point game advantage into a 17-point shutout.
The Jets’ ability to finish the game without allowing Pittsburgh onto the scoreboard was especially important.
A preseason game often includes extensive substitutions and different combinations of players. Finishing strongly under those circumstances can provide useful information about depth and execution.
Statistical Profile of the Game
The entire matchup can be summarized through a few major numbers.
| Category | New York Jets | Pittsburgh Steelers |
| Final Score | 17 | 0 |
| Passing Yards | 226 | 144 |
| Rushing Yards | 62 | 98 |
| Receiving Yards | 239 | 184 |
| Passing TDs | 2 | 0 |
| Interceptions Thrown | 0 | 2 |
| Sacks | 4 | 2 |
| Defensive INTs | 2 | 0 |
| Total Tackles | 76 | 70 |
| Punt Returns | 51 yards | 43 yards |
| Kickoff Returns | 27 yards | 80 yards |
| Field Goals | 1/2 | 0/1 |
The table makes the central story easy to see.
Pittsburgh’s strongest area was rushing.
New York’s strongest areas were passing efficiency, scoring, ball security, and defensive takeaways.
What This Game Does and Does Not Tell Us
It is important not to overstate what one preseason box score proves.
A preseason game is not identical to a regular-season matchup. Player workloads can vary, quarterback rotations can change, and coaching staffs may prioritize evaluation over maximizing a particular player’s statistics.
Therefore, these numbers should be viewed as a snapshot of performance rather than a definitive prediction of future regular-season outcomes.
Still, the statistics provide useful evidence.
For Pittsburgh, the clearest areas to examine are passing efficiency, turnover avoidance, red-zone execution, and the ability to turn rushing production into points.
For New York, the encouraging statistical areas include passing accuracy, quarterback efficiency, defensive takeaways, and overall ball security.
Frequently Asked Questions
What was the final score between the Steelers and Jets?
The New York Jets defeated the Pittsburgh Steelers 17-0 on August 22, 2026, in an NFL preseason game.
Who led the Steelers in passing?
Drew Allar led Pittsburgh with 11 completions on 23 attempts for 110 yards. Will Howard completed 10 of 15 passes for 74 yards and threw two interceptions.
Who led the Jets in passing?
Cade Klubnik led New York with 10 completions for 75 yards. Bailey Zappe added 68 yards, Geno Smith had 65 yards and one touchdown, and Brady Cook had 31 yards and one touchdown.
Who was the Steelers’ leading rusher?
Kaleb Johnson led Pittsburgh with 10 carries for 39 yards, averaging 3.9 yards per carry.
Who was the Jets’ leading receiver?
Quincy Skinner Jr. led New York with four receptions for 47 yards and one touchdown.
How many interceptions did each team have?
The Jets intercepted Pittsburgh twice, with Andre Cisco returning one interception 23 yards and Samuel Womack III returning the other seven yards. Pittsburgh recorded no interceptions.
Conclusion
The Pittsburgh Steelers vs New York Jets Match Player Stats show that New York’s 17-0 victory was built primarily on passing efficiency, defensive takeaways, and ball security rather than rushing dominance.
Pittsburgh actually finished with the stronger rushing performance, gaining 98 yards on 26 attempts compared with New York’s 62 yards on 24 attempts. However, the Steelers could not turn that advantage into points.
The biggest statistical gap appeared through the air. New York completed 24 of 31 passes for 226 yards, two touchdowns, and no interceptions. Pittsburgh completed 21 of 38 passes for only 144 yards, no touchdowns, and two interceptions.
The defensive numbers reinforced that advantage. The Jets recorded four sacks and two interceptions, while Pittsburgh had two sacks and no interceptions.
Individual performances also provide useful context. Kaleb Johnson led Pittsburgh’s rushing attack, Drew Allar led its passing production, and Lake McRee supplied the team’s longest reception. For New York, Cade Klubnik led the team in passing yards, Geno Smith delivered a perfect 7-for-7 passing line with a touchdown, Quincy Skinner Jr. led the receiving group, and Chip Trayanum paced the rushing attack.
Taken as a whole, the box score demonstrates an important football principle: winning does not always require dominating every statistical category. Pittsburgh ran for more yards and produced more kickoff return yardage, but New York was substantially more efficient in the passing game and won the interception battle 2-0.
That combination was enough to produce a decisive preseason shutout and makes the individual numbers behind the 17-0 score particularly useful for anyone studying the matchup.
