The Denver Broncos vs Washington Commanders Match Player Stats reveal how Denver secured a dramatic 27-26 overtime victory against Washington on December 1, 2025. The game featured strong quarterback performances, productive receiving targets, important defensive plays, and a late comeback attempt that pushed the contest into overtime. Bo Nix led Denver’s passing attack with 321 yards, while Marcus Mariota produced 294 passing yards and two touchdowns for Washington. Both offenses found ways to move the football, but Denver’s ability to convert important opportunities into points ultimately made the difference.

This matchup was much closer than the final standings of the two teams might suggest. Denver finished with 408 total rushing and passing yards according to the supplied individual statistics, while Washington generated 437 yards. Washington also had the advantage on the ground, recording 143 rushing yards compared with Denver’s 87. However, the Broncos made better use of their scoring opportunities and received important contributions from their defense and special teams.

The final score tells only part of the story. To understand why Denver escaped with a one-point win, it is important to examine quarterback efficiency, rushing production, receiving contributions, defensive pressure, turnovers, and kicking performance. This breakdown uses the supplied ESPN box-score statistics to explain the individual performances and the factors that shaped the result.

Denver Broncos vs Washington Commanders Match Player Stats: Game Overview

The December 1 matchup delivered an exciting contest between two teams with different levels of success during the season. Denver entered the game with a reported 10-2 record, while Washington was listed at 3-9.

Denver eventually won 27-26 in overtime. The Broncos established an early scoring advantage, but Washington continued to respond and kept the game competitive through the fourth quarter.

Final Score and Team Records

Game Information	Denver Broncos	Washington Commanders
Final score	27	26
Game result	Win	Loss
Overall record	10-2	3-9
Home/away status	Away	Home
Home/away record	4-2 away	2-4 home
Passing yards	321	294
Rushing yards	87	143
Receiving yards	321	294
Passing touchdowns	1	2
Rushing touchdowns	2	1
Interceptions	1	1
Sacks allowed	1	2

Note: Passing and receiving yards are presented separately because they describe the same passing production, not additional team yardage. The supplied box-score data lists the game as Week 9, although the December 1 date and reported 10-2 and 3-9 records create a season-context discrepancy. The analysis therefore uses the supplied date and player statistics without treating the Week 9 label as independently verified.

Quarter-by-Quarter Scoring

Quarter	Denver Broncos	Washington Commanders
First Quarter	3	0
Second Quarter	10	7
Third Quarter	7	7
Fourth Quarter	0	6
Overtime	7	6
Final	27	26

Denver controlled the opening portion of the game and built a 13-7 halftime lead. Both teams scored seven points in the third quarter, keeping the Broncos ahead by six.

Washington made its strongest push in the fourth quarter, scoring six points while holding Denver scoreless. That late effort brought the teams level and forced overtime.

The Broncos eventually scored seven points in the extra period, while Washington managed six. That one-point difference decided the game.

1. Bo Nix vs Marcus Mariota: Quarterback Performance

Quarterback play was one of the most important parts of this matchup. Bo Nix and Marcus Mariota both produced more than 290 passing yards, but their approaches were different.

Nix delivered a higher passing-yard total and completed a greater percentage of his attempts. Mariota, meanwhile, contributed more directly to Washington’s scoring through his two passing touchdowns and ability to gain yards on the ground.

Bo Nix’s Passing Statistics

Denver Broncos v Washington Commanders

Bo Nix

Denver Broncos

321 yards

Passing yards

Passing Category	Bo Nix
Completions	29
Attempts	45
Completion percentage	64.4%
Passing yards	321
Yards per attempt	7.1
Passing touchdowns	1
Interceptions	1
Sacks	1
Sack yardage	6
QBR	62.8
Passer rating	83.7

Nix completed 29 of his 45 passing attempts, giving him a completion percentage of approximately 64.4%. His 321 passing yards demonstrated that Denver could move the ball through the air even when Washington attempted to make the passing game difficult.

His average of 7.1 yards per attempt was another positive element of his performance. It suggests that Denver was not relying entirely on short completions to accumulate passing yards. The offense was able to generate meaningful gains through its receiving options.

However, the performance was not perfect.

Nix threw one interception and took one sack for six yards. Those plays matter because turnovers and negative passing plays can change field position and create additional pressure on the defense.

His 83.7 passer rating also shows that the overall performance was productive without being exceptionally efficient in every category.

One important detail is that Nix finished with 321 passing yards but only one passing touchdown. Denver relied heavily on its rushing attack when it came to scoring touchdowns. That balance helped the Broncos avoid depending on one offensive approach.

Marcus Mariota’s Passing Statistics

Philadelphia Eagles v Washington Commanders – NFL 2025

Marcus Mariota

Washington Commanders

294 yards

Passing yards

Passing Category	Marcus Mariota
Completions	28
Attempts	50
Completion percentage	56.0%
Passing yards	294
Yards per attempt	5.9
Passing touchdowns	2
Interceptions	1
Sacks	2
Sack yardage	18
QBR	55.8
Passer rating	78.2

Mariota completed 28 of 50 passes for 294 yards and two touchdowns. Although he finished with fewer passing yards than Nix, his two touchdown passes gave Washington an important scoring contribution through the air.

His completion percentage was 56%, which was lower than Nix’s 64.4%. The difference suggests that Washington had more difficulty completing its passing attempts consistently.

Mariota also averaged 5.9 yards per attempt. That figure was below Nix’s 7.1 yards per attempt, showing that Denver generated more passing production from each attempt.

The two sacks Mariota absorbed also deserve attention. They cost Washington 18 yards and created difficult situations for the offense. Against a defense capable of producing pressure, losing that much yardage can make third-down conversions harder.

Despite these challenges, Mariota kept Washington competitive. His two passing touchdowns helped the Commanders remain within reach, particularly when Denver’s offense failed to add points in the fourth quarter.

Quarterback Comparison

Statistic	Bo Nix	Marcus Mariota
Completions	29	28
Attempts	45	50
Completion rate	64.4%	56.0%
Passing yards	321	294
Yards per attempt	7.1	5.9
Passing TDs	1	2
Interceptions	1	1
Sacks taken	1	2
QBR	62.8	55.8
Passer rating	83.7	78.2
Rushing yards	16	55

The comparison shows why the quarterback battle cannot be judged through passing touchdowns alone.

Nix produced more passing yards, completed a higher percentage of his attempts, and averaged more yards per throw. Mariota produced more passing touchdowns and added 55 rushing yards.

Performance takeaway: Nix had the stronger passing efficiency, while Mariota offered Washington additional value as a runner. Both quarterbacks contributed to an offense that scored enough points to make the contest competitive.

2. Rushing Statistics: Which Team Controlled the Ground Game?

Washington had a clear advantage in rushing production.

The Commanders recorded 143 rushing yards on 33 attempts, averaging 4.3 yards per carry. Denver finished with 87 rushing yards on 23 attempts, averaging 3.8 yards per carry.

That difference of 56 rushing yards was significant. It helped Washington maintain offensive balance and gave Mariota opportunities to influence the game without relying entirely on his passing ability.

Denver Broncos Rushing Leaders

Player	Carries	Yards	Average	TDs	Long
RJ Harvey	13	35	2.7	2	11
Jaleel McLaughlin	6	24	4.0	0	14
Bo Nix	2	16	8.0	0	11
Marvin Mims Jr.	1	9	9.0	0	9
Adam Prentice	1	3	3.0	0	3
Team total	23	87	3.8	2	14

RJ Harvey’s Two-Touchdown Contribution

Watch RJ Harvey Rip Off a 40-Yard TD vs. Cowboys

RJ Harvey

2 TDs

Team rushing leader in carries

RJ Harvey was Denver’s leading ball carrier, receiving 13 rushing attempts and producing 35 yards.

His average of 2.7 yards per carry was not particularly impressive. Nevertheless, his two rushing touchdowns were among the most important individual contributions in the game.

This is a useful example of why rushing production needs to be evaluated through more than total yardage.

A running back can have a relatively modest average while still making a major difference near the goal line. Touchdowns are especially valuable because they convert offensive possessions into points.

Harvey’s 35 yards represented a limited share of Denver’s total offense, but his two scores helped the Broncos maintain their advantage.

Jaleel McLaughlin Adds Ground Production

Report: Broncos Re-Sign RB Jaleel McLaughlin to Low-Level Deal

Jaleel McLaughlin

24 yards

Six rushing attempts

McLaughlin carried the ball six times for 24 yards, averaging four yards per attempt.

Although he did not score, his contribution gave Denver another option in the running game. His 14-yard longest run was also the team’s longest rushing gain in the supplied statistics.

The Broncos needed contributions from multiple players because their overall rushing production was limited.

Washington Commanders Rushing Leaders

Player	Carries	Yards	Average	TDs	Long
Marcus Mariota	10	55	5.5	0	19
Chris Rodriguez Jr.	11	41	3.7	1	11
Jeremy McNichols	6	30	5.0	0	16
Jacory Croskey-Merritt	4	20	5.0	0	12
Deebo Samuel Sr.	2	-3	-1.5	0	-1
Team total	33	143	4.3	1	19

Marcus Mariota’s Mobility Made a Difference

Mariota was Washington’s leading rusher, finishing with 55 yards on 10 carries.

His average of 5.5 yards per carry was better than the average of every Denver ball carrier listed in the supplied statistics.

This rushing production made him a dual-threat quarterback. Denver had to account for his ability to move outside the pocket and gain yards with his legs.

Quarterback rushing can create several advantages:

• It gives an offense another option when passing lanes are covered.
• It can help convert difficult third-down situations.
• It forces defenders to monitor the quarterback instead of focusing entirely on receivers.
• It creates additional opportunities for designed runs and scrambles.

Mariota’s 19-yard longest run was also the longest rushing play recorded by either team in the supplied data.

Chris Rodriguez Jr. Provides a Touchdown

Denver Broncos v Washington Commanders

Chris Rodriguez Jr.

41 yards

One rushing touchdown

Rodriguez carried the football 11 times for 41 yards and scored one rushing touchdown.

His 3.7-yard average was lower than Mariota’s and McNichols’ averages, but he still provided a useful physical presence in the running game.

His touchdown was particularly important because it gave Washington another way to score besides Mariota’s passing production.

Washington’s Rushing Advantage Explained

Washington’s 143 rushing yards compared with Denver’s 87 tell an important part of the offensive story.

The Commanders had:

• 10 more rushing attempts.
• 56 additional rushing yards.
• A higher team rushing average.
• More rushing production from their quarterback.

However, a rushing advantage does not automatically produce a victory.

Denver compensated through more productive passing, two rushing touchdowns, and stronger defensive disruption. Washington moved the ball effectively but did not turn its statistical advantages into a higher final score.

3. Receiving Statistics: Top Targets and Passing Contributions

The receiving numbers show that both teams had productive individual performers.

Denver’s passing attack was led by Evan Engram, who recorded 79 receiving yards. Washington’s most productive receiver was Zach Ertz, who finished with 106 yards.

Terry McLaurin also delivered a strong performance for the Commanders, recording 96 receiving yards and one touchdown.

Denver Broncos Receiving Leaders

Player	Receptions	Targets	Yards	Average	TDs	Long
Evan Engram	6	9	79	13.2	0	41
Courtland Sutton	5	6	62	12.4	1	31
Adam Trautman	3	4	47	15.7	0	22
Pat Bryant	3	7	42	14.0	0	21
RJ Harvey	3	4	27	9.0	0	12
Troy Franklin	2	3	21	10.5	0	17
Tyler Badie	3	5	18	6.0	0	13
Adam Prentice	1	1	11	11.0	0	11
Marvin Mims Jr.	2	2	8	4.0	0	6
Jaleel McLaughlin	1	1	6	6.0	0	6
Lil’Jordan Humphrey	0	1	0	0.0	0	0
Team total	29	43	321	11.1	1	41

Evan Engram Leads Denver’s Receiving Attack

Steve Atwater breaks down Evan Engram’s key OT catch-and-run vs. Commanders | Between the Lines

Evan Engram

79 yards

Six receptions on nine targets

Engram was Denver’s leading receiver by yardage, recording six catches for 79 yards on nine targets.

His average of 13.2 yards per reception was a strong contribution for a tight end.

His longest reception covered 41 yards, making it the longest completed pass among Denver’s individual receiving statistics.

Engram’s production was valuable because tight ends can serve as important connections between the quarterback and the wider receiving group. They can provide shorter passing options while also creating opportunities for longer gains.

His nine targets also indicate that Nix regularly looked in his direction.

Engram did not score a touchdown, but his ability to gain yardage helped Denver maintain offensive momentum.

Courtland Sutton Delivers a Touchdown

Courtland Sutton Makes Franchise History in Broncos’ SNF Victory

The Courtland Sutton

1 TD

62 receiving yards

Sutton caught five passes for 62 yards and one touchdown on six targets.

His 12.4 yards per reception showed that Denver received useful production whenever he connected with Nix.

The touchdown was especially important because Denver recorded only one passing touchdown in the supplied statistics.

Sutton’s six targets also represented a strong connection rate with Nix. He caught five of those opportunities, giving him an impressive reception-to-target ratio.

Adam Trautman and Pat Bryant Add Depth

Adam Trautman recorded three catches for 47 yards, averaging 15.7 yards per reception.

His 22-yard longest reception showed that he could contribute more than short passing gains.

Pat Bryant also delivered a productive performance. He caught three of seven targets for 42 yards.

Although Bryant did not score, his receiving production helped distribute the workload across Denver’s offense.

This distribution matters because an offense becomes more difficult to defend when the quarterback has several useful receiving options.

Washington Commanders Receiving Leaders

Player	Receptions	Targets	Yards	Average	TDs	Long
Zach Ertz	10	13	106	10.6	0	21
Terry McLaurin	7	14	96	13.7	1	20
Deebo Samuel Sr.	5	7	64	12.8	0	38
Colson Yankoff	1	1	14	14.0	0	14
John Bates	2	2	9	4.5	0	7
Treylon Burks	1	4	5	5.0	1	5
Jeremy McNichols	2	2	0	0.0	0	0
Chris Rodriguez Jr.	0	1	0	0.0	0	0
Jaylin Lane	0	1	0	0.0	0	0
Team total	28	45	294	10.5	2	38

Zach Ertz Leads Washington With 106 Yards

Washington Commanders NFL playoff scenarios for first round – The Washington Post

Zach Ertz

106 yards

10 receptions on 13 targets

Ertz was Washington’s leading receiver with 10 receptions for 106 yards.

He received 13 targets, which made him one of Mariota’s most frequently used passing options.

His 10.6 yards per reception was lower than some of the other receiving averages in the matchup, but his overall volume made him extremely valuable.

Ertz’s performance demonstrates the importance of consistency. A receiver does not always need to produce a huge individual play to become a major offensive contributor.

By repeatedly catching passes and moving the chains, a tight end can help an offense sustain drives and create more scoring opportunities.

Terry McLaurin Provides a Touchdown Threat

Carolina Panthers v Washington Commanders

Terry McLaurin

96 yards

Seven catches and one touchdown

McLaurin recorded seven receptions for 96 yards and one touchdown.

His 13.7 yards per reception was better than Ertz’s average, showing that he generated more yardage on each successful catch.

McLaurin received 14 targets, the highest target total among the Washington receivers listed.

His touchdown gave Washington an important scoring contribution and helped the team stay close to Denver.

One interesting detail is that McLaurin had more targets than Ertz but finished with fewer receptions and slightly fewer yards. That difference highlights the varying roles of Washington’s primary receiving options.

Deebo Samuel Adds Versatility

Denver Broncos v Washington Commanders

Deebo Samuel Sr.

64 yards

Five receptions and two rushing attempts

Samuel caught five passes for 64 yards on seven targets.

His receiving average of 12.8 yards per catch demonstrated his ability to generate meaningful gains.

He also received two rushing attempts, although those attempts resulted in minus-three yards.

The combination of receiving and rushing involvement shows the different ways Washington used him within its offensive structure.

Samuel additionally contributed to the return game, recording 114 yards on four kick returns.

His involvement in multiple areas made him one of the more versatile players in the supplied statistics.

Receiving Comparison: Broncos vs Commanders

Category	Denver	Washington
Receptions	29	28
Targets	43	45
Receiving yards	321	294
Yards per reception	11.1	10.5
Receiving touchdowns	1	2
Longest reception	41	38

Denver produced 27 more receiving yards despite having two fewer targets and one more reception.

Washington recorded more receiving touchdowns, but Denver generated slightly better average production per reception.

This difference contributed to the contrast between the two offenses. Denver gained more passing yardage, while Washington converted a greater portion of its passing production into touchdowns.

4. Defensive Player Statistics: Tackles, Sacks and Interceptions

Offensive production often receives most of the attention, but defensive performance can determine the result of a close game.

Denver’s defense recorded two sacks, eight tackles for loss, nine passes defended, and six quarterback hits.

Washington recorded one sack, two tackles for loss, five passes defended, and four quarterback hits.

These numbers show that Denver created more disruption in the backfield and generated more pressure on the opposing quarterback.

Denver Broncos Defensive Statistics

Defensive Category	Denver
Total tackles	83
Solo tackles	52
Sacks	2
Tackles for loss	8
Passes defended	9
Quarterback hits	6
Interceptions	1

Talanoa Hufanga Leads Denver in Tackles

Denver Broncos v Washington Commanders

Talanoa Hufanga

13 tackles

10 solo tackles

Hufanga led Denver’s defense with 13 total tackles, including 10 solo tackles.

A high tackle total can indicate that a defender was consistently involved in stopping offensive plays.

His performance was especially relevant in a matchup where Washington generated 143 rushing yards.

Defenders who can make reliable tackles are important against a team that uses both its running backs and mobile quarterback to advance the ball.

Other Important Denver Defensive Contributors

Player	Total Tackles	Solo	Additional Contribution
Brandon Jones	8	6	No additional statistic supplied
Alex Singleton	6	4	2 passes defended, 1 QB hit
Jonathon Cooper	6	4	1 tackle for loss
Ja’Quan McMillian	6	4	1 pass defended
Dre Greenlaw	5	2	1 pass defended, 1 interception

Dre Greenlaw was particularly important because he recorded an interception and returned it for 27 yards.

An interception can change the momentum of a football game by ending an opposing possession and giving the offense another opportunity.

Greenlaw’s 27-yard return also provided Denver with additional field-position value.

Dre Greenlaw’s Interception

Denver Broncos v Washington Commanders

Dre Greenlaw

1 INT

27 interception return yards

Greenlaw’s interception was one of the important defensive statistics for Denver.

It stopped a Washington passing possession and created an opportunity for the Broncos to take control of the football.

The 27 return yards made the play more valuable than an interception without a return.

Washington Commanders Defensive Statistics

Defensive Category	Washington
Total tackles	79
Solo tackles	35
Sacks	1
Tackles for loss	2
Passes defended	5
Quarterback hits	4
Interceptions	1

Bobby Wagner Leads Washington’s Defense

Commanders re-sign Bobby Wagner to one-year deal: Perennial All-Pro returning for 14th NFL season – CBS Sports

Bobby Wagner

8 tackles

One interception

Wagner recorded eight total tackles, including three solo tackles, and added one pass defended.

He also intercepted a pass and returned it for six yards.

That interception was an important defensive contribution because it prevented Denver from continuing its offensive possession.

Wagner’s ability to contribute in both tackling and pass coverage demonstrated his importance to Washington’s defensive unit.

The Frankie Luvu Produces Washington’s Only Sack

Frankie Luvu | Washington Commanders

Frankie Luvu

1 sack

Two quarterback hits

Luvu recorded four tackles, one sack, one tackle for loss, one pass defended, and two quarterback hits.

He was Washington’s most productive player in terms of the listed individual quarterback-pressure statistics.

His two quarterback hits were especially useful because they showed that he was involved in disrupting passing plays beyond his recorded sack.

Other Washington Defensive Contributors

Player	Total Tackles	Solo	Additional Contribution
Mike Sainristil	7	4	No additional statistic supplied
Jeremy Reaves	7	3	1 pass defended
Quan Martin	7	2	No additional statistic supplied
Jonathan Jones	6	5	No additional statistic supplied
Frankie Luvu	4	1	1 sack, 1 TFL, 1 pass defended, 2 QB hits

Defensive Comparison

Denver had the statistical advantage in several important defensive categories.

Category	Denver	Washington
Total tackles	83	79
Solo tackles	52	35
Sacks	2	1
Tackles for loss	8	2
Passes defended	9	5
QB hits	6	4
Interceptions	1	1

The most notable difference was tackles for loss. Denver recorded eight compared with Washington’s two.

This suggests that the Broncos were more successful at disrupting offensive plays behind the line of scrimmage.

Washington still produced a valuable defensive performance, particularly through Wagner’s interception and Luvu’s pressure.

However, Denver’s ability to create more negative plays gave its defense a stronger statistical profile.

5. Special Teams Statistics: Kicking, Punting and Returns

Special teams are often overlooked when people study player statistics, but they can have a major influence on close games.

The Broncos and Commanders both received reliable kicking performances.

Denver’s Wil Lutz converted both of his field-goal attempts and all three extra-point attempts. Washington’s Jake Moody also converted both field goals and both extra points.

Kicking Statistics

Statistic	Wil Lutz	Jake Moody
Field goals made	2	2
Field goals attempted	2	2
Field-goal percentage	100%	100%
Longest field goal	33 yards	38 yards
Extra points made	3	2
Extra points attempted	3	2
Total points	9	8

Wil Lutz’s Performance for Denver

K Wil Lutz hits a 35-yard game-winning field goal to defeat Chiefs | Broncos vs. Chiefs

Wil Lutz

9 points

Two field goals and three extra points

Lutz converted both field-goal attempts, including a longest kick of 33 yards.

He also successfully converted all three extra points.

His nine total points made him an important contributor to Denver’s winning score.

A reliable kicker can help a team stay competitive when the offense cannot consistently finish drives with touchdowns.

Jake Moody’s Performance for Washington

Washington Commanders kicker Jake Moody makes a 38-yard field goal in Commanders debut to trim Denver Broncos lead to 20-17

Jake Moody

8 points

Two field goals and two extra points

Moody also finished with a perfect field-goal record, converting both attempts.

His longest successful kick covered 38 yards.

He added two extra points and finished with eight total points.

Both kickers were accurate, meaning the one-point final margin was not caused by a missed field goal or extra point in the supplied statistics.

Punting Comparison

Punting Category	Jeremy Crawshaw	Tress Way
Punts	4	4
Total yards	181	169
Average	45.3	42.3
Touchbacks	1	0
Inside the 20	1	2
Longest punt	50	56

Denver’s Jeremy Crawshaw averaged 45.3 yards per punt, while Washington’s Tress Way averaged 42.3 yards.

Way placed two punts inside the 20-yard line, compared with one for Crawshaw.

This is an important distinction because punt distance and punt placement are not identical measures of performance.

A longer punt can improve field position, but a well-placed punt inside the 20 can also force an opponent to begin its possession deep in its own territory.

Kick Return Statistics

Team	Player	Returns	Yards	Average	Long
Denver	Marvin Mims Jr.	3	68	22.7	26
Denver	Tyler Badie	2	50	25.0	27
Washington	Deebo Samuel Sr.	4	114	28.5	35
Washington	Jeremy McNichols	1	15	15.0	15

Washington recorded 129 total kick-return yards, while Denver finished with 118.

Deebo Samuel was the leading returner with 114 yards on four returns.

His 28.5-yard average was higher than the average of either Denver returner.

Marvin Mims Jr. led Denver in total kick-return yards with 68, while Tyler Badie averaged 25 yards per return.

Punt Return Statistics

Team	Player	Returns	Yards	Average
Denver	Marvin Mims Jr.	1	10	10.0
Washington	Jaylin Lane	1	0	0.0

Mims returned one punt for 10 yards.

Washington’s Jaylin Lane recorded one punt return without gaining yardage.

These plays provided additional opportunities for both teams to improve their starting field position.

6. Turnovers and Ball Security

Turnovers can dramatically change the direction of an NFL game.

In this matchup, both teams recorded one interception according to the supplied statistics. However, their overall fumble records were slightly different.

Interception Comparison

Team	Player	Interceptions	Return Yards
Denver	Dre Greenlaw	1	27
Washington	Bobby Wagner	1	6

Neither defense had an advantage in the number of interceptions.

However, Greenlaw returned his interception 27 yards, while Wagner returned his for six yards.

That difference gave Denver more return yardage from its interception.

Fumble Statistics

Denver Broncos

Player	Fumbles	Lost	Recovered
Bo Nix	1	0	1

Washington Commanders

Player	Fumbles	Lost	Recovered
Marcus Mariota	1	0	0
Deebo Samuel Sr.	1	0	0
Jeremy McNichols	0	0	1
John Bates	0	0	1
Team total	2	0	2

The supplied statistics show that Denver recorded one fumble, while Washington recorded two.

Neither team lost a fumble.

That detail is important because a fumble does not automatically count as a turnover. The opposing team must recover the football for possession to change.

Both teams successfully avoided losing possession through their recorded fumbles.

Why Ball Security Matters

Ball security becomes especially important during close games.

A lost fumble or interception can give the opponent an additional possession and create a scoring opportunity.

In this matchup:

• Both teams threw one interception.
• Denver recorded one fumble without losing possession.
• Washington recorded two fumbles without losing possession.
• Each defense recorded an interception.

The supplied statistics therefore show an equal interception count and no lost fumbles.

Denver’s victory cannot be explained simply by saying that Washington committed more turnovers. The more useful distinction is the Broncos’ ability to create defensive disruption while maintaining possession when their own fumbles occurred.

7. Most Important Players Who Influenced the Result

Looking beyond the leading statistical categories helps explain which players made the biggest contributions.

Several players stood out because of their ability to generate yardage, score touchdowns, create defensive opportunities, or support their teams in multiple areas.

Denver’s Most Valuable Offensive Contributors

Player	Key Contribution	Why It Mattered
Bo Nix	321 passing yards	Led Denver’s passing attack
RJ Harvey	2 rushing TDs	Converted rushing opportunities into points
Evan Engram	79 receiving yards	Led the team in receiving production
Courtland Sutton	62 yards, 1 TD	Added Denver’s passing touchdown
Wil Lutz	9 kicking points	Converted all five kicking attempts

RJ Harvey deserves particular attention because his two rushing touchdowns came despite a relatively low rushing average.

His contribution shows that individual efficiency and scoring impact are not always the same thing. A player might gain fewer yards but still make the most important contribution near the goal line.

Nix was another major factor. His 321 passing yards provided the foundation for Denver’s aerial offense, while his ability to complete 29 passes helped the Broncos maintain offensive production.

Engram and Sutton were also important because they offered different types of receiving value. Engram produced the most receiving yards, while Sutton contributed a touchdown.

Washington’s Most Valuable Offensive Contributors

Player	Key Contribution	Why It Mattered
Marcus Mariota	294 passing yards, 55 rushing yards	Provided dual-threat production
Zach Ertz	106 receiving yards	Led Washington’s receivers
Terry McLaurin	96 yards, 1 TD	Delivered a major scoring contribution
Deebo Samuel Sr.	64 receiving yards	Added receiving and return production
Chris Rodriguez Jr.	41 rushing yards, 1 TD	Contributed on the ground

Mariota’s 55 rushing yards deserve special recognition. His mobility gave Washington another way to attack Denver’s defense.

Ertz was the most productive receiver by yardage, while McLaurin was particularly valuable because he combined strong receiving production with a touchdown.

Samuel also played an important role beyond catching passes. His kick-return production gave Washington additional opportunities to improve field position.

8. Why Denver Won Despite Washington’s Rushing Advantage

One of the most interesting parts of this matchup is that Washington finished with more rushing yards, yet Denver won.

The Commanders recorded 143 rushing yards compared with Denver’s 87. They also averaged more yards per rushing attempt.

On paper, those figures suggest that Washington was more effective on the ground.

However, football games are decided by points rather than individual statistical categories.

Several factors help explain Denver’s advantage.

1. Denver Produced More Passing Yards

Nix finished with 321 passing yards, while Mariota recorded 294.

Denver generated 27 more passing yards despite attempting five fewer passes.

The Broncos also averaged 7.1 yards per attempt compared with Washington’s 5.9.

That difference suggests that Denver was more productive on a per-attempt basis.

2. Denver Received Two Rushing Touchdowns From RJ Harvey

Harvey scored twice on the ground.

Those touchdowns were especially valuable because Denver did not need to depend entirely on its passing game to reach the end zone.

Washington’s rushing attack produced one touchdown through Rodriguez, while Denver’s two rushing touchdowns gave it a scoring advantage in that category.

3. Denver Created More Defensive Disruption

The Broncos recorded:

• Two sacks.
• Eight tackles for loss.
• Nine passes defended.
• Six quarterback hits.

Washington recorded:

• One sack.
• Two tackles for loss.
• Five passes defended.
• Four quarterback hits.

Denver’s defensive advantage was particularly clear in tackles for loss.

These plays can disrupt an offense by forcing longer third-down situations and limiting the ability to maintain consistent drives.

4. Both Teams Had Reliable Kickers

Neither team missed a field goal or extra point in the supplied statistics.

Lutz scored nine points, while Moody scored eight.

The difference in their total points came from the number of extra points converted, rather than missed kicks.

5. Denver Finished With the Higher Score

The final score was Denver 27, Washington 26.

Although Washington had more rushing yards and more passing touchdowns, Denver found enough scoring opportunities to finish one point ahead.

This is why a complete statistical analysis should consider offensive production, defensive performance, and scoring efficiency together.

9. Complete Statistical Comparison

The following table brings together the major team statistics from the supplied box-score information.

Statistical Category	Denver Broncos	Washington Commanders
Final score	27	26
Passing completions	29	28
Passing attempts	45	50
Passing yards	321	294
Yards per attempt	7.1	5.9
Passing touchdowns	1	2
Interceptions thrown	1	1
Sacks allowed	1	2
Rushing attempts	23	33
Rushing yards	87	143
Rushing average	3.8	4.3
Rushing touchdowns	2	1
Receptions	29	28
Receiving yards	321	294
Receiving touchdowns	1	2
Total defensive tackles	83	79
Solo tackles	52	35
Defensive sacks	2	1
Tackles for loss	8	2
Passes defended	9	5
Quarterback hits	6	4
Interceptions recorded	1	1
Kick-return yards	118	129
Punt-return yards	10	0
Field goals made	2	2
Extra points made	3	2
Punting average	45.3	42.3

The comparison highlights the contrasting strengths of both teams.

Denver had the advantage in passing yardage, defensive disruption, and rushing touchdowns. Washington was more productive on the ground and recorded more receiving touchdowns.

The most important lesson is that statistical advantages need to be evaluated within the context of scoring opportunities. A team can lead in several categories without winning the game.

10. How to Read NFL Player Statistics Correctly

For readers researching individual performances, understanding the difference between common football statistics is essential.

A box score contains several categories, and each one measures a different part of a player’s contribution.

Passing Yards vs. Passing Efficiency

Passing yards show how much yardage a quarterback generates through completed passes.

However, passing yards alone do not reveal how efficiently the quarterback used his opportunities.

For example:

• Bo Nix recorded 321 passing yards on 45 attempts.
• Marcus Mariota recorded 294 passing yards on 50 attempts.

Nix generated more yardage with fewer attempts.

Yards per attempt helps explain that difference. It measures the passing yards generated for each attempted throw.

Completion percentage is another useful measurement because it shows how often a quarterback successfully completes a pass.

Rushing Attempts and Yards Per Carry

The rushing attempts show how frequently a player carries the football.

Rushing yards show the total distance gained through those attempts.

Yards per carry helps compare players who receive different workloads.

In this game, Mariota averaged 5.5 yards per carry, while Harvey averaged 2.7.

However, Harvey scored two rushing touchdowns, showing why average yardage should not be used as the only measure of a running back’s contribution.

Targets and Receptions

Targets represent passes directed toward a receiver.

Receptions represent the passes successfully caught.

A player with many targets but fewer receptions may have had difficulty converting opportunities into catches.

McLaurin received 14 targets and recorded seven receptions. Ertz received 13 targets and caught 10 passes.

That comparison provides more information than receiving yards alone.

Defensive Tackles and Passes Defended

Tackles show how frequently defenders stop offensive players.

Solo tackles are made by one defender, while assisted tackles involve multiple defenders.

Passes defended measure plays in which a defender prevents or disrupts a completed pass.

Interceptions are particularly important because they give the defense possession of the football.

Sacks and Quarterback Hits

A sack occurs when a defender tackles the quarterback behind the line of scrimmage during a passing play.

A quarterback hit records contact with the quarterback during a play, even when the play does not result in a sack.

Denver recorded two sacks and six quarterback hits. Washington recorded one sack and four quarterback hits.

These figures help explain how much pressure each defense generated.

Why Context Matters More Than a Single Number

A useful player evaluation combines several statistics.

For example, a quarterback might record 300 passing yards but throw multiple interceptions. Another quarterback might finish with fewer yards but protect the football and produce more touchdowns.

Similarly, a running back with 40 rushing yards and two touchdowns may have a greater scoring impact than a player with 100 rushing yards and no touchdowns.

The best approach is to compare:

1. Individual production.
2. Efficiency.
3. Scoring contributions.
4. Turnovers.
5. Defensive impact.
6. The final team result.

This method gives readers a more balanced understanding of player performance.

11. Official Box Score and Statistical Reliability

For readers who want to examine the original numbers, the most useful reference is the ESPN Broncos vs Commanders box score.

The supplied statistics cover passing, rushing, receiving, defense, kicking, punting, returns, and fumbles.

When using historical NFL statistics, it is important to distinguish between the date of a game, its official season week, and the records shown in a particular data extract.

The supplied information identifies December 1, 2025, as the game date but also lists Week 9. Those details do not align cleanly with the reported team records of 10-2 and 3-9.

For that reason, the statistical analysis above focuses on the player figures and final score provided rather than presenting the week designation as confirmed.

There are also limits to what a traditional box score can explain.

It can show how many yards a player gained, how many passes were completed, and how many tackles a defender recorded. However, it does not always explain the full tactical context behind a play.

For a deeper evaluation, analysts would normally consider additional information such as:

• Third-down conversion rates.
• Red-zone efficiency.
• Time of possession.
• Number of offensive plays.
• Explosive plays.
• Penalty yardage.
• Expected points added.
• Pressure rate.
• Completion percentage over expected.

These statistics help explain why certain plays were successful and whether a team’s production came from consistent execution or a few major gains.

The supplied data does not provide all these categories, so they should not be estimated or invented.

12. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

1. Who won the Denver Broncos vs Washington Commanders game?

The Denver Broncos defeated the Washington Commanders 27-26 in overtime on December 1, 2025, according to the supplied box-score information.

2. How many passing yards did Bo Nix record against Washington?

Bo Nix completed 29 of 45 passes for 321 yards, one touchdown, and one interception. He averaged 7.1 yards per attempt.

3. How many passing yards did Marcus Mariota have?

Marcus Mariota completed 28 of 50 passes for 294 yards and two touchdowns. He also threw one interception and recorded 55 rushing yards.

4. Who was the leading receiver for the Denver Broncos?

Evan Engram led Denver with six receptions for 79 yards on nine targets. His longest reception covered 41 yards.

5. Who led the Washington Commanders in receiving yards?

Zach Ertz led Washington with 106 receiving yards on 10 receptions. He received 13 targets during the game.

6. Which Denver Broncos player scored the most rushing touchdowns?

RJ Harvey led Denver’s rushing attack in touchdowns with two scores. He finished with 35 rushing yards on 13 carries.

Conclusion

The Denver Broncos vs Washington Commanders Match Player Stats show how a closely contested NFL game can be decided by several different aspects of team performance.

Bo Nix led Denver with 321 passing yards, while Marcus Mariota provided 294 passing yards and 55 rushing yards for Washington. Evan Engram topped the Broncos’ receiving chart with 79 yards, and Zach Ertz led the Commanders with 106 yards. Terry McLaurin also made a major contribution with 96 receiving yards and a touchdown.

RJ Harvey’s two rushing touchdowns were particularly important for Denver. On defense, Talanoa Hufanga led the Broncos with 13 tackles, while Dre Greenlaw recorded an interception. Bobby Wagner led Washington with eight tackles and also intercepted a pass.

Washington had the advantage in rushing yards, receiving touchdowns, and kick-return yardage. Denver, however, generated more passing yards and defensive disruption while converting two rushing touchdowns.

Ultimately, the Broncos secured the 27-26 overtime victory. The individual performances demonstrate that winning football requires more than accumulating yards. Efficiency, defensive pressure, scoring opportunities, and execution in important moments all contribute to the final result.