dallas cowboys vs los angeles rams match player stats

Dallas Cowboys vs Los Angeles Rams Match Player Stats: Key Performances and Breakdown

Introduction

The NFL game between the Dallas Cowboys and Los Angeles Rams showcased both teams competing fiercely on the field. The Rams came out on top, securing a 31-21 victory, despite the Cowboys putting up a solid fight. In this breakdown, we will go over the game statistics in detail, highlighting the performances of key players and key statistical categories that defined the game.

Overview of the Match

The Cowboys, coming into the game with a 0-1 record, had high hopes of bouncing back after their opening week loss. On the other hand, the Rams, who were 1-0 at the time, were determined to maintain their perfect record at home. The game was a balanced matchup, with both teams showing strengths and weaknesses throughout. The Cowboys’ offense struggled to find consistency, especially in the early part of the game, where they were unable to score in the first quarter and only managed six points in the second. By halftime, the Rams had already taken a commanding 14-6 lead. In the second half, Dallas tried to rally, but the Rams were too dominant on both sides of the ball, ultimately pulling away to win 31-21.

Let’s dive into the statistics to understand how the players performed and where each team succeeded and fell short.

Team Stats Comparison

First Downs

  • Dallas Cowboys: 19
  • Los Angeles Rams: 22
    The Rams had a slight edge in first downs, which is often an indicator of offensive efficiency. Dallas had more rushing first downs (9 vs. 11), while the Rams excelled in passing first downs (10 vs. 7). Both teams earned a similar amount of first downs via penalties (Cowboys with 3, Rams with 1), reflecting their respective discipline in the game.

Third Down Efficiency

  • Dallas Cowboys: 4-11 (36%)
  • Los Angeles Rams: 5-11 (45%)
    On third downs, both teams had similar success rates, but the Rams held a slight advantage. Converting third downs is crucial for sustaining drives, and the Rams were able to do so with a bit more regularity, contributing to their overall time of possession.

Fourth Down Efficiency:

  • Dallas Cowboys: 1-2
  • Los Angeles Rams: 2-2
    The Rams were perfect on fourth downs, successfully converting both attempts. The Cowboys, while successful on one of their two fourth-down attempts, were not able to keep up in this area.

Total Yards

  • Dallas Cowboys: 297
  • Los Angeles Rams: 364
    The Rams outgained the Cowboys by 67 yards. Their efficiency in the passing game, combined with a strong rushing attack, helped them achieve this statistical advantage.

Yards per Play:

  • Dallas Cowboys: 5.0
  • Los Angeles Rams: 5.8
    The Rams had a better yards-per-play average, which reflects their ability to generate more explosive plays and keep the defense on its toes.

    Offensive Stats Breakdown

    Passing Game:

    Dallas Cowboys:

    • Passing Yards: 149
    • Comp/Att: 19/32
    • Yards per Pass: 4.5
    • Interceptions: 1
    • Sacks: 1 sack for 8 yards lost

      The Cowboys struggled in the passing game, with Dak Prescott completing only 19 of his 32 attempts for a modest 149 yards. The passing game averaged just 4.5 yards per pass, far below the Rams’ efficiency. Prescott threw one interception, which further hindered the Cowboys’ offensive rhythm. The offensive line gave up one sack, resulting in an 8-yard loss.

      Los Angeles Rams:

      • Passing Yards: 183
      • Comp/Att: 16/24
      • Yards per Pass: 7.3
      • Interceptions: 1
      • Sacks: 1 sack for 5 yards lost

        Matthew Stafford led the Rams with 183 passing yards, completing 16 of 24 attempts. His yards per pass were much higher at 7.3, showing that the Rams’ passing offense was more explosive. Stafford, like Prescott, also threw an interception, but he did a better job of spreading the ball around, and the Rams’ offense remained more productive in the air.

        Rushing Game:

        Dallas Cowboys:

        • Rushing Yards: 148
        • Rushing Attempts: 27
        • Yards per Rush: 5.5

          The Cowboys leaned on their rushing attack, which proved to be relatively effective. They gained 148 yards on 27 attempts, averaging 5.5 yards per carry. Ezekiel Elliott and Tony Pollard both contributed heavily to the ground game, helping to keep the Cowboys competitive. However, their rushes were less frequent compared to the Rams, limiting their total offensive output.

          Los Angeles Rams:

          • Rushing Yards: 181
          • Rushing Attempts: 38
          • Yards per Rush: 4.8

            The Rams had a more committed rushing attack, running the ball 38 times for 181 yards. Their 4.8 yards per rush was still impressive, and it allowed them to control the clock and sustain long drives. Darrell Henderson and Cam Akers were effective in the backfield, wearing down the Cowboys’ defense and setting up favorable passing situations.

            Red Zone Efficiency

            Dallas Cowboys:

            • Red Zone Conversions: 2-4
              The Cowboys were not as efficient in the red zone, scoring on just 2 of their 4 attempts. This inefficiency in scoring opportunities ultimately cost them the game.

            Los Angeles Rams:

            • Red Zone Conversions: 4-5
              In contrast, the Rams were far more effective in the red zone, converting 4 of 5 opportunities into touchdowns. This high red-zone efficiency was a major factor in their victory, as they capitalized on their chances.

              Penalties and Turnovers

              1. Dallas Cowboys:
                • Penalties: 11 for 83 yards
                • Turnovers: 1 (1 interception)

              The Cowboys had a relatively high penalty count, with 11 penalties resulting in 83 yards lost. This lack of discipline hurt their offensive drives and gave the Rams additional opportunities. The Cowboys also had one turnover, an interception, which allowed the Rams to gain an advantage in terms of field position.

              Los Angeles Rams:

              • Penalties: 8 for 104 yards
              • Turnovers: 1 (1 interception)

                The Rams, while committing 8 penalties for 104 yards, were still able to avoid costly mistakes in terms of turnovers. Their single interception did not affect the game as severely as the Cowboys’ penalty issues and turnovers.

                Time of Possession

                Dallas Cowboys:

                • Possession Time: 26:40
                  The Cowboys struggled to maintain possession for long stretches, with only 26 minutes and 40 seconds of ball control. This contributed to their inability to score quickly and forced them to play catch-up throughout the game.

                Los Angeles Rams:

                • Possession Time: 33:20
                  The Rams controlled the ball for a significant 33 minutes and 20 seconds. This time of possession dominance helped them keep the Cowboys’ offense off the field and control the tempo of the game.

                  Key Player Performances

                  Dallas Cowboys:

                  • Dak Prescott (QB): Prescott faced challenges, particularly in the passing game. He threw for 149 yards, with a touchdown and an interception. His performance did not meet expectations, and he was under pressure from the Rams’ defense.
                  • Ezekiel Elliott (RB): Elliott contributed 53 rushing yards on 15 carries, showing his ability to move the ball effectively. However, his efforts were not enough to swing the game in the Cowboys’ favor.
                  • CeeDee Lamb (WR): Lamb had a solid game with 7 catches for 61 yards, but he was unable to break through for a big play that could have changed the momentum.

                  Los Angeles Rams:

                  • Matthew Stafford (QB): Stafford had a relatively efficient game, throwing for 183 yards with a touchdown and an interception. His calm leadership was crucial in guiding the Rams to victory.
                  • Darrell Henderson (RB): Henderson led the Rams’ rushing attack with 75 yards on 19 carries. His consistent performance on the ground helped open up the passing game.
                  • Cooper Kupp (WR): Kupp had a quiet game in terms of yardage, but his catches were key to moving the chains and maintaining possession.

                    Conclusion

                    The Los Angeles Rams’ victory over the Dallas Cowboys in this matchup was largely driven by their superior efficiency in the red zone, better time of possession, and more consistent offensive performance. While both teams had their moments, the Rams’ balanced attack — combining a strong rushing game with efficient passing — was the deciding factor. The Cowboys’ inability to execute in critical moments, particularly in the red zone, and their struggles with penalties and turnovers, ultimately allowed the Rams to dominate and secure the win. This match served as a reminder of how critical efficiency in all facets of the game — from passing and rushing to penalties and turnovers — is to securing a victory in the NFL.

                    FAQS

                    1. What was the final score between Dallas Cowboys and Los Angeles Rams?
                    The Rams won 31-21 over the Cowboys.

                    2. Who had the most rushing yards in the Dallas Cowboys vs Los Angeles Rams game?
                    Darrell Henderson of the Rams led with 75 rushing yards.

                    3. How many turnovers did the Cowboys commit in the game?
                    The Cowboys committed one turnover, an interception.

                    4. What was the key difference in red zone efficiency between the two teams?
                    The Rams converted 4 of 5 red zone opportunities, while the Cowboys scored 2 of 4.

                    5. Who threw more passing yards in the game, Dak Prescott or Matthew Stafford?
                    Matthew Stafford threw 183 passing yards, more than Dak Prescott’s 149 yards.

                    Leave a Reply

                    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

                    Back To Top