The washington commanders vs miami dolphins match player stats from the August 15, 2026, NFL preseason matchup tell the story of a Washington victory built on a strong running game, defensive takeaways, and timely scoring. The Washington Commanders defeated the Miami Dolphins 20-7, overcoming an early Miami touchdown and scoring 17 points in the second quarter. The game offered a useful look at reserve quarterbacks, developing running backs, receiving depth, and defensive execution as both teams evaluated players ahead of the regular season.

The final score only explains part of the contest. Washington recorded 174 rushing yards, scored twice on the ground, and intercepted Miami quarterbacks three times. Miami finished with 117 rushing yards but managed just 109 passing yards and committed three interceptions. Those differences help explain why the Commanders controlled the scoreboard despite Miami opening the game with the only points of the first quarter.

This analysis uses the supplied ESPN box-score data for Game ID 401873277. Because this was a preseason contest, individual statistics should be interpreted in the context of player evaluation, roster competition, and limited game participation rather than treated as a complete measure of regular-season performance.

Washington Commanders vs Miami Dolphins Match Player Stats: Game Overview

The matchup took place on August 15, 2026, during the NFL preseason. Washington finished with a 20-7 victory, while Miami was held scoreless after its opening-quarter touchdown.

Washington Commanders

Winning team · Preseason record 1-0

20

Miami Dolphins

Losing team · Preseason record 0-1

7

August 15, 2026 · NFL preseason · Final score: Washington 20, Miami 7

Quarter-by-quarter scoring

Quarter	Washington	Miami
First quarter	0	7
Second quarter	17	0
Third quarter	0	0
Fourth quarter	3	0
Final score	20	7

Miami started with a 7-0 lead after the opening quarter. Washington then produced a decisive second-quarter response, scoring 17 unanswered points. Neither team scored in the third quarter, and Washington added a field goal in the fourth to complete the 13-point victory.

The scoring pattern matters because it shows that Washington did not need a high-volume passing attack to win. Its combination of rushing production, defensive pressure, and takeaways created enough opportunities to establish control.

Key team statistics at a glance

Statistical category	Washington	Miami
Passing yards	160	109
Rushing yards	174	117
Total passing completions	15 of 27	8 of 24
Rushing attempts	41	28
Rushing touchdowns	2	1
Passing touchdowns	0	0
Interceptions thrown	1	3
Sacks recorded	1	3
Total tackles	52	77
Field goals made	2	0
Extra points made	2	1

Washington’s clearest statistical advantages came in passing yards, rushing yards, and turnovers. The Commanders gained 334 combined passing and rushing yards, compared with Miami’s 226. Washington also protected the ball more effectively, throwing one interception against Miami’s three.

Miami’s defense recorded more tackles and sacks, which suggests that the Dolphins generated some pressure and defensive activity. However, those numbers did not translate into a victory. Tackles and sacks must be evaluated alongside field position, turnovers, and scoring opportunities to understand their actual impact.

1. Quarterback Performance: Passing Stats and Decision-Making

Quarterback statistics were among the most revealing parts of this game. Washington completed more passes, gained more passing yards, and threw fewer interceptions. Miami, meanwhile, received an efficient opening performance from Malik Willis before its other quarterbacks struggled to maintain the same level.

Miami Dolphins quarterback stats

Quarterback	Comp/Att	Passing yards	Yards per attempt	TD	INT	Passer rating
Malik Willis	4/5	43	8.6	0	0	102.5
Cam Miller	3/11	39	3.5	0	2	2.3
Quinn Ewers	1/8	27	3.4	0	1	1.6
Team total	8/24	109	4.5	0	3	9.2

Statistics are reproduced from the supplied box-score data.

Malik Willis starts strongly

Willis completed four of five passes for 43 yards, averaging 8.6 yards per attempt. He did not throw a touchdown or interception, but his opening series gave Miami an important early advantage.

His contribution was more than a completion percentage. Willis completed four-fifths of his attempts and helped establish a rhythm between the passing game and the running attack. His passing connection with Caleb Douglas produced a 28-yard gain, creating an opportunity for Miami to move into scoring position.

Willis also added nine rushing yards on two carries. That mobility gave the offense another way to move the ball and helped complement De’Von Achane’s rushing production.

The main limitation is sample size. Five passing attempts are not enough to establish how Willis would perform over an entire game. His numbers show an encouraging short appearance, not proof of sustained performance over a full NFL contest.

Cam Miller struggles with turnovers

Miller completed three of 11 attempts for 39 yards, with two interceptions. His completion rate was approximately 27.3%, and he averaged only 3.5 yards per attempt.

The interceptions were especially damaging because Miami was already trying to recover from Washington’s second-quarter scoring run. Turnovers limit the offense’s ability to build sustained drives and give the opposing team additional opportunities to control field position.

Miller’s performance also illustrates why passing yardage should never be examined in isolation. His 39 yards were not enough to offset the risk created by two interceptions.

However, a preseason box score does not reveal every relevant detail. Pass protection, receiver separation, route execution, and the difficulty of individual throws can influence quarterback results. Film review would be needed to separate those factors from the quarterback’s own decisions.

Quinn Ewers faces a difficult outing

Ewers completed one of eight passes for 27 yards and threw one interception. His 12.5% completion rate made this the least productive passing line among the three Miami quarterbacks.

He averaged 3.4 yards per attempt and did not record a passing touchdown. Those numbers indicate that Miami struggled to produce reliable passing offense during his appearances.

For a young quarterback, the important evaluation points include footwork, timing, accuracy, and the ability to recognize defensive coverage. A poor statistical performance identifies areas that need further examination, but it does not establish how a player will perform in future games.

Washington Commanders quarterback stats

Quarterback	Comp/Att	Passing yards	Yards per attempt	TD	INT	Passer rating
Athan Kaliakmanis	6/10	87	8.7	0	0	88.3
Sam Hartman	8/15	80	5.3	0	1	41.0
Marcus Mariota	1/2	22	11.0	0	0	89.6
Team total	15/27	160	7.0	0	1	62.1

Washington’s quarterback rotation delivered a more productive overall passing performance, although it was not flawless.

Athan Kaliakmanis completed six of 10 passes for 87 yards without an interception. His 8.7 yards per attempt was the highest figure among Washington’s three listed quarterbacks with a full set of passing attempts.

That average suggests Washington found opportunities to gain useful yardage without relying exclusively on short completions. Still, his line contained no passing touchdown, so the value of his contribution was primarily in moving the ball rather than finishing drives through the air.

Sam Hartman completed eight of 15 passes for 80 yards. He threw one interception and averaged 5.3 yards per attempt. His eight completions were the most among Washington quarterbacks, but his yardage efficiency was lower than Kaliakmanis’s.

Hartman’s passing line shows why completion totals can be misleading. Completing more passes does not necessarily mean a quarterback has generated more offensive value. The distance gained, turnover risk, and resulting scoring opportunities are equally important.

Marcus Mariota completed one of two attempts for 22 yards. Although his 11.0 yards per attempt was the highest individual figure in Washington’s quarterback group, his sample was extremely small. Two attempts are not sufficient to draw firm conclusions about his passing efficiency.

What the quarterback comparison reveals

The combined numbers favor Washington in three important areas:

• Passing volume: Washington completed 15 passes compared with Miami’s eight.
• Passing efficiency: Washington averaged 7.0 yards per attempt, compared with Miami’s 4.5.
• Ball security: Washington threw one interception, while Miami threw three.

Neither team recorded a passing touchdown in the supplied statistics. Washington therefore built its lead through rushing touchdowns and field goals rather than through the passing game finding the end zone.

One technical detail matters when comparing the totals. Washington recorded 189 gross passing yards in its receiving statistics, but 160 net passing yards in the team summary. The difference reflects 29 yards lost on sacks. That distinction helps explain why receiving totals and net passing figures do not always match.

2. Running Back Stats: Washington Controls the Ground Game

The rushing statistics provide one of the strongest explanations for the final result. Washington recorded 174 rushing yards on 41 attempts, while Miami produced 117 yards on 28 carries. Both teams averaged 4.2 yards per rush, but Washington used its greater volume to generate more total yardage and two rushing touchdowns.

Washington Commanders rushing leaders

Player	Carries	Rushing yards	Average	Longest run	TD
Kaytron Allen	23	85	3.7	16 yards	1
Robert Henry Jr.	12	75	6.3	22 yards	1
Sam Hartman	3	13	4.3	11 yards	0
Jerome Ford	1	4	4.0	4 yards	0
Athan Kaliakmanis	2	-3	-1.5	-1 yard	0
Team total	41	174	4.2	22 yards	2

Kaytron Allen delivers a high-volume performance

Allen led Washington with 85 rushing yards on 23 carries and scored one touchdown. His average of 3.7 yards per attempt was below the team average, but his workload was significant.

The value of Allen’s performance lies partly in consistency and volume. Twenty-three carries gave Washington a dependable option to keep the ball moving and sustain its ground-based approach.

His touchdown also converted rushing production into points. Washington’s second-quarter surge included Allen’s one-yard scoring run, which helped turn a narrow deficit into a double-digit lead.

A useful distinction for readers is that a high carry total does not automatically mean a running back was the most explosive player. Allen generated the most total rushing yards for Washington, but another teammate produced more yardage per attempt.

Robert Henry Jr. supplies explosive runs

Henry rushed 12 times for 75 yards, averaging 6.3 yards per carry. He also scored a touchdown and recorded the longest rushing attempt in Washington’s listed rushing statistics, a 22-yard run.

His average was 2.6 yards per carry higher than Allen’s. That difference points to a more explosive individual rushing line, even though Henry handled fewer attempts.

Henry’s touchdown came on a 22-yard run in the second quarter, giving Washington the lead after Jake Moody’s field goal had made the score 7-3. The play was important because it converted Washington’s growing offensive momentum into a clear scoring advantage.

For roster evaluation, Henry’s numbers make him a player worth watching in subsequent preseason games. The combination of 75 yards, a touchdown, and a 6.3-yard average is encouraging. However, one game cannot settle a running back competition. Blocking quality, pass protection, special-teams contributions, and consistency across multiple appearances also matter.

Miami Dolphins rushing leaders

Player	Carries	Rushing yards	Average	Longest run	TD
De’Von Achane	7	39	5.6	14 yards	1
Ollie Gordon II	7	39	5.6	12 yards	0
Jaylen Wright	6	22	3.7	13 yards	0
Malik Willis	2	9	4.5	6 yards	0
Quinn Ewers	2	5	2.5	4 yards	0
Cam Miller	1	2	2.0	2 yards	0
Carlos Washington Jr.	2	2	1.0	1 yard	0
Donovan Edwards	1	-1	-1.0	-1 yard	0
Team total	28	117	4.2	14 yards	1

De’Von Achane gives Miami its early spark

Achane finished with 39 rushing yards on seven carries, averaging 5.6 yards per attempt. He also scored Miami’s only touchdown.

His touchdown was the decisive moment of the opening quarter. Miami’s first scoring drive demonstrated how the Dolphins could combine passing and rushing plays to move downfield. Willis connected with Douglas for a substantial gain, and the running game helped finish the drive with Achane’s short scoring run.

Achane’s efficiency was strong in this sample, but his seven carries were fewer than Allen’s 23 for Washington. The contrast reflects the different workloads in the two backfields rather than necessarily indicating a difference in each player’s overall ability.

Ollie Gordon II matches Achane’s yardage

Gordon also recorded 39 rushing yards on seven carries, averaging 5.6 yards per attempt. He matched Achane in total yardage and average but did not score a touchdown in the supplied rushing table.

That is an important distinction when comparing similar statistical lines. Gordon’s rushing contribution was productive, but Achane’s performance included the points that gave Miami its only lead of the game.

Jaylen Wright added 22 yards on six carries. His average of 3.7 yards was lower than those of Achane and Gordon, but his role gave Miami another option in the rotation.

Why Washington’s rushing advantage mattered

Washington attempted 13 more rushes than Miami and gained 57 additional rushing yards. Although both teams averaged the same yards per carry, the Commanders maintained a greater volume of ground production.

That approach supported three objectives:

1. Sustaining possessions: Repeated rushing attempts helped Washington keep the offense moving.
2. Scoring near the goal line: Allen and Henry each supplied a rushing touchdown.
3. Reducing pressure on the passing game: Washington could produce points without needing a quarterback to throw a touchdown.

The ground game was not the only factor in the victory, but it gave Washington a reliable foundation while the defense took advantage of Miami’s passing mistakes.

3. Receiving Stats: Which Players Made the Biggest Impact?

The receiving statistics show that Washington spread its passing production among several players, while Miami relied on a smaller group of successful connections. Neither team recorded a receiving touchdown in the supplied data.

Washington’s receivers combined for 15 receptions and 189 receiving yards. Miami’s receivers recorded eight catches for 109 yards. The difference in total receiving yards reflects Washington’s greater number of completions and its ability to generate more passing production.

Washington Commanders receiving stats

Player	Receptions	Receiving yards	Yards per catch	Longest catch	TD
Jacoby Jones	2	33	16.5	28 yards	0
Jaylin Lane	3	31	10.3	17 yards	0
Colson Yankoff	2	24	12.0	17 yards	0
Dyami Brown	1	22	22.0	22 yards	0
Jaden Bradley	2	21	10.5	12 yards	0
Treylon Burks	1	16	16.0	16 yards	0
Antonio Williams	1	16	16.0	16 yards	0
Van Jefferson	1	14	14.0	14 yards	0
Ben Sinnott	1	11	11.0	11 yards	0
Team total	15	189	12.6	28 yards	0

Individual receiving figures follow the supplied player-stat table.

Jacoby Jones leads Washington in receiving yards

Jones recorded two receptions for 33 yards, making him Washington’s leading receiver by total yardage in the supplied data. He averaged 16.5 yards per catch, which indicates that his two successful receptions gained meaningful distance.

A receiver’s total yardage and catch count measure different things. Jaylin Lane had three receptions, the highest number in Washington’s listed group, while Jones produced more total receiving yards on fewer catches.

That distinction matters when evaluating players in a preseason setting. Coaches need to understand not only who catches the ball consistently but also who creates useful gains and executes the assigned route.

Jaylin Lane provides a reliable receiving option

Lane caught three passes for 31 yards, averaging 10.3 yards per reception. His reception total led the Commanders’ listed receivers.

Three catches can help a quarterback maintain rhythm and avoid depending on one big play. Lane’s performance also contributed to Washington’s broader distribution of receiving production.

However, the supplied statistics do not provide target totals for these players. It is therefore not possible to calculate their individual catch rates or determine how frequently they were targeted.

Colson Yankoff and Dyami Brown add useful yardage

Yankoff recorded two catches for 24 yards, averaging 12.0 yards per reception. Brown caught one pass for 22 yards, giving him a 22.0-yard average.

Brown’s figure was the highest yards-per-catch average among Washington’s listed receivers, but it came from a single reception. That makes it a useful description of his recorded play rather than a stable measure of his usual performance.

Together, the figures show that Washington gained yardage through a mixture of short completions and more substantial receptions.

Miami Dolphins receiving stats

Player	Receptions	Receiving yards	Yards per catch	Longest catch	TD
Caleb Douglas	1	28	28.0	28 yards	0
Jalen Tolbert	1	27	27.0	27 yards	0
AJ Henning	1	24	24.0	24 yards	0
Malik Washington	3	15	5.0	8 yards	0
Terrace Marshall Jr.	1	9	9.0	9 yards	0
Cole Turner	1	6	6.0	6 yards	0
Team total	8	109	13.6	28 yards	0

Caleb Douglas produces Miami’s longest listed reception

Douglas caught one pass for 28 yards, averaging 28.0 yards per reception. That catch gave Miami a valuable downfield gain during its opening scoring drive.

A 28-yard reception can change the shape of a possession. It moves the offense closer to scoring range and may force the defense to respect deeper passing routes. In this case, the gain helped Miami build the drive that ended with Achane’s touchdown.

Douglas’s single reception should still be considered in context. It demonstrates the value of that play, but it does not provide enough evidence to judge his consistency across a full game.

Malik Washington leads Miami in receptions

Malik Washington caught three passes for 15 yards, averaging five yards per catch. His reception count matched Lane’s team-leading total for Washington, but his yardage per reception was lower.

Short receptions can be valuable when they move the chains or help a quarterback settle into a drive. Their value depends on the down, distance, and defensive coverage, none of which can be fully evaluated from the receiving table alone.

Jalen Tolbert and AJ Henning provide downfield production

Tolbert finished with one reception for 27 yards, while Henning caught one pass for 24 yards. Both recorded strong yardage on their limited opportunities.

These numbers show that Miami had the ability to generate individual passing gains. Its larger problem was maintaining that production after Willis’s opening series. The team finished with only eight completions and no passing touchdowns, making it difficult to sustain offensive pressure.

What the receiving comparison tells us

Washington’s advantage was primarily in total production and the number of completed passes. Miami’s 13.6 yards per reception exceeded Washington’s 12.6, but the Dolphins had far fewer catches.

This is a useful reminder that averages should not be considered independently of volume. Miami’s higher yards-per-catch figure did not mean it generated more total passing offense. Washington’s additional completions produced more receiving yards overall.

4. Defensive Stats: Washington Wins the Turnover Battle

The defensive numbers are essential to understanding the result. Washington recorded three interceptions, while Miami threw one. The Commanders also allowed no further points after the opening quarter.

Defensive comparison

Defensive category	Washington	Miami
Total tackles	52	77
Solo tackles	32	41
Sacks	1	3
Tackles for loss	2	2
Passes defended	5	7
Quarterback hits	4	5
Interceptions	3	1
Defensive touchdowns	0	0

Miami recorded more tackles, sacks, passes defended, and quarterback hits. Nevertheless, Washington’s three interceptions were the more decisive difference in the supplied defensive statistics.

Washington’s secondary creates three interceptions

The Commanders recorded interceptions through Ale Kaho, Quan Martin, and Malik Spencer. Kaho’s interception included 22 return yards, while Martin and Spencer also recorded picks.

Three interceptions represent a substantial turnover contribution in any football game. In a preseason contest, they also provide coaching staffs with opportunities to evaluate defensive recognition, positioning, and reaction to the football.

Turnovers can change a game in several ways:

• They end the opponent’s possession immediately.
• They prevent a drive from reaching a potential scoring opportunity.
• They can improve field position for the offense.
• They place additional pressure on quarterbacks to avoid mistakes.

Washington did not return an interception for a touchdown, so the value of these plays came through possession changes rather than direct defensive scoring.

The figures do not identify the exact result of every interception or establish how much each one contributed to a specific scoring drive. It is safest to treat the three interceptions as a major overall advantage rather than assign unsupported point values to individual plays.

Ale Kaho, Quan Martin, and Malik Spencer

Kaho’s interception return of 22 yards gave Washington a defensive play with additional field-position value. Martin and Spencer added two more interceptions to complete the team’s total.

The most important lesson is the combined effect. Washington’s defense did not rely on one player to generate every turnover. Three different defenders contributed, suggesting that several players made productive plays in the secondary.

That distribution can be encouraging during preseason roster evaluation. However, the box score alone does not establish whether these players consistently performed well in coverage, tackling, or communication throughout the game.

Miami’s defense creates pressure

Miami recorded three sacks, five quarterback hits, and seven passes defended. Those numbers show that the Dolphins produced pressure and contested passing plays.

The defensive performance was not uniformly poor simply because Miami lost. The Dolphins’ ability to record sacks and force Washington’s quarterbacks into difficult situations is a positive element in the statistical record.

The problem was that Miami did not turn those defensive contributions into enough scoring opportunities. Washington’s rushing game still produced two touchdowns, and the Commanders maintained control of the scoreboard.

Why tackles alone do not explain defensive quality

Miami’s 77 tackles compared with Washington’s 52 might appear to favor the Dolphins. Yet a tackle total is not the same as a measure of defensive dominance.

A team can record more tackles because its opponent runs more plays, completes more passes, or sustains longer possessions. Washington ran 71 offensive plays in the supplied team statistics, while Miami ran 53. Different defensive workloads can affect raw tackle totals.

A stronger evaluation combines tackles with yards allowed, turnovers, third-down stops, scoring prevention, and field position. In this matchup, Washington’s interceptions and ability to keep Miami scoreless after the first quarter were central to the outcome.

5. Special Teams Stats: Field Goals and Returns

Special teams helped Washington convert offensive opportunities into points. The Commanders made both field-goal attempts, while Miami did not attempt a field goal in the supplied kicking statistics.

Kicking comparison

Team/player	Field goals	Longest field goal	Extra points	Total points
Jake Moody, Washington	1/1	29 yards	1/1	4
Drew Stevens, Washington	1/1	41 yards	1/1	4
Washington total	2/2	41 yards	2/2	8
Riley Patterson, Miami	0/0	Not applicable	1/1	1

Moody converted a 29-yard field goal, and Stevens made a 41-yard attempt. Both Washington kickers also converted an extra point.

The two field goals supplied six points, while the two successful extra points added two more. The field goals were especially useful because they allowed Washington to extend its lead without needing another touchdown.

Miami’s Patterson converted the extra point following Achane’s touchdown. The supplied data show no Miami field-goal attempt, so it would be inaccurate to describe the Dolphins as having missed a field goal.

Kick-return statistics

Team	Returns	Return yards	Average
Washington	2	57	28.5
Miami	3	44	14.7

Washington averaged 28.5 yards per kick return, compared with Miami’s 14.7. Robert Henry Jr. returned one kickoff for 30 yards, while Jerome Ford recorded a 27-yard return.

Miami’s Jalen Reagor recorded two returns for 44 yards, averaging 22.0 yards per return. Jaylen Wright added one return that gained no yards.

Washington’s return average was nearly twice Miami’s. Although the number of returns was small, the difference suggests that the Commanders gained more starting-field-position value from their recorded kickoff returns.

Punt returns and punting

Washington returned two punts for 12 yards, averaging six yards per return. Miami returned three punts for 18 yards, also averaging six yards.

The punting numbers were nearly identical:

Punter	Punts	Total yards	Average	Inside the 20
Bradley Pinion, Miami	6	269	44.8	2
Matt Haack, Washington	6	268	44.7	2

Pinion averaged 44.8 yards per punt, while Haack averaged 44.7. Both placed two punts inside the opponent’s 20-yard line.

These figures suggest similar gross punting distance. They do not establish which punter had the better net-punting performance because the supplied table does not provide complete return and net-yardage calculations for both teams.

Overall, Washington’s successful field goals and stronger kickoff-return average supported its victory, while the punting figures were largely even.

6. Team Statistics: Where Washington Gained Its Advantage

The broader team statistics explain why Washington won despite both teams averaging 4.2 yards per rushing attempt. The Commanders ran more plays, generated more total yardage, and held possession for longer.

Team statistic	Washington	Miami
Total net yards	334	226
Total offensive plays	71	53
Average yards per play	4.7	4.3
First downs	21	10
Third-down conversions	8 of 17	3 of 12
Third-down conversion rate	47.1%	25.0%
Time of possession	35:23	24:37
Penalties	7	7
Penalty yards	47	66
Turnovers	1	3

These team-level figures are consistent with the official game information available through the Washington Commanders’ game center.

First downs and possession favor Washington

Washington recorded 21 first downs, more than twice Miami’s total of 10. First downs indicate how often an offense earns another set of downs through its progress, helping reveal whether a team can sustain possessions.

The Commanders also held the ball for 35 minutes and 23 seconds, compared with Miami’s 24 minutes and 37 seconds. That difference of 10 minutes and 46 seconds allowed Washington to control more of the game’s offensive activity.

Possession time alone does not guarantee victory. A team can hold the ball without scoring, and a quick-scoring offense can win with fewer possessions. In this game, however, Washington combined longer possession with more first downs, additional yardage, and a 13-point victory.

Third-down efficiency reveals an important difference

Washington converted eight of 17 third downs, a success rate of approximately 47.1%. Miami converted three of 12, or 25%.

That gap matters because third downs often determine whether an offense continues a drive or gives the ball back to its opponent.

Washington’s higher conversion rate helped the team sustain its offensive workload. Miami’s lower rate made it harder to build on its early lead and maintain pressure after the first quarter.

The numbers do not reveal every third-down situation, such as the distance needed for a conversion. Still, the overall difference provides useful evidence of Washington’s greater ability to extend possessions.

Penalties create another point of comparison

Both teams were penalized seven times, but Washington lost 47 yards while Miami lost 66. The Dolphins therefore surrendered 19 more yards through penalties.

Penalty yardage can affect field position and make drives more difficult. However, not all penalties have the same impact. A holding penalty on a critical down can be more damaging than a short penalty on a play that would not have produced a first down.

The aggregate numbers show that Washington gave away fewer penalty yards, but they do not identify the impact of every individual infraction.

The turnover margin helped decide the game

Washington threw one interception, while Miami threw three. Neither team recorded a defensive touchdown in the supplied statistics.

That gives Washington a turnover margin of plus two based on interceptions alone. The advantage was significant because Miami had fewer successful offensive possessions and was unable to score after the opening quarter.

Washington did not need to dominate every statistical category. It needed to gain enough yardage, capitalize on scoring opportunities, and avoid giving the Dolphins the same number of chances. The overall statistics show that the Commanders accomplished those objectives.

7. How the Game Developed: From Miami’s Early Lead to Washington’s Victory

The scoring sequence provides a clear account of how the game changed.

First quarter: Miami strikes first

Miami opened the scoring with a rushing touchdown by Achane. The drive featured Willis’s efficient passing, Douglas’s 28-yard reception, and contributions from the ground game.

The early score demonstrated Miami’s potential when its passing and rushing attacks worked together. At that point, the Dolphins held a 7-0 advantage.

Second quarter: Washington scores 17 unanswered points

Washington responded with a 29-yard field goal by Moody, cutting the deficit to 7-3.

Henry then broke off a 22-yard touchdown run. After Stevens converted the extra point, Washington led 10-7.

Allen followed with a one-yard rushing touchdown, and Moody added the extra point. Washington’s lead increased to 17-7.

The sequence changed the game’s direction. Washington combined two rushing touchdowns with a field goal, while Miami failed to add to its opening-quarter score.

Third quarter: Both offenses are held scoreless

Neither team scored in the third quarter. This period did not change the scoreboard, but it reinforced Washington’s ability to protect its lead.

The absence of points also shows why a final score should not be interpreted as evidence that one team scored throughout the game. Washington’s scoring was concentrated in the second quarter.

Fourth quarter: Stevens completes the scoring

Stevens converted a 41-yard field goal in the fourth quarter, extending Washington’s advantage to 20-7.

Miami could not produce a response, and the Commanders completed a 13-point victory.

The final sequence illustrates the combined value of Washington’s scoring balance and defensive control. The Commanders had already created their advantage with rushing touchdowns, then added a field goal while preventing Miami from getting back into the game.

8. What the Match Player Stats Mean for Preseason Evaluation

Preseason football requires a different approach to player evaluation than regular-season football. The score matters, but coaches must also consider player development, depth-chart competition, execution, and the quality of individual performances.

Washington’s running back competition

Allen and Henry were two of Washington’s most productive offensive players.

Allen led the team with 85 rushing yards on 23 carries and scored once. Henry gained 75 yards on 12 attempts, scored a touchdown, and averaged 6.3 yards per carry.

These performances provide different kinds of evidence. Allen demonstrated that he could handle a substantial rushing workload, while Henry produced more yards per attempt and a longer scoring run.

Neither line alone settles a roster decision. Coaches also evaluate pass protection, receiving ability, special teams, practice performance, and consistency across multiple games.

Washington’s quarterback depth

Kaliakmanis recorded 87 passing yards without an interception, while Hartman threw for 80 yards with one interception. Mariota’s two attempts produced 22 yards.

The statistics suggest that Kaliakmanis had the strongest passing line by yardage efficiency among Washington’s quarterbacks with meaningful attempts. Hartman’s greater completion total did not translate into the same yards-per-attempt figure.

A fair evaluation should consider the limited number of attempts, the quality of defensive pressure, and the circumstances in which each quarterback played. Preseason numbers are useful evidence, but they are not a substitute for film review and practice evaluation.

Miami’s quarterback development

Willis’s four completions on five attempts offered an encouraging opening sample. Miller and Ewers, by contrast, combined for three interceptions and only 66 passing yards.

Miami’s next evaluation step would be to determine why its passing production fell after the opening series. Relevant questions include whether the quarterbacks were reading coverage correctly, whether the receivers were getting open, and whether the offensive line provided enough protection.

The box score establishes the results, but it cannot answer every technical question behind them.

Miami’s defensive performance

Three sacks and seven passes defended are meaningful contributions. Miami’s defense also recorded 77 tackles.

Those numbers suggest the Dolphins had players capable of disrupting Washington’s offense. Yet the Commanders still gained 334 total net yards and scored 20 points.

The next step is to examine the context of those plays. Coaches would want to know whether the sacks occurred on critical downs, whether coverage limited passing options, and how well the defense handled Washington’s rushing attack.

Why one preseason game should not determine a player’s future

A single game can highlight promising performances and identify weaknesses. It cannot establish a complete picture of a player’s long-term ability.

A reliable evaluation process considers:

• Performance across several games and practices.
• Consistency against different defensive schemes.
• Decision-making under pressure.
• Ability to execute assignments.
• Contributions on special teams.
• Availability and role within the team’s depth chart.

This broader approach helps prevent overreacting to a single interception, touchdown, or unusually high rushing average.

9. Washington Commanders vs Miami Dolphins Match Player Stats: Main Takeaways

The washington commanders vs miami dolphins match player stats reveal five important lessons from the 20-7 preseason result.

1. Washington’s rushing attack produced the decisive touchdowns. Allen and Henry each scored on the ground, and the Commanders finished with 174 rushing yards.
2. Miami’s opening drive was its offensive high point. Willis completed four of five passes, Douglas gained 28 yards on a reception, and Achane scored the game’s first touchdown. Miami did not score again.
3. Turnovers were a major difference. Washington intercepted Miami’s quarterbacks three times while throwing one interception of its own.
4. Washington sustained more possessions. The Commanders recorded 21 first downs and converted 47.1% of their third downs. Miami recorded 10 first downs and converted 25% of its third downs.
5. Several individual performances deserve further evaluation. Allen and Henry stood out in Washington’s backfield, Kaliakmanis delivered a productive passing line, and Willis had an efficient but brief appearance for Miami. The results offer useful evidence without settling future depth-chart decisions.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. What was the final score of the Washington Commanders vs Miami Dolphins game?

The Washington Commanders defeated the Miami Dolphins 20-7 in their preseason matchup on August 15, 2026, according to the supplied game data.

2. Who led the Washington Commanders in rushing yards?

Kaytron Allen led Washington with 85 rushing yards on 23 carries and one touchdown. Robert Henry Jr. added 75 rushing yards and one touchdown on 12 carries.

3. How many passing yards did Miami gain?

Miami recorded 109 net passing yards. Its quarterbacks combined to complete eight of 24 attempts, with no passing touchdowns and three interceptions.

4. Which Miami quarterback had the best passing performance?

Malik Willis had the most efficient passing line, completing four of five attempts for 43 yards without an interception. His 102.5 passer rating was the highest among Miami’s listed quarterbacks.

5. How many interceptions did Washington record?

Washington recorded three interceptions. Ale Kaho, Quan Martin, and Malik Spencer each contributed one interception in the supplied defensive statistics.

6. Why did Washington win despite Miami recording more tackles and sacks?

Washington gained more total yards, rushed for two touchdowns, held possession longer, and threw fewer interceptions. Miami’s higher tackle and sack totals did not offset Washington’s advantages in scoring and ball security.

Conclusion

The Washington Commanders’ 20-7 victory over the Miami Dolphins was built on a productive ground game, defensive takeaways, and better control of offensive possessions. Washington gained 334 total net yards, rushed for 174 yards, and scored twice on the ground. Its defense intercepted Miami’s quarterbacks three times and prevented the Dolphins from scoring after the opening quarter.

Miami had positive individual performances, particularly Willis’s efficient opening series and Achane’s touchdown run. Douglas also supplied an important downfield reception, while the defense generated three sacks. However, the Dolphins struggled to sustain their passing production after the opening drive.

The most useful way to interpret the washington commanders vs miami dolphins match player stats is to consider the complete picture rather than focus on one player or one statistic. Washington’s rushing production, third-down efficiency, and turnover advantage explain the result more clearly than the final score alone. Because the game was a preseason contest, individual performances should also be viewed as early evaluation evidence rather than definitive predictions of regular-season success.