Tampa Bay Buccaneers vs Los Angeles Rams Match Player Stats
The Tampa Bay Buccaneers vs Los Angeles Rams Match Player Stats from November 24, 2025, reveal how the Los Angeles Rams secured a convincing 34-7 victory over Tampa Bay. Matthew Stafford delivered three passing touchdowns, Davante Adams scored twice as a receiver, and the Rams defense turned two interceptions into a decisive advantage. One of those interceptions resulted in a defensive touchdown, making the performance even more damaging for the Buccaneers.
The game provided a clear contrast between two offenses. Los Angeles moved the ball efficiently through the air, created scoring opportunities, and protected possession well enough to maintain control. Tampa Bay, meanwhile, struggled to generate consistent passing production despite gaining 123 rushing yards. The Buccaneers finished with only seven points, while the Rams built a 31-7 halftime lead and added another field goal in the fourth quarter.
For readers examining individual performances, fantasy football implications, team efficiency, or the decisive moments behind the final score, this breakdown covers the major player statistics, offensive contributions, defensive performances, and special teams numbers. It also identifies a discrepancy in the supplied passing statistics that should be considered when interpreting the final totals.
Tampa Bay Buccaneers vs Los Angeles Rams Match Player Stats: Game Overview
The Rams hosted the Buccaneers on November 24, 2025, and won 34-7. The result reflected a strong performance across the passing game, defensive pressure, and turnover creation.
Final Score and Team Records
| Game Information | Tampa Bay Buccaneers | Los Angeles Rams |
| Final score | 7 | 34 |
| Record entering the reported game summary | 6-5 | 9-2 |
| Home or away record | 4-3 away | 5-1 at home |
| First-quarter points | 0 | 14 |
| Second-quarter points | 7 | 17 |
| Third-quarter points | 0 | 0 |
| Fourth-quarter points | 0 | 3 |
| Total points | 7 | 34 |
The scoring pattern explains much of the result. Los Angeles scored twice in the first quarter and added 17 points in the second. Tampa Bay managed its only touchdown during the second quarter but could not produce another scoring drive during the remainder of the game.
The Rams entered halftime with a 31-7 lead. That advantage allowed their defense to apply pressure while Tampa Bay faced the need to take greater risks to get back into the contest.
The third quarter was scoreless for both teams. Los Angeles then added three fourth-quarter points to complete the 34-7 victory.
What Decided the Game?
Three factors stand out in the statistical record.
- Quarterback efficiency: Matthew Stafford completed 25 of 35 passes for 273 yards and three touchdowns, according to his individual passing line.
- Turnover advantage: The Rams recorded two interceptions, returning them for a combined 81 yards and one touchdown.
- Receiving production: Davante Adams caught two touchdown passes, while Puka Nacua led the Rams in receiving yards with 97.
Tampa Bay’s rushing attack provided some positive production, but its passing offense struggled to turn possessions into points. The Buccaneers’ two interceptions allowed the Rams to create additional scoring opportunities and increased the difficulty of any comeback attempt.
Matthew Stafford’s Passing Performance
Matthew Stafford was the leading offensive performer for Los Angeles. His reported individual statistics show an experienced quarterback operating efficiently and finding the end zone without throwing an interception.
Matthew Stafford Passing Stats
| Statistic | Performance |
| Completions | 25 |
| Pass attempts | 35 |
| Completion percentage | 71.4% |
| Passing yards | 273 |
| Yards per attempt | 7.8 |
| Passing touchdowns | 3 |
| Interceptions | 0 |
| Sacks taken | 1 |
| Sack yards lost | 10 |
| ESPN QBR | 77.6 |
| Passer rating | 122.7 |
Stafford completed approximately seven out of every ten attempts. His 7.8 yards per attempt also indicates that the Rams were producing meaningful gains through the passing game rather than relying entirely on short completions.
The three touchdown passes were particularly important. Each passing score helped the Rams convert their offensive possessions into points, while the absence of interceptions meant Stafford did not give Tampa Bay an opportunity to take possession through a pass turnover.
His reported passer rating of 122.7 supports the conclusion that this was a highly productive outing. The 77.6 QBR provides another favorable indicator, although QBR and passer rating use different calculations and should not be treated as interchangeable measures.
Why Stafford’s Efficiency Mattered
Quarterback performance is best understood by considering production, risk, and scoring together.
Stafford’s 25 completions produced substantial yardage, and three of those completions resulted in touchdowns. He also avoided interceptions despite attempting 35 passes.
This combination made it difficult for Tampa Bay to disrupt the Rams’ offensive rhythm. The Buccaneers recorded one sack, but they did not generate a passing turnover against Stafford in the supplied statistics.
A quarterback does not need to throw for an extraordinary number of yards to dominate a game. The more important question is whether his passing creates scoring opportunities while avoiding costly mistakes. Stafford’s reported performance met both objectives.
A Note About the Passing-Yard Discrepancy
The supplied game data contains an inconsistency that should not be ignored. Stafford’s individual passing line lists 273 yards, while the Los Angeles team passing summary lists 263 yards. The Rams’ receiving statistics also total 273 yards.
For this article, Stafford’s individual line is reported as provided, and the team-level discrepancy is identified rather than silently corrected. Readers seeking a fully reconciled official total should compare the original ESPN box score and play-by-play record.
Tampa Bay Quarterback Stats: Baker Mayfield and Teddy Bridgewater
Tampa Bay used both Baker Mayfield and Teddy Bridgewater in the reported passing statistics. Neither quarterback produced the level of efficiency needed to keep the Buccaneers competitive with the Rams.
Baker Mayfield Passing Stats
| Statistic | Performance |
| Completions | 9 |
| Pass attempts | 19 |
| Completion percentage | 47.4% |
| Passing yards | 41 |
| Yards per attempt | 2.2 |
| Passing touchdowns | 1 |
| Interceptions | 2 |
| Sacks taken | 2 |
| Sack yards lost | 12 |
| ESPN QBR | 32.8 |
| Passer rating | 32.0 |
Mayfield’s statistical line shows the central problem for Tampa Bay: limited passing production combined with turnovers.
He completed nine of 19 attempts, a completion rate below 50%. His 41 passing yards and 2.2 yards per attempt indicate that the offense did not generate much downfield progress from his passing attempts.
The two interceptions were even more damaging. Against an offense as productive as the Rams, giving away possessions creates additional pressure on the defense and reduces the margin for offensive mistakes.
Mayfield did record one passing touchdown, but the overall production was insufficient to support a comeback. His passer rating of 32.0 reflected the difficulty of the performance, while his QBR of 32.8 offered a separate assessment of his contribution.
Teddy Bridgewater Passing Stats
| Statistic | Performance |
| Completions | 8 |
| Pass attempts | 15 |
| Completion percentage | 53.3% |
| Passing yards | 62 |
| Yards per attempt | 4.1 |
| Passing touchdowns | 0 |
| Interceptions | 0 |
| Sacks taken | 2 |
| Sack yards lost | 21 |
| ESPN QBR | 6.8 |
| Passer rating | 63.8 |
Bridgewater completed eight passes for 62 yards without throwing an interception or a touchdown. His 4.1 yards per attempt were higher than Mayfield’s reported 2.2, but the total passing production remained modest.
Bridgewater also took two sacks for a combined loss of 21 yards. Sacks can stall drives by creating longer third-down situations and pushing offenses away from manageable passing distances.
His passer rating was higher than Mayfield’s, but that does not mean he transformed the Buccaneers’ offense. His passing line still shows no touchdowns, limited yardage, and substantial yardage lost through sacks.
Tampa Bay’s Combined Passing Numbers
| Team Passing Statistic | Reported Total |
| Completions | 17 |
| Attempts | 34 |
| Completion percentage | 50.0% |
| Passing yards | 70 |
| Yards per attempt | 3.0 |
| Passing touchdowns | 1 |
| Interceptions | 2 |
| Sacks | 4 |
| Sack yards lost | 33 |
| Team passer rating | 41.7 |
The combined figures make the contrast with Stafford especially clear. Tampa Bay recorded 70 team passing yards, while Stafford alone was credited with 273 individual passing yards.
The four sacks also contributed to Tampa Bay’s offensive difficulties. Even when a passing play begins with a reasonable opportunity, pressure can erase progress and force an offense into difficult situations.
These statistics do not establish that quarterback play alone determined the outcome. Offensive line performance, receiver separation, defensive coverage, field position, and game situation also matter. Nevertheless, the passing numbers and interceptions provide strong evidence that Tampa Bay’s passing attack was a major weakness in this matchup.
Rushing Stats: Buccaneers vs Rams
The rushing statistics offer a more balanced comparison than the passing figures. Tampa Bay gained more rushing yards than Los Angeles, yet the Buccaneers failed to turn that advantage into additional points.
Tampa Bay Buccaneers Rushing Leaders
| Player | Carries | Rushing Yards | Yards per Carry | Longest Run | TDs |
| Sean Tucker | 12 | 42 | 3.5 | 9 | 0 |
| Rachaad White | 7 | 38 | 5.4 | 16 | 0 |
| Baker Mayfield | 4 | 19 | 4.8 | 9 | 0 |
| Tez Johnson | 2 | 12 | 6.0 | 6 | 0 |
| Teddy Bridgewater | 1 | 6 | 6.0 | 6 | 0 |
| Owen Wright | 3 | 6 | 2.0 | 4 | 0 |
| Team total | 29 | 123 | 4.2 | 16 | 0 |
Sean Tucker led Tampa Bay in carries with 12 and finished with 42 rushing yards. His workload made him the team’s leading conventional rushing option by attempts.
Rachaad White produced 38 yards on seven carries, averaging 5.4 yards per attempt. He also recorded the longest run among the listed Tampa Bay players, gaining 16 yards on one carry.
Mayfield contributed 19 rushing yards, while Tez Johnson averaged six yards per carry on two attempts. These smaller contributions helped Tampa Bay reach 123 total rushing yards.
However, none of the listed Buccaneers rushing performances resulted in a touchdown. That distinction matters because yardage alone does not guarantee points. An offense can gain ground between the tackles and on designed runs but still struggle to finish drives.
Los Angeles Rams Rushing Leaders
| Player | Carries | Rushing Yards | Yards per Carry | Longest Run | TDs |
| Kyren Williams | 12 | 46 | 3.8 | 9 | 0 |
| Blake Corum | 7 | 24 | 3.4 | 10 | 0 |
| Team total | 19 | 70 | 3.7 | 10 | 0 |
Kyren Williams led the Rams with 46 rushing yards on 12 carries. Blake Corum added 24 yards on seven attempts.
Los Angeles finished with 70 rushing yards, 53 fewer than Tampa Bay’s reported total. Yet the Rams scored 34 points, demonstrating that a team does not need to dominate rushing yardage to control a game.
The Rams’ passing efficiency and defensive touchdowns helped create the separation. Their rushing attack supported the broader offensive effort, while Stafford and the receivers provided the most significant scoring production.
Why Tampa Bay’s Rushing Advantage Was Not Enough
Tampa Bay’s 123 rushing yards were a positive statistical result, but three factors limited their overall impact.
- No rushing touchdowns: The Buccaneers did not convert any of their listed rushing attempts into a score.
- Weak passing production: Their reported 70 team passing yards made it harder to sustain a balanced offensive attack.
- Turnover pressure: Two interceptions gave Los Angeles additional opportunities and made Tampa Bay’s scoring deficit more difficult to overcome.
This is an important lesson when interpreting football box scores. Total yardage provides useful context, but it does not measure how consistently an offense scores, protects possession, or converts opportunities into touchdowns.
Receiving Stats: The Players Who Shaped the Passing Game
The receiving numbers reveal the different ways the two teams generated offense. Los Angeles had several productive targets, including a leading receiver in Puka Nacua and a touchdown specialist in Davante Adams. Tampa Bay spread its limited production across multiple players but generated only one receiving touchdown.
Los Angeles Rams Receiving Stats
| Player | Receptions | Receiving Yards | Yards per Reception | Targets | Longest Reception | TDs |
| Puka Nacua | 7 | 97 | 13.9 | 11 | 31 | 0 |
| Davante Adams | 5 | 62 | 12.4 | 8 | 24 | 2 |
| Colby Parkinson | 4 | 41 | 10.3 | 4 | 15 | 1 |
| Davis Allen | 3 | 29 | 9.7 | 4 | 15 | 0 |
| Konata Mumpfield | 2 | 25 | 12.5 | 2 | 14 | 0 |
| Jordan Whittington | 3 | 17 | 5.7 | 3 | 13 | 0 |
| Kyren Williams | 1 | 2 | 2.0 | 1 | 2 | 0 |
| Terrance Ferguson | 0 | 0 | 0.0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Team total | 25 | 273 | 10.9 | 34 | 31 | 3 |
The individual receiving totals are reproduced from the supplied data. The reported team receiving total of 273 yards conflicts with the team passing summary, which lists 263 yards.
Puka Nacua’s Contribution
Nacua led the Rams in receiving yards, finishing with seven catches for 97 yards on 11 targets. His average of 13.9 yards per reception indicates that his catches generated substantial gains.
He did not record a receiving touchdown in the supplied statistics, but touchdowns are not the only measure of a receiver’s contribution. A receiver can help an offense by moving the chains, creating favorable down-and-distance situations, and forcing defenders to respect intermediate and deeper routes.
Nacua’s 97 yards made him the Rams’ most productive receiver by yardage. His 11 targets also show that he was a central part of the passing attack.
Davante Adams’ Two Touchdowns
Adams recorded five receptions for 62 yards and two touchdowns. He averaged 12.4 yards per catch and received eight targets.
His two receiving touchdowns made him the Rams’ leading touchdown scorer among the listed receivers. While Nacua generated more total receiving yards, Adams made a greater direct contribution to the final score through his finishing ability.
This difference highlights why receiving yards and touchdowns should be evaluated separately. Yardage indicates how much ground a receiver gained through catches, while touchdowns show how often those contributions ended in points.
Colby Parkinson’s Red-Zone Value
Parkinson finished with four receptions for 41 yards and one touchdown on four targets. He caught every pass targeted to him in the supplied line.
His average of 10.3 yards per reception indicates that his production was not limited to very short catches. The touchdown also gave Los Angeles another scoring option beyond its leading wide receivers.
A productive tight end can create matchup problems for defenses, particularly when linebackers or safeties must cover receivers running routes through the middle of the field. The supplied statistics establish Parkinson’s production, although they do not independently confirm which defensive matchup produced his touchdown.
Tampa Bay Buccaneers Receiving Stats
| Player | Receptions | Receiving Yards | Yards per Reception | Targets | Longest Reception | TDs |
| Emeka Egbuka | 3 | 32 | 10.7 | 8 | 32 | 0 |
| Tez Johnson | 3 | 21 | 7.0 | 4 | 14 | 1 |
| Cade Otton | 4 | 21 | 5.3 | 7 | 13 | 0 |
| Sterling Shepard | 3 | 12 | 4.0 | 5 | 7 | 0 |
| Chris Godwin Jr. | 2 | 9 | 4.5 | 4 | 5 | 0 |
| Sean Tucker | 1 | 4 | 4.0 | 2 | 4 | 0 |
| Rachaad White | 1 | 4 | 4.0 | 1 | 4 | 0 |
| Team total | 17 | 103 | 6.1 | 31 | 32 | 1 |
The Buccaneers’ receiving totals show a significant gap in production compared with Los Angeles. Emeka Egbuka led Tampa Bay with 32 receiving yards, while Tez Johnson recorded the team’s only listed receiving touchdown.
Cade Otton led the Buccaneers in receptions with four, but his 21 yards reflected limited gains. Chris Godwin Jr. recorded two catches for nine yards, and Sterling Shepard added 12 yards on three receptions.
The distribution suggests that Tampa Bay did not have a receiver producing the kind of sustained yardage that Nacua delivered for Los Angeles. The Buccaneers also completed fewer passes overall and had significantly less passing yardage according to the supplied team statistics.
Comparing the Receiving Units
| Receiving Measure | Tampa Bay | Los Angeles |
| Receptions | 17 | 25 |
| Reported receiving yards | 103 | 273 |
| Yards per reception | 6.1 | 10.9 |
| Receiving touchdowns | 1 | 3 |
| Longest reception | 32 | 31 |
| Targets | 31 | 34 |
Los Angeles recorded eight more receptions and three times as many receiving touchdowns. Its reported average of 10.9 yards per reception also exceeded Tampa Bay’s 6.1.
Interestingly, Tampa Bay’s longest reception was one yard longer than Los Angeles’ longest. That isolated statistic did not translate into a comparable passing attack, because overall efficiency depends on the production of every target and the consistency of the offense.
The broader picture is clear: Los Angeles generated more yards per catch, converted more receptions into touchdowns, and sustained a more productive passing offense.
Defensive Player Stats: Interceptions, Sacks, and Tackles
The Rams’ defense played a major role in the outcome. Its two interceptions, four sacks, and ten passes defended created problems for Tampa Bay throughout the game.
Los Angeles Rams Defensive Leaders
| Player | Total Tackles | Solo Tackles | Sacks | Tackles for Loss | Passes Defended | QB Hits |
| Kam Curl | 8 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kamren Kinchens | 7 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| Kobie Turner | 7 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
Kam Curl led the listed Rams defenders with eight total tackles, six of them solo. His contribution reflects consistent involvement in stopping Tampa Bay’s offensive plays.
Kamren Kinchens recorded seven tackles, including five solo tackles, and defended one pass. His work added to a defensive performance that restricted Tampa Bay’s ability to make progress through the air.
Kobie Turner was especially effective as a pass rusher. He recorded two sacks, two tackles for loss, and two quarterback hits. Those numbers show how his pressure contributed beyond the final tackle on a play.
A sack can create a long third-down situation, disrupt a developing route, or force a quarterback to abandon a planned read. Turner’s pressure was one component of the Rams’ broader defensive success.
Tampa Bay Buccaneers Defensive Leaders
| Player | Total Tackles | Solo Tackles | Sacks | Tackles for Loss | Passes Defended | QB Hits |
| Lavonte David | 8 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Antoine Winfield Jr. | 8 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Lavonte David and Antoine Winfield Jr. each recorded eight total tackles. David also registered one tackle for loss.
Their tackle totals indicate that both defenders remained active throughout the game, but tackles alone do not establish that a defense controlled its opponent. Tampa Bay allowed 34 points and failed to record an interception in the supplied defensive summary.
The Rams also had a larger total of defensive tackles, 66 compared with Tampa Bay’s 54. That figure reflects the volume of defensive involvement, but it should be interpreted alongside other measures such as sacks, turnovers, scoring, and passing efficiency.
Team Defensive Comparison
| Defensive Statistic | Tampa Bay | Los Angeles |
| Total tackles | 54 | 66 |
| Solo tackles | 32 | 36 |
| Sacks | 1 | 4 |
| Tackles for loss | 3 | 7 |
| Passes defended | 3 | 10 |
| Quarterback hits | 3 | 6 |
| Interceptions | 0 | 2 |
| Defensive touchdowns | 0 | 1 |
The Rams held an advantage in every listed team defensive category. They recorded three more sacks than Tampa Bay, defended seven more passes, and intercepted two passes.
The defensive touchdown was especially important because it turned a takeaway directly into points. A conventional interception gives the defense possession, but a pick-six also bypasses the offense’s need to complete a scoring drive.
The Rams’ defensive performance therefore contributed to both sides of the scoreboard: it restricted Tampa Bay’s offense while adding points of its own.
Interceptions and the Game-Changing Defensive Plays
Turnovers are among the most consequential statistics in football because they can change field position, scoring opportunities, and the decisions teams make on later possessions.
Rams Interception Leaders
| Defender | Interceptions | Return Yards | Defensive TDs |
| Cobie Durant | 1 | 50 | 1 |
| Emmanuel Forbes Jr. | 1 | 31 | 0 |
| Team total | 2 | 81 | 1 |
Cobie Durant returned an interception for a reported 50 yards and a touchdown. Emmanuel Forbes Jr. added another interception with a 31-yard return.
Together, the Rams recorded 81 interception-return yards. Tampa Bay did not record an interception in the supplied team statistics.
Why the Pick-Six Mattered
A defensive interception return for a touchdown changes the scoreboard immediately. The offense does not need to take the field to convert the turnover into points.
It also changes the pressure on the opposing team. After a defensive touchdown, the trailing offense may feel compelled to pass more often, even when the passing game has struggled. More aggressive passing can create additional opportunities for defensive pressure and interceptions.
The available statistics confirm Durant’s interception return touchdown and the Rams’ two interceptions. They do not provide enough detail to reconstruct every decision or coverage assignment that led to those plays, so those tactical specifics should not be assumed without the play-by-play record.
Turnover Comparison
Los Angeles finished with two interceptions and one defensive touchdown, while Tampa Bay recorded no interceptions. The Buccaneers’ passing line lists two interceptions thrown by Mayfield, although the supplied data does not explicitly map each interception to a particular defensive player.
This distinction matters when using a box score. Team totals can establish how many turnovers occurred, while a play-by-play log is needed to verify the exact sequence, field position, and game-clock situation for each turnover.
Special Teams Stats
Special teams played a supporting role in the result. Los Angeles converted its reported field goals and extra points, while Tampa Bay converted its only listed extra-point attempt.
Kicking Statistics
| Player | Team | Field Goals | FG Percentage | Longest FG | Extra Points | Total Points |
| Harrison Mevis | Rams | 2/2 | 100% | 52 yards | 4/4 | 10 |
| Chase McLaughlin | Buccaneers | 0/0 | Not applicable | None | 1/1 | 1 |
Mevis made both field-goal attempts, including a longest field goal of 52 yards. He also converted all four listed extra-point attempts.
His reported total of ten points includes six points from the two field goals and four from extra points. This gives a straightforward example of how a kicker can contribute meaningfully to a team’s final score even without recording a touchdown.
McLaughlin attempted no field goals in the supplied statistics and converted one extra point. Tampa Bay’s limited scoring opportunities restricted the available work for its kicker.
Punting Statistics
| Player | Team | Punts | Total Yards | Average | Longest Punt | Inside the 20 |
| Riley Dixon | Buccaneers | 4 | 169 | 42.3 | 55 yards | 0 |
| Ethan Evans | Rams | 3 | 105 | 35.0 | 51 yards | 1 |
Dixon averaged 42.3 yards per punt, compared with Evans’ 35.0. Tampa Bay also punted four times, one more than Los Angeles.
Punting averages do not fully measure the value of a punt. Placement, hang time, return opportunities, and the resulting field position can be just as important as distance. The supplied figures show that Evans placed one punt inside the 20-yard line, while Dixon recorded none.
Return Statistics
| Team | Returner | Return Type | Returns | Yards | Average | Longest |
| Buccaneers | Owen Wright | Kick | 2 | 48 | 24.0 | 28 |
| Buccaneers | Kameron Johnson | Punt | 1 | 15 | 15.0 | 15 |
| Rams | Kyren Williams | Punt | 1 | 8 | 8.0 | 8 |
Owen Wright averaged 24 yards on two kick returns for Tampa Bay. Kameron Johnson returned one punt for 15 yards, while Kyren Williams recorded one punt return for eight yards.
These returns supplied field-position opportunities, but none of the listed returns resulted in a touchdown. The difference in the final score was driven more directly by Los Angeles’ passing production and defensive takeaways.
Team Statistics Comparison
A team-level comparison brings the main themes together. The following table uses the supplied figures, with the passing-yard discrepancy noted separately.
| Statistic | Tampa Bay Buccaneers | Los Angeles Rams |
| Final score | 7 | 34 |
| Passing yards in team summary | 70 | 263 |
| Rushing yards | 123 | 70 |
| Receptions | 17 | 25 |
| Reported receiving yards | 103 | 273 |
| Passing touchdowns | 1 | 3 |
| Interceptions thrown | 2 | 0 |
| Rushing touchdowns | 0 | 0 |
| Sacks recorded by defense | 1 | 4 |
| Interceptions recorded by defense | 0 | 2 |
| Defensive touchdowns | 0 | 1 |
The table shows that Tampa Bay’s primary statistical advantage was rushing yardage. Los Angeles led in passing production, receiving production, touchdowns, defensive pressure, and interceptions.
The Rams’ advantage in passing efficiency was particularly significant. Stafford’s individual line lists 273 yards and three touchdowns, while Tampa Bay’s combined passing summary lists only 70 yards and one touchdown.
There is a reporting inconsistency in the Los Angeles figures: the team passing summary lists 263 yards, but the individual passing line and receiving totals indicate 273. These numbers should not be combined as though they were fully reconciled. For an official statistical record, the original box score should be checked before publishing a definitive team passing-yard total.
What the Statistics Reveal About Both Teams
The final score provides the headline, but the player statistics explain how the game developed.
Los Angeles Had the More Effective Passing Offense
Stafford completed 71.4% of his attempts and threw three touchdowns without an interception. Nacua gained 97 receiving yards, and Adams caught two touchdown passes.
That combination gave Los Angeles both a reliable source of yardage and multiple scoring threats. Parkinson’s touchdown further demonstrated that the Rams could distribute scoring opportunities among different receivers.
Tampa Bay Could Not Match That Efficiency
The Buccaneers gained 123 rushing yards, but their quarterbacks combined for just 70 passing yards in the supplied team summary. Mayfield’s two interceptions added another problem.
The offense’s limited passing production made it difficult to build consecutive successful drives. Once the Rams established a large lead, Tampa Bay had even less room for mistakes.
The Rams Defense Created Extra Value
Los Angeles did more than prevent scores. Its defense recorded two interceptions, four sacks, ten passes defended, and a defensive touchdown.
These statistics reflect pressure on the quarterback and disruption of the passing game. They also show why defensive performance should not be evaluated only by points allowed. Turnovers and defensive scores can directly increase a team’s chance of winning.
Rushing Yards Did Not Tell the Whole Story
Tampa Bay won the rushing-yard comparison, but Los Angeles won comfortably. The Buccaneers’ rushing production was not matched by efficient passing or enough touchdowns.
This is why a useful statistical review should consider several categories together. Yardage, touchdowns, turnovers, sacks, and efficiency measures describe different aspects of a team’s performance. No single number tells the complete story.
How to Interpret These Player Statistics Correctly
For readers comparing NFL games, several practices help prevent misleading conclusions.
Separate Individual and Team Totals
Individual player statistics and team totals should normally reconcile, but reporting errors or transcription problems can occur. Here, Stafford’s 273 individual passing yards conflict with the Rams’ team summary of 263.
When a discrepancy appears, identify it explicitly and check the official play-by-play or box score rather than choosing one number without explanation.
Compare Efficiency Alongside Volume
A player with more attempts will often accumulate more yards. Yards per attempt, completion percentage, yards per reception, and yards per carry provide additional context.
Stafford’s 7.8 yards per attempt and Nacua’s 13.9 yards per reception help explain the effectiveness of the Rams’ passing attack beyond raw volume alone.
Evaluate Touchdowns and Turnovers Separately
Touchdowns show how often a team finishes possessions with points. Interceptions reveal costly changes of possession, while a defensive touchdown creates points without requiring an offensive drive.
Los Angeles benefited from both its three reported passing touchdowns and a defensive touchdown. Tampa Bay’s two interceptions thrown further widened the gap in the most important scoring-related events.
Use Defensive Statistics in Context
Tackles measure involvement in stopping plays, while sacks and interceptions indicate more specific forms of disruption. Passes defended and quarterback hits add further context.
A high tackle total is not automatically evidence of a dominant defense. It must be considered alongside scoring allowed, yards conceded, pressure, and takeaways.
Verify the Game Date and Source
NFL statistics are often republished across sports websites, search results, fantasy platforms, and news summaries. When a figure is important, the official league gamebook or a reliable box score should be used to verify it.
The supplied game record identifies ESPN as the source and lists November 24, 2025, as the date. Readers can consult the original ESPN game box score for the recorded statistics and supporting game information.
Frequently Asked Questions
1. What was the final score of the Buccaneers vs Rams game on November 24, 2025?
The Los Angeles Rams defeated the Tampa Bay Buccaneers 34-7. Los Angeles scored 31 points in the first half, while Tampa Bay scored its only touchdown in the second quarter.
2. How many passing touchdowns did Matthew Stafford throw against Tampa Bay?
Matthew Stafford was credited with three passing touchdowns and no interceptions. His individual passing line lists 25 completions on 35 attempts for 273 yards.
3. Who led the Rams in receiving yards?
Puka Nacua led Los Angeles with seven receptions for 97 yards on 11 targets. Davante Adams recorded 62 receiving yards and two touchdowns, making him the leading touchdown receiver among the listed Rams players.
4. Who scored the Rams’ defensive touchdown?
Cobie Durant was credited with an interception return touchdown. His reported interception return covered 50 yards, and the Rams recorded two interceptions for 81 combined return yards.
5. How many rushing yards did Tampa Bay record?
The Buccaneers recorded 123 rushing yards on 29 carries, averaging 4.2 yards per carry. Sean Tucker led the team with 42 rushing yards, while Rachaad White averaged 5.4 yards per carry on seven attempts.
6. Why do the Rams’ passing-yard totals differ in the supplied statistics?
Matthew Stafford’s individual passing line lists 273 yards, and the receiving totals also add up to 273 yards. However, the Rams’ team passing summary lists 263 yards. The discrepancy should be checked against the original box score or official gamebook before treating either team-level figure as definitive.
Conclusion
The November 24, 2025, matchup ended with the Los Angeles Rams defeating the Tampa Bay Buccaneers 34-7. Matthew Stafford’s three passing touchdowns, Davante Adams’ two receiving scores, and the Rams defense’s two interceptions were central to the result. Cobie Durant’s interception return touchdown added another major scoring contribution.
Tampa Bay’s 123 rushing yards were a notable positive, but its passing attack produced limited yardage and two interceptions. Los Angeles was more effective at turning offensive opportunities into points and created additional value through defensive pressure and turnovers.
The individual statistics also show why football analysis requires more than looking at the final score or total yardage. Passing efficiency, receiving production, sacks, turnovers, and scoring all help explain the difference between the teams. One data-quality issue remains: the Rams’ reported passing totals conflict by ten yards, so that figure should be verified before the statistics are reused in a definitive historical record.
