Las Vegas Raiders vs New England Patriots Match Player Stats
The las vegas raiders vs new england patriots match player stats from October 11, 2026, tell the story of a convincing 45-17 victory for the New England Patriots. The Patriots combined an explosive passing attack with an effective rushing game, while the Las Vegas Raiders struggled to establish consistent production on the ground. Drake Maye delivered the standout individual performance, throwing for 374 yards and four touchdowns without an interception, according to the supplied ESPN box score data.
New England’s offense created separation early and maintained its advantage throughout the game. The Patriots scored 14 points in the first quarter, added seven in the second, and produced another 14 in the third. Las Vegas managed seven points in the opening quarter but failed to score in the second, leaving the Raiders chasing the game for much of the afternoon.
For readers examining individual performances, this matchup offers several important details beyond the final score. Passing efficiency, rushing production, receiving contributions, defensive pressure, and turnovers help explain why the Patriots controlled the contest. Brock Bowers provided a major receiving threat for Las Vegas, while Kyle Williams and DeMario Douglas helped turn New England’s passing opportunities into substantial gains and touchdowns.
This statistical breakdown examines the available player numbers, team performance, and key differences between the two offenses. The figures below are based on the supplied ESPN box score text. Because some team totals appear inconsistent with individual player figures, those discrepancies are identified rather than silently corrected.
Las Vegas Raiders vs New England Patriots Match Player Stats: Game Overview
The final score was New England Patriots 45, Las Vegas Raiders 17. The 28-point margin reflected New England’s advantage in scoring consistency, passing production, and rushing efficiency.
| Game Information | Details |
| Game date | October 11, 2026 |
| Away team | Las Vegas Raiders |
| Home team | New England Patriots |
| Final score | Patriots 45, Raiders 17 |
| Raiders’ reported record | 3-2 overall |
| Patriots’ reported record | 3-2 overall |
| Raiders’ reported away record | 2-1 |
| Patriots’ reported home record | 2-0 |
| Patriots’ leading passer | Drake Maye |
| Raiders’ leading passer | Kirk Cousins |
| Raiders’ leading receiver | Brock Bowers |
| Patriots’ leading receiver | Kyle Williams |
| Patriots’ leading rusher | Rhamondre Stevenson |
The supplied record information places both teams at 3-2 after the game. These records are reproduced from the provided data and have not been independently verified.
Final Score by Quarter
The quarter-by-quarter scoring shows how New England built and protected its lead.
| Quarter | Las Vegas Raiders | New England Patriots |
| First quarter | 7 | 14 |
| Second quarter | 0 | 7 |
| Third quarter | 3 | 14 |
| Fourth quarter | 7 | 10 |
| Final score | 17 | 45 |
New England scored twice as many points as Las Vegas in the opening quarter. The Patriots then extended their lead before delivering another 14-point third quarter.
The Raiders’ scoreless second quarter was particularly costly. Against a team producing touchdowns through multiple offensive approaches, a prolonged scoring drought made a comeback increasingly difficult.
Las Vegas scored three points in the third quarter and seven in the fourth, but New England continued adding points in both periods. That consistency prevented the Raiders from turning their late scoring into a meaningful threat.
Drake Maye’s Passing Performance
Drake Maye was the central figure in New England’s offensive success. The supplied statistics credit him with 26 completions on 34 attempts, 374 passing yards, four touchdown passes, and no interceptions.
| Passing Statistic | Drake Maye |
| Completions | 26 |
| Attempts | 34 |
| Completion percentage | 76.5% |
| Passing yards | 374 |
| Yards per attempt | 11.0 |
| Passing touchdowns | 4 |
| Interceptions | 0 |
| Sacks recorded against him | 1 |
| Sack yards lost | 3 |
| Quarterback rating | 150.9 |
| ESPN QBR | 94.5 |
Maye completed approximately three out of every four attempts while averaging 11.0 yards per attempt. That combination suggests New England was not merely accumulating short completions. Its passing attack was generating substantial yardage while maintaining a high completion rate.
Four touchdown passes also demonstrate how effectively the Patriots converted passing opportunities into points. Avoiding interceptions helped preserve possession and reduced the number of opportunities Las Vegas had to change momentum through takeaways.
Why Maye’s Efficiency Mattered
Passing yards are useful, but they do not tell the entire story of a quarterback’s performance. Completion percentage, yards per attempt, touchdowns, interceptions, and sacks provide a more complete view.
Maye’s figures stand out in several ways:
- High completion rate: Completing 76.5% of attempts helped sustain drives.
- Strong downfield production: An average of 11.0 yards per attempt indicates substantial gains per throw.
- Touchdown conversion: Four passing touchdowns gave New England a direct scoring advantage.
- Ball security: No interceptions were recorded in the supplied statistics.
- Limited sack damage: One sack for three yards suggests relatively little lost yardage from sacks.
These numbers point to a quarterback who combined accuracy with productive passing rather than relying on one statistical strength alone.
Reading the Quarterback Rating Correctly
The supplied data lists Maye’s passer rating as 150.9 and his ESPN QBR as 94.5. These figures measure performance differently and should not be treated as interchangeable.
Traditional passer rating uses passing completions, attempts, yards, touchdowns, and interceptions. ESPN’s QBR is a separate metric intended to evaluate a quarterback’s broader contribution to game outcomes. Both figures are reported here as supplied, without recalculation.
Kirk Cousins’ Passing Performance for Las Vegas
Kirk Cousins led the Raiders’ passing attack, completing 19 of 28 attempts for 243 yards and one touchdown. He threw no interceptions, but his production did not match Maye’s scoring output.
| Passing Statistic | Kirk Cousins |
| Completions | 19 |
| Attempts | 28 |
| Completion percentage | 67.9% |
| Passing yards | 243 |
| Yards per attempt | 8.7 |
| Passing touchdowns | 1 |
| Interceptions | 0 |
| Sacks recorded against him | 3 |
| Sack yards lost | 23 |
| Quarterback rating | 106.7 |
| ESPN QBR | 65.4 |
Cousins posted a completion percentage of approximately 67.9% and averaged 8.7 yards per attempt. Those numbers indicate that he was capable of moving the ball through the air.
The main difference was the result of those passing opportunities. Cousins threw one touchdown, compared with Maye’s four. Even without interceptions, the Raiders could not turn their passing production into points at the same rate as New England.
Cousins’ Strengths and Limitations
Cousins avoided interceptions, which helped the Raiders retain possession. His 243 passing yards also provided a foundation for the team’s receiving production.
However, three sacks for 23 yards created additional negative plays. Sacks can disrupt offensive rhythm, push a team into longer passing situations, and reduce the likelihood of sustaining a drive.
The contrast between Cousins and Maye is therefore not simply about total yardage. Maye generated more passing yards, more touchdowns, and fewer sack-related losses. Those differences helped explain the large scoring gap.
Fernando Mendoza’s Contribution
The supplied box score also lists Fernando Mendoza as a Raiders passer. He completed six of eight attempts for 48 yards, with no touchdowns or interceptions.
| Passing Statistic | Fernando Mendoza |
| Completions | 6 |
| Attempts | 8 |
| Completion percentage | 75.0% |
| Passing yards | 48 |
| Yards per attempt | 6.0 |
| Touchdowns | 0 |
| Interceptions | 0 |
| Sacks recorded against him | 0 |
| Passer rating | 89.6 |
| ESPN QBR | 19.3 |
Mendoza’s limited passing volume makes direct comparisons with Cousins or Maye less meaningful. Eight attempts provide a much smaller sample than 28 or 34 attempts, and the supplied figures do not explain the circumstances behind his appearances.
His completion percentage was 75.0%, but the average gain per attempt was lower than those recorded by the other two quarterbacks. He did not record a passing touchdown in the provided statistics.
The key takeaway is that Mendoza contributed additional passing production, but the available numbers do not establish whether his role resulted from a planned rotation, a situational substitution, or another factor.
Raiders and Patriots Team Passing Comparison
The team passing figures illustrate the difference between the two offenses, although an important discrepancy in the supplied statistics requires attention.
| Team Passing Metric | Raiders | Patriots |
| Completions | 25 | 26 |
| Attempts | 36 | 34 |
| Completion percentage | 69.4% | 76.5% |
| Passing yards listed | 268 | 371 |
| Yards per attempt | 8.1 | 11.0 |
| Passing touchdowns | 1 | 4 |
| Interceptions | 0 | 0 |
| Sacks recorded | 3 | 1 |
| Sack yards lost | 23 | 3 |
| Passer rating | 102.9 | 150.9 |
The supplied team total lists 268 passing yards for Las Vegas and 371 for New England. Maye’s individual passing entry, however, lists 374 yards. This three-yard difference should be checked against the original box score before publication.
The Raiders’ team passing entry also differs from the simple sum of the two listed quarterbacks’ individual passing yards. For that reason, the figures should be understood as values extracted from the supplied text, not a fully reconciled statistical record.
Despite those discrepancies, the broader pattern is clear within the supplied data: New England produced more passing touchdowns and averaged more yards per attempt. That combination helped the Patriots score 45 points.
Rushing Statistics: Patriots Establish the Ground Game
New England’s rushing attack added another dimension to the offense. The supplied team figures credit the Patriots with 165 rushing yards on 31 attempts, averaging 5.3 yards per carry and scoring twice on the ground.
The Raiders, by comparison, recorded 38 team rushing yards on 18 attempts, averaging 2.1 yards per carry with one rushing touchdown.
| Team Rushing Metric | Raiders | Patriots |
| Rushing attempts | 18 | 31 |
| Rushing yards | 38 | 165 |
| Yards per carry | 2.1 | 5.3 |
| Rushing touchdowns | 1 | 2 |
| Longest run listed | 5 yards | 32 yards |
The 127-yard difference in the listed rushing totals is significant. New England averaged more than twice the Raiders’ yards per carry and recorded 13 additional rushing attempts.
An effective rushing game can help an offense maintain possession, create manageable passing situations, and keep a defense from focusing entirely on the quarterback. The Patriots’ ground production complemented Maye’s passing performance and gave the Raiders more than one offensive threat to contain.
Rhamondre Stevenson Leads New England
Rhamondre Stevenson was the Patriots’ leading listed rusher, recording 13 carries for 64 yards and one touchdown.
| Rushing Statistic | Rhamondre Stevenson |
| Carries | 13 |
| Rushing yards | 64 |
| Yards per carry | 4.9 |
| Rushing touchdowns | 1 |
| Longest run | 20 yards |
Stevenson’s average of 4.9 yards per carry gave New England productive gains on the ground. His longest run of 20 yards also shows that he generated at least one substantial rushing play.
His contribution extended beyond rushing. The supplied receiving figures credit him with three catches for 21 yards, providing another way for the Patriots to use him in the passing game.
A running back who contributes in both phases can make defensive assignments more difficult. The defense must account for the possibility of a handoff as well as a pass to the back.
Corey Kiner Provides Explosive Rushing Production
Corey Kiner recorded six carries for 52 yards, averaging 8.7 yards per carry. His longest listed run covered 32 yards.
| Rushing Statistic | Corey Kiner |
| Carries | 6 |
| Rushing yards | 52 |
| Yards per carry | 8.7 |
| Rushing touchdowns | 0 |
| Longest run | 32 yards |
Kiner’s average was the highest among the Patriots’ listed rushers. His 52 yards on six carries also represented a substantial contribution despite a relatively modest workload.
The 32-yard run indicates the potential for explosive gains, although the supplied data does not provide the play-by-play details needed to assess the blocking scheme or defensive mistake behind that run.
Kiner also appears in the receiving statistics with one catch for seven yards. His combined contribution added flexibility to New England’s offensive approach.
Drake Maye’s Rushing Contribution
Maye added 25 rushing yards on seven carries and scored one rushing touchdown, according to the supplied figures.
| Rushing Statistic | Drake Maye |
| Carries | 7 |
| Rushing yards | 25 |
| Yards per carry | 3.6 |
| Rushing touchdowns | 1 |
| Longest run | 10 yards |
Maye’s rushing production matters because a quarterback who can gain yards on designed runs or improvised plays creates an additional defensive responsibility.
Defenders cannot always commit entirely to coverage or rush lanes when the quarterback is a potential runner. Even moderate rushing output can influence how a defense handles passing situations near the goal line.
Combined with his four passing touchdowns, Maye’s listed rushing touchdown demonstrates that the supplied scoring data credits him with contributions through both passing and running.
Ashton Jeanty Leads the Raiders’ Listed Rushers
Ashton Jeanty recorded 10 carries for 27 yards, averaging 2.7 yards per carry. His longest run was four yards.
| Rushing Statistic | Ashton Jeanty |
| Carries | 10 |
| Rushing yards | 27 |
| Yards per carry | 2.7 |
| Rushing touchdowns | 0 |
| Longest run | 4 yards |
Jeanty received the most carries among the Raiders’ listed rushers, but the resulting yardage was limited. His average of 2.7 yards per carry fell well below Stevenson’s 4.9 and Kiner’s 8.7.
Jeanty’s role was not limited to rushing. He also recorded three receptions for 50 yards, making him a more productive receiving option than his rushing totals alone suggest.
This distinction is important when evaluating running backs. A player’s rushing statistics may tell only part of the story if he also contributes through short passes, screen plays, or other receiving opportunities.
Raiders’ Other Rushing Contributions
Dylan Laube recorded four carries for nine yards and one rushing touchdown. Mike Washington Jr. had one carry for five yards, while Mendoza added three rushing yards on one attempt. Tre Tucker recorded two carries for minus-six yards.
These individual figures help explain the limited ground production listed for Las Vegas. Several players contributed only small amounts of rushing yardage, while Tucker’s negative total reduced the overall output.
The supplied Raiders team rushing total is 38 yards, but the individual rushing entries do not reconcile cleanly with that total. Readers should consult the original box score for a definitive statistical accounting.
Receiving Statistics: Raiders vs Patriots
Receiving production was another major factor in the outcome. The Raiders had several players generate useful yardage, particularly Brock Bowers, but New England received more touchdown production from its pass catchers.
The supplied figures list Bowers with 110 receiving yards, while Kyle Williams led the Patriots with 91. DeMario Douglas added two receiving touchdowns, and Hunter Henry recorded another touchdown for New England.
Raiders Receiving Leaders
| Player | Receptions | Receiving Yards | Average Yards per Catch | Touchdowns | Targets |
| Brock Bowers | 8 | 110 | 13.8 | 1 | 10 |
| Ashton Jeanty | 3 | 50 | 16.7 | 0 | 6 |
| Cody White | 2 | 44 | 22.0 | 0 | 4 |
| Tre Tucker | 4 | 41 | 10.3 | 0 | 5 |
| Dylan Laube | 3 | 16 | 5.3 | 0 | 3 |
| Ian Thomas | 1 | 9 | 9.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Deven Thompkins | 1 | 8 | 8.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Malik Benson | 1 | 6 | 6.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Mike Washington Jr. | 1 | 5 | 5.0 | 0 | 4 |
| Michael Mayer | 1 | 2 | 2.0 | 0 | 1 |
The Raiders’ listed receiving leaders show that the passing attack had more than one productive option. Bowers led in receptions and yards, while Jeanty and Cody White supplied additional yardage.
The table also shows why receiving efficiency must be considered alongside volume. White averaged 22.0 yards per catch, the highest listed average among the Raiders’ receivers with multiple catches. Jeanty averaged 16.7 yards per reception, providing another source of gains beyond the traditional running game.
These averages do not necessarily mean every reception was a deep pass. A player can produce a high average through a combination of intermediate catches, yards after the catch, and a particularly long reception.
Brock Bowers Delivers the Raiders’ Leading Receiving Performance
Bowers recorded eight catches for 110 yards and one touchdown on 10 targets. His average of 13.8 yards per reception made him the Raiders’ most productive listed receiving option.
| Brock Bowers Statistic | Result |
| Targets | 10 |
| Receptions | 8 |
| Catch rate | 80.0% |
| Receiving yards | 110 |
| Average per reception | 13.8 yards |
| Receiving touchdowns | 1 |
| Longest reception | 27 yards |
Bowers caught eight of his 10 targets, giving him a high catch rate in the supplied figures. He also exceeded 100 receiving yards, which made him an important source of offensive production despite the Raiders’ defeat.
His performance illustrates an important distinction in football analysis: a strong individual showing does not automatically produce a strong team result. A receiver can gain substantial yardage, convert targets into catches, and score a touchdown while the overall offense still struggles to keep pace.
The Patriots’ ability to score four passing touchdowns, compared with the Raiders’ one, helps explain why Bowers’ contribution was not enough to change the outcome.
Ashton Jeanty Adds Value as a Receiver
Jeanty’s three receptions produced 50 yards, including a longest catch of 31 yards. His receiving average of 16.7 yards per catch was higher than his rushing average of 2.7 yards per carry.
This contrast highlights the importance of evaluating players in their full offensive roles. Although Jeanty found limited success running between the tackles or through the available rushing lanes, his receiving production created opportunities to move the ball in a different way.
For readers studying running-back performance, receiving yards, targets, and catch rate can help explain how a player contributes when the traditional rushing attack is ineffective.
Patriots Receiving Leaders
| Player | Receptions | Receiving Yards | Average Yards per Catch | Touchdowns | Targets |
| Kyle Williams | 3 | 91 | 30.3 | 1 | 3 |
| DeMario Douglas | 4 | 65 | 16.3 | 2 | 5 |
| Efton Chism III | 5 | 57 | 11.4 | 0 | 6 |
| Eli Raridon | 5 | 57 | 11.4 | 0 | 5 |
| Hunter Henry | 3 | 44 | 14.7 | 1 | 5 |
| Rhamondre Stevenson | 3 | 21 | 7.0 | 0 | 4 |
| Romeo Doubs | 1 | 16 | 16.0 | 0 | 3 |
| TreVeyon Henderson | 1 | 16 | 16.0 | 0 | 3 |
| Corey Kiner | 1 | 7 | 7.0 | 0 | 1 |
The Patriots’ receiving statistics reveal a distributed passing attack. Williams generated the most yards per reception, Douglas recorded the most receiving touchdowns, and Chism and Raridon each had five catches.
This spread of production can make an offense more difficult to defend. If a defense focuses on one receiver, the quarterback may find another target in a different area of the field. New England’s numbers show meaningful contributions from wide receivers, tight ends, and running backs.
Kyle Williams Produces an Explosive Receiving Average
Williams caught three passes for 91 yards and one touchdown. His 30.3 yards per reception was the highest average among the Patriots’ listed receivers.
| Kyle Williams Statistic | Result |
| Targets | 3 |
| Receptions | 3 |
| Catch rate | 100.0% |
| Receiving yards | 91 |
| Average per reception | 30.3 yards |
| Receiving touchdowns | 1 |
| Longest reception | 49 yards |
Williams’ longest catch covered 49 yards. His production suggests that New England was able to create significant gains through its passing game without needing a high volume of targets for every receiver.
A high yards-per-catch average can indicate explosive-play potential, but it should be interpreted alongside the player’s number of opportunities. Williams received three targets in the supplied data, so his performance was highly productive within a relatively small sample.
Even so, the combination of 91 yards and a touchdown from three receptions made him one of the Patriots’ most impactful receiving options.
DeMario Douglas Makes His Opportunities Count
Douglas caught four passes for 65 yards and two touchdowns on five targets. His 16.3 yards per reception provided a strong average, while his touchdown total gave him the most receiving scores among the listed players in this game.
His production shows why touchdown numbers matter when assessing offensive effectiveness. Receiving yards help measure a player’s contribution to moving the ball, but touchdowns show that the offense converted opportunities into direct scoring results.
Douglas’ two scores helped New England turn its passing advantage into a wider lead. His performance also demonstrates how a receiver who is not the team’s leading yardage producer can still have an outsized impact on the final score.
Hunter Henry and the Supporting Cast
Henry recorded three receptions for 44 yards and a touchdown. Chism and Raridon each added 57 yards on five receptions, according to the supplied figures.
These contributions helped prevent the Patriots’ passing game from depending on one player. A variety of receiving options can give a quarterback more flexibility when defenses change coverage or concentrate on a primary target.
The numbers do not provide route charts, defensive coverage assignments, or individual separation measurements. Therefore, they cannot establish exactly how each receiver became open. They do, however, show that New England’s scoring production was spread across multiple players.
Team Offense Comparison: Where the Patriots Gained Their Advantage
Comparing passing and rushing production together offers a clearer picture of the contest than examining any single statistic.
| Offensive Category | Raiders | Patriots |
| Passing yards listed | 268 | 371 |
| Rushing yards listed | 38 | 165 |
| Passing touchdowns | 1 | 4 |
| Rushing touchdowns | 1 | 2 |
| Total touchdowns by category | 2 | 6 |
| Rushing attempts | 18 | 31 |
| Passing attempts | 36 | 34 |
| Interceptions thrown | 0 | 0 |
The figures show that New England generated substantially more production through both passing and rushing. The Patriots also recorded more touchdowns in each category.
The listed passing and rushing yards total 306 for Las Vegas and 536 for New England. These are simple sums of the supplied team entries, not independently verified official total-offense figures. The discrepancy between some individual and team passing totals means these sums should not be presented as fully reconciled official totals.
Why Balanced Offense Creates Problems for a Defense
A balanced offense does not necessarily need equal passing and rushing yardage. It needs to make both approaches credible enough that the defense cannot focus exclusively on one.
In this game, New England’s passing output created a major threat, while the rushing game averaged 5.3 yards per carry. That combination gave the Patriots multiple ways to advance the ball.
The Raiders’ listed rushing average of 2.1 yards per carry presented a contrasting picture. When rushing gains are limited, an offense can become more dependent on passing to sustain drives. Defenses may then have greater freedom to adjust their pass rush and coverage plans.
This is a tactical interpretation of the statistical pattern, not a verified account of the exact defensive adjustments used in the game.
Defensive Statistics: Pressure Without Interceptions
The defensive figures show that neither team recorded an interception in the supplied data. New England nevertheless generated more sacks, tackles for loss, and quarterback hits.
| Defensive Metric | Raiders | Patriots |
| Total tackles | 69 | 64 |
| Solo tackles | 39 | 36 |
| Sacks | 1 | 3 |
| Tackles for loss | 0 | 6 |
| Passes defended | 3 | 4 |
| Quarterback hits | 6 | 8 |
| Defensive touchdowns | 0 | 0 |
| Interceptions | 0 | 0 |
The Raiders recorded more total tackles, but that does not automatically mean they played better defense. Tackle totals can rise when a defense spends more time on the field or has to stop repeated offensive gains.
New England’s three sacks and six tackles for loss indicate more production behind the line of scrimmage in the supplied figures. The Patriots also recorded eight quarterback hits, compared with six for Las Vegas.
Why Sacks and Tackles for Loss Matter
A sack ends a passing play with the quarterback losing yardage. A tackle for loss stops a ball carrier behind the line of scrimmage. Both can make it harder for an offense to sustain a drive.
These plays are valuable because they can create longer down-and-distance situations. An offense facing second-and-long or third-and-long has fewer options than one that consistently gains positive yardage early in a series.
New England’s higher sack total also fits the broader pattern of its defensive performance. The Raiders’ offense managed only 38 listed rushing yards, and Cousins was sacked three times according to his individual statistics. The available numbers suggest that Las Vegas encountered difficulties in both the running game and pass protection.
Why the Patriots’ Defense Did Not Need an Interception
Interceptions are among the most visible defensive plays, but they are not the only way to influence a game. Sacks, pressure, tackles for loss, and forced negative plays can disrupt an offense without producing a turnover.
Neither team recorded an interception in the supplied data. Yet New England’s advantage in sacks and tackles for loss shows that defensive impact should not be judged solely by interceptions.
The supplied statistics do not include every defensive detail, such as individual pressures, missed tackles, coverage grades, or all play-by-play outcomes. A complete defensive evaluation would require those additional records.
Turnovers and Ball Security
The supplied fumble data lists two Raiders fumbles, with one lost, and one Patriots fumble, also with one lost. The Raiders’ listed recoveries include contributions credited to Michael Mayer and Darien Porter. The Patriots’ recovery was credited to Craig Woodson.
| Turnover Category | Raiders | Patriots |
| Team fumbles listed | 2 | 1 |
| Fumbles lost | 1 | 1 |
| Interceptions thrown | 0 | 0 |
| Defensive interceptions recorded | 0 | 0 |
The figures indicate one lost fumble for each team. As a result, the supplied turnover information does not show an advantage for either side in the number of fumbles lost.
That matters because turnovers can change field position and give an offense extra opportunities. However, it would be misleading to attribute New England’s 28-point victory to turnovers alone when the provided figures show equal numbers of lost fumbles and no interceptions.
The larger differences in passing touchdowns, rushing production, and defensive pressure offer more direct statistical explanations for the final margin.
Interpreting Fumble Statistics Carefully
A fumble is not automatically a turnover. The offense may recover its own fumble, or the defense may recover it. Only a change of possession counts as a lost fumble for the team that initially had the ball.
The supplied Raiders data lists two team fumbles, one lost, and two recoveries. Those values may reflect the way the source groups individual recovery entries, but they should be checked against the original play-by-play before drawing conclusions about every possession change.
Special Teams: Kicking, Punting, and Returns
Special teams contribute to field position, scoring opportunities, and the starting position for offensive drives. The supplied figures show several differences between the teams, particularly in field-goal accuracy and punt placement.
Kicking Statistics
| Kicking Metric | Raiders: Matt Gay | Patriots: Andy Borregales |
| Field goals made | 1 | 1 |
| Field goals attempted | 2 | 1 |
| Field-goal percentage | 50.0% | 100.0% |
| Longest field goal | 46 yards | 28 yards |
| Extra points made | 2 | 6 |
| Extra points attempted | 2 | 6 |
| Total points listed | 5 | 9 |
Gay made one of two field-goal attempts, while Borregales converted his only attempt. The supplied figures also credit Borregales with six successful extra points, compared with two for Gay.
The difference in extra-point attempts reflects the wider scoring disparity. New England recorded six touchdowns in the supplied offensive categories, while Las Vegas recorded two. The Patriots therefore had more opportunities to add points after touchdowns.
A missed field goal can matter, especially in a close game, but the available data does not provide enough context to say exactly how the missed Raiders attempt affected subsequent strategy or possession.
Punting Statistics
| Punting Metric | AJ Cole, Raiders | Mitch Wishnowsky, Patriots |
| Punts | 4 | 2 |
| Total punting yards | 192 | 81 |
| Average yards per punt | 48.0 | 40.5 |
| Longest punt | 59 yards | 54 yards |
| Touchbacks | 1 | 0 |
| Punts inside the 20-yard line | 0 | 1 |
Cole averaged 48.0 yards per punt, compared with Wishnowsky’s 40.5. However, the Patriots recorded one punt inside the 20-yard line, while the Raiders recorded none in the supplied data.
Punting averages should be interpreted alongside placement. A longer punt is not always more effective if it produces a touchback or gives the opponent a favorable return opportunity. Pinning an opponent near its own goal line can be valuable even when the punt travels a shorter distance.
The figures show that the Patriots punted twice and the Raiders four times. This difference is consistent with the broader scoring pattern, although punt counts alone do not reveal the length or outcome of every offensive drive.
Kick Returns
| Team | Returner | Returns | Yards | Average | Longest |
| Raiders | Deven Thompkins | 3 | 80 | 26.7 | 32 |
| Raiders | Dylan Laube | 3 | 69 | 23.0 | 25 |
| Patriots | Kyle Williams | 3 | 71 | 23.7 | 27 |
The Raiders recorded six kick returns for 149 yards, averaging 24.8 yards per return. The Patriots recorded three returns for 71 yards, averaging 23.7.
Las Vegas therefore had more total kick-return yardage in the supplied figures, but that did not translate into a better final result. Return yards must be viewed alongside offensive efficiency and the points scored after each possession.
Punt Returns
Deven Thompkins recorded one Raiders punt return for 18 yards. Marcus Jones recorded two Patriots punt returns for 29 yards, averaging 14.5 yards per return.
These figures offer useful context for special-teams performance, but they do not establish how many points resulted directly from return-generated field position. That would require the relevant drive and play-by-play details.
The Statistical Turning Points Behind the 45-17 Result
The supplied numbers identify several factors that help explain New England’s advantage.
1. New England Scored Early
The Patriots opened with 14 points in the first quarter, twice the Raiders’ seven. An early lead can give an offense greater flexibility, while the trailing team may feel pressure to increase its passing volume or take more risks.
The quarter-by-quarter figures show that New England did not surrender its lead at any stage.
2. The Patriots Produced Four Passing Touchdowns
Maye’s four touchdown passes were the clearest individual difference in the passing statistics. Cousins recorded one passing touchdown, despite completing 19 passes for 243 yards.
The five-touchdown difference in passing production between the two quarterbacks was larger than the difference in their completion totals. This shows why yardage alone cannot fully explain offensive success.
3. The Rushing Game Favored New England
The Patriots recorded 165 rushing yards on 31 attempts, while the Raiders recorded 38 on 18 attempts. The resulting difference was 127 rushing yards.
New England’s listed average of 5.3 yards per carry gave it a more productive ground attack. Las Vegas averaged 2.1 yards per carry, limiting the consistency of its rushing production.
4. The Patriots Had More Impact Behind the Line
New England recorded three sacks and six tackles for loss, compared with one sack and no tackles for loss for Las Vegas. Those plays can disrupt offensive rhythm and make it more difficult to convert important downs.
5. The Raiders Could Not Match New England’s Scoring Pace
Las Vegas scored seven points in the first quarter, none in the second, three in the third, and seven in the fourth. New England scored in every quarter and reached double digits in the first, third, and fourth.
This difference in scoring consistency is central to understanding the final result. The Patriots maintained offensive production throughout the game, while the Raiders had a prolonged period without points.
How to Analyze NFL Player Statistics Beyond the Box Score
A box score is a useful starting point, but it is most informative when the numbers are read together rather than in isolation.
Compare Efficiency With Volume
A quarterback with 300 yards on 25 attempts has produced a different statistical profile from one with 300 yards on 45 attempts. Similarly, a running back with 50 yards on six carries has been more efficient per attempt than one with 50 yards on 20 carries.
In this matchup, Maye’s 11.0 yards per attempt and Kiner’s 8.7 rushing yards per carry illustrate how efficiency can reveal useful information beyond raw totals.
Separate Individual Production From Team Results
Bowers’ 110 receiving yards were an impressive individual contribution, but the Raiders still lost by 28 points. An individual player’s performance cannot be evaluated solely by whether the team won or lost.
A balanced review considers the player’s production, role, opportunities, touchdowns, and contribution to sustaining drives.
Distinguish Passing Yards From Total Offensive Production
Passing yards measure the yards gained through the air, while rushing yards measure ground production. Team passing totals can also differ from a simple sum of individual passing figures because of sacks and the way statistical categories are recorded.
For this game, the supplied passing totals are not fully consistent. The safest approach is to report the original figures transparently and verify the official box score before using them in calculations that depend on exact totals.
Use Context When Comparing Players
A player who receives three targets should not be judged in exactly the same way as one who receives 10. Small samples can produce unusually high or low averages.
Williams’ 30.3 yards per reception was exceptional in the supplied figures, but it came from three catches. Bowers’ 13.8 yards per reception came from eight catches, providing a larger sample of receiving production.
Both performances were valuable, but the sample size is relevant when interpreting their averages.
Data Accuracy and Source Notes
The statistics in this article were extracted from the ESPN box score text supplied for the October 11, 2026, matchup. The source text contains several apparent inconsistencies that should be resolved before the article is treated as a definitive statistical record.
The main issues include:
- Maye’s individual passing entry lists 374 yards, while the Patriots’ team passing entry lists 371.
- The Raiders’ team passing total does not reconcile cleanly with the individual passing figures for Cousins and Mendoza.
- Some listed team rushing totals do not reconcile with the sum of individual rushing entries.
- The supplied fumble and recovery totals require verification to ensure that individual and team-level entries are interpreted consistently.
These discrepancies do not justify inventing replacement figures. The appropriate editorial approach is to retain the supplied numbers with a clear qualification and check the official ESPN NFL box score before publication.
This is particularly important for sports articles because readers may compare the reported figures with official records, fantasy-football platforms, historical databases, or other game reports.
Frequently Asked Questions
1. What was the final score of the Las Vegas Raiders vs New England Patriots game?
The New England Patriots defeated the Las Vegas Raiders 45-17 on October 11, 2026, according to the supplied ESPN box score data. New England scored in all four quarters and maintained its lead throughout the game.
2. How many passing yards did Drake Maye record against the Raiders?
Drake Maye recorded 374 passing yards, 26 completions on 34 attempts, and four touchdown passes without an interception in the supplied individual statistics. His listed passer rating was 150.9, with an ESPN QBR of 94.5.
3. Who was the Raiders’ leading receiver in the game?
Brock Bowers led the Raiders with eight receptions for 110 yards and one touchdown on 10 targets. His longest reception was 27 yards, and he averaged 13.8 yards per catch in the supplied statistics.
4. Which team had more rushing yards?
The supplied team rushing figures credit the Patriots with 165 yards on 31 attempts and the Raiders with 38 yards on 18 attempts. New England averaged 5.3 yards per carry, compared with Las Vegas at 2.1 yards per carry. The individual and team totals should be checked against the original box score because some entries do not reconcile.
5. How many touchdowns did Drake Maye throw against the Raiders?
Maye threw four touchdown passes according to the supplied statistics. He also recorded one rushing touchdown in the listed rushing figures, demonstrating contributions through both passing and running.
6. Did either team record an interception?
No interceptions were recorded for either team in the supplied data. Both quarterbacks listed in the passing statistics for Las Vegas avoided interceptions, and Maye also finished with none. The Patriots nevertheless won comfortably through stronger scoring production, effective rushing, and defensive pressure.
Conclusion
The las vegas raiders vs new england patriots match player stats show how New England built its 45-17 victory through an effective combination of passing efficiency, rushing production, and defensive pressure. Drake Maye led the performance with 374 passing yards and four touchdown passes, while Rhamondre Stevenson and Corey Kiner contributed to a productive ground game.
For Las Vegas, Brock Bowers stood out with 110 receiving yards and a touchdown, and Kirk Cousins threw for 243 yards without an interception. However, the Raiders’ limited rushing output and lower passing touchdown total left them unable to match New England’s scoring pace.
The most revealing differences were New England’s four passing touchdowns, its 165 listed rushing yards, and its advantage in sacks and tackles for loss. Together, these figures provide a clearer explanation of the result than the final score alone.
Readers should also keep the supplied data discrepancies in mind. The individual and team passing figures do not fully agree, and some rushing totals require verification. Consulting the original ESPN record is the best way to confirm exact figures before using them in historical comparisons or statistical analysis.
