Introduction

The Brooklyn Nets faced the Denver Nuggets on January 29, 2026, in a tight NBA regular season game at Ball Arena in Denver. The final score was 107-103 in favor of the Nuggets, marking a close battle where both teams showed grit despite injuries. This match was notable for Michael Porter Jr.’s return to Denver after his offseason trade to Brooklyn, where he put up a strong showing. Fans got a mix of high-scoring plays and defensive stands, making it a game worth breaking down for player stats and key contributions. Understanding these Brooklyn Nets vs Denver Nuggets match player stats helps fans see how individual efforts shaped the outcome.

The game drew attention because the Nuggets snapped a three-game home losing streak, improving to 32-16, while the Nets extended their skid to seven losses, dropping to 12-34. Porter received a video tribute and standing ovation for his past role in Denver’s 2023 title win. Both sides missed key players, like Denver’s four starters and Brooklyn’s Ziaire Williams due to a calf injury. This setup forced adjustments that highlighted bench depth and star power in the Brooklyn Nets vs Denver Nuggets match player stats.

Game Summary

In the first quarter, the Nets jumped to a 5-0 lead with Porter’s three-point play, but the Nuggets responded to end it 30-26 ahead. Denver’s Jamal Murray hit a key three, and Tim Hardaway Jr. added a jumper. The second quarter saw Denver pull away, outscoring Brooklyn 34-23 for a 64-49 halftime lead. Jonas Valanciunas scored inside, and Hardaway drained multiple threes. Turnovers hurt the Nets here. The third quarter flipped as Brooklyn rallied 27-15, cutting the gap to 79-76. Porter sparked it with threes and a steal leading to a layup, tying at 73-73.

The fourth quarter stayed intense, with the Nets briefly leading 92-90 on Nolan Traore’s layup. Murray then took over, scoring nine points in the last 2:26, including a jumper and free throws to make it 105-100. Peyton Watson’s three free throws after a foul sealed it, and Valanciunas added two more. The Nets’ last shot missed. This flow shows how momentum shifts affected the Brooklyn Nets vs Denver Nuggets match player stats, with Denver’s clutch play proving decisive.

Will You Check This Article: Cesta Roman: A Complete Guide to Ancient Roman Roads

Brooklyn Nets Player Stats and Analysis

Standout Starters

Michael Porter Jr. led the Nets with 38 points on 13-of-28 shooting, including 7-of-15 from three, plus 10 rebounds, three assists, two steals, and two blocks in 37 minutes. His +12 plus-minus shows his impact. Porter’s scoring burst in the third quarter, with threes and a steal for a layup, helped erase a 15-point deficit. As a former Nugget, his emotional return fueled his play, making him the game’s top scorer. These Brooklyn Nets vs Denver Nuggets match player stats highlight his efficiency at 46.4% field goal and perfect 5-of-5 free throws, proving his value in tough road games.

Nic Claxton contributed 10 points on 4-of-7 shooting, eight rebounds, seven assists, and a block in 31 minutes. His 57.1% shooting and perfect free throws added reliability inside. Claxton’s assists stood out, setting up plays for teammates like Porter. He grabbed three offensive rebounds, helping second-chance points. Despite four fouls and two turnovers, his +6 plus-minus reflects solid defense against Denver’s bigs. In the Brooklyn Nets vs Denver Nuggets match player stats, Claxton’s all-around game shows why he’s key for Brooklyn’s interior presence and playmaking from the center spot.

Terance Mann scored 12 points on 3-of-9 shooting, with 2-of-5 threes and 4-of-5 free throws, plus six rebounds and an assist in 29 minutes. His 33.3% field goal rate was low, but he added two offensive rebounds for extra possessions. Mann’s +11 plus-minus indicates positive court time, especially in defensive efforts. He committed two turnovers but avoided blocks or steals against him. These stats from the Brooklyn Nets vs Denver Nuggets match underline Mann’s role as a versatile guard-forward who contributes on both ends, even on off-shooting nights.

Key Bench Contributors

Day’Ron Sharpe provided seven points on 3-of-5 shooting, nine rebounds (five offensive), an assist, and two steals in 17 minutes. His 60% shooting and 50% free throws helped inside. Sharpe’s rebounds created second chances, vital during the comeback. With a -12 plus-minus and three fouls, he faced challenges, but his energy off the bench mattered. In analyzing Brooklyn Nets vs Denver Nuggets match player stats, Sharpe’s rebounding edge shows his potential as a backup big, offering hustle that keeps games close.

Drake Powell added seven points on 2-of-5 shooting, including 1-of-3 threes and perfect free throws, with a rebound and assist in 20 minutes. His 40% shooting was decent, but a -11 plus-minus and turnover hurt. Powell’s three-pointer in the third aided the rally. He picked up two fouls without steals or blocks. These Brooklyn Nets vs Denver Nuggets match player stats reveal Powell’s growing role as a wing scorer, providing sparks that could develop into consistent production for Brooklyn.

Tyrese Martin scored five points on 2-of-8 shooting, with 1-of-5 threes, six rebounds, but no assists in 17 minutes. His 25% shooting struggled, leading to a -19 plus-minus and five fouls. Martin’s rebounds, all defensive, helped control the glass. Without turnovers, he played clean but inefficiently. In the Brooklyn Nets vs Denver Nuggets match player stats, Martin’s effort on boards stands out, suggesting he can improve scoring to become a reliable bench option.

Denver Nuggets Player Stats and Analysis

Standout Starters

Jamal Murray topped the Nuggets with 27 points on 9-of-16 shooting, 2-of-3 threes, and perfect 7-of-7 free throws, adding four rebounds and six assists in 33 minutes. His 56.3% shooting and clutch nine points in the final 2:26 turned the game. Murray’s two steals and low turnovers (two) showed smart play. Despite a -9 plus-minus, his leadership shone. These Brooklyn Nets vs Denver Nuggets match player stats emphasize Murray’s ability to close games, making him Denver’s go-to in pressure spot.

Tim Hardaway Jr. delivered 25 points on 9-of-15 shooting, a season-high 7-of-11 threes, eight rebounds, and three assists in 28 minutes. His 60% shooting and 63.6% from deep built the halftime lead. Hardaway’s +21 plus-minus reflects dominance, with no turnovers. He added a steal. In the Brooklyn Nets vs Denver Nuggets match player stats, Hardaway’s outside shooting stretched defenses, creating space for teammates and proving his fit in Denver’s lineup.

Peyton Watson scored 19 points on 7-of-15 shooting, 2-of-3 threes, plus two rebounds, three assists, and two blocks in 34 minutes. His 46.7% shooting and 50% free throws (3-of-6) included key free throws late. Watson’s even plus-minus and no turnovers aided flow. These stats from the Brooklyn Nets vs Denver Nuggets match highlight Watson’s two-way play, blocking shots and assisting, which helped Denver maintain control inside and out.

Key Bench Contributors

Bruce Brown contributed 12 points on 5-of-7 shooting, 1-of-1 three, three rebounds, three assists in 33 minutes. His 71.4% shooting and +13 plus-minus showed efficiency. Brown added a free throw but had two turnovers and fouls. His playmaking set up scores. In Brooklyn Nets vs Denver Nuggets match player stats, Brown’s versatility off the bench provided steady scoring and defense, helping Denver weather the Nets’ rally.

Jonas Valanciunas added 12 points on 4-of-11 shooting, nine rebounds, three assists, and a steal in 25 minutes. His perfect 4-of-4 free throws and +11 plus-minus anchored the paint. Valanciunas’ hook shots and rebounds dominated early. With three fouls but no turnovers, he stayed effective. These Brooklyn Nets vs Denver Nuggets match player stats underscore Valanciunas’ role as a reliable big, controlling boards and scoring inside against Brooklyn’s frontcourt.

Julian Strawther scored seven points on 2-of-6 shooting, 1-of-2 threes, perfect free throws, a rebound, assist, and two steals in 22 minutes. His 33.3% shooting came with +11 plus-minus and no turnovers. Strawther’s steals disrupted plays. In the Brooklyn Nets vs Denver Nuggets match player stats, his defensive energy and timely scoring boosted Denver’s bench, adding depth in a shorthanded lineup.

Team Stats Comparison

The Nuggets shot 47.5% from the field (38-of-80) compared to the Nets’ 43.5% (37-of-85), giving Denver an edge in efficiency. From three, Denver hit 50% (13-of-26) while Brooklyn made 37.8% (14-of-37). Free throws saw Denver at 72% (18-of-25) and Nets at 83.3% (15-of-18). Rebounds favored Brooklyn 49-41, with 14 offensive for second chances. Both teams had 24 assists, but Denver’s six steals topped Brooklyn’s four. Turnovers were low: Nets eight, Nuggets six. These Brooklyn Nets vs Denver Nuggets match player stats in team form show Denver’s better shooting won despite rebounding disadvantage.

Fouls hurt the Nets more at 21 versus Denver’s 14, leading to extra free throws for the Nuggets. Blocks were six for Brooklyn and four for Denver, indicating stronger interior defense from the Nets. Plus-minus totals balanced out, but Denver’s bench outscored Brooklyn’s 23-27 wait, actually bench points aren’t direct, but overall, Denver’s starters carried more. In breaking down Brooklyn Nets vs Denver Nuggets match player stats, these comparisons reveal how shooting accuracy and foul control tipped the scale for Denver in a close contest.

Related: Chicago Bears vs Green Bay Packers Match Player Stats: In-Depth Analysis of the 2026 NFC Wild Card Thriller

Key Matchups and Strategies

Porter vs. his old team was a highlight, with his 38 points challenging Denver’s defense. Murray’s clutch plays countered that. The Nets used perimeter shooting to rally, hitting 14 threes, while Denver mixed inside scores from Valanciunas with outside bombs from Hardaway. Brooklyn’s rebounding advantage (49-41) came from Claxton and Sharpe, but turnovers in the first half allowed Denver runs. Denver’s strategy focused on assists and steals to force mistakes. These elements in Brooklyn Nets vs Denver Nuggets match player stats show adaptive tactics, with Denver’s late-game execution proving superior.

Injuries forced both teams to rely on depth. Nets leaned on Claxton’s playmaking (seven assists), unusual for a center, to set up shooters. Nuggets used Watson’s blocks and Murray’s scoring to protect leads. The third-quarter shift came from Brooklyn’s defense holding Denver to 15 points. However, fouls like Traore’s late one on Watson cost them. Analyzing Brooklyn Nets vs Denver Nuggets match player stats, these matchups teach lessons on handling shorthanded rosters and capitalizing on opponent weaknesses.

Implications for the Season

This loss extended the Nets’ streak to seven, highlighting needs for consistency and health. Porter’s performance boosts confidence, but their 12-34 record suggests rebuild focus. For Denver, the win at 32-16 strengthens Western Conference standing, showing resilience without starters. Murray and Hardaway’s scoring could carry them in playoffs. In the broader Brooklyn Nets vs Denver Nuggets match player stats context, this game underscores Denver’s title contender status and Brooklyn’s growth potential with young talent like Traore.

Upcoming games test these: Nets host Utah, Nuggets face Clippers. If patterns hold, Denver might push for top seeds, while Nets aim to end skids. These stats from the match provide insights for fans tracking season progress, emphasizing clutch play and depth as key to success.

Conclusion

The January 29, 2026, Brooklyn Nets vs Denver Nuggets match player stats paint a picture of a hard-fought game where individual brilliance met team effort. Porter’s 38 points for Brooklyn and Murray’s 27 for Denver stood out, but overall shooting and clutch moments decided it. Fans can learn from these breakdowns how stats like rebounds and free throws influence outcomes. Whether you’re a Nets supporter hoping for turnaround or Nuggets fan eyeing playoffs, this game’s details offer valuable lessons. Keep following for more on NBA matchups.

Cesta roman stands for the vast network of roads built by the ancient Romans. These paths connected cities, towns, and provinces across their empire. They helped with trade, army movements, and spreading ideas. The term “cesta roman” comes from words meaning “Roman road” in some languages, like Czech or Slovenian where “cesta” means road. This system started around 300 BC and grew over centuries. It covered over 50,000 miles of main routes and more side paths. Romans built them straight and strong to last. Today, many still exist or shape modern highways. Understanding cesta roman shows how one empire changed travel forever. It was key to their power and success.

The importance of cesta roman goes beyond just moving people. These roads made the Roman Empire work as a unit. Soldiers could march quickly to far places. Merchants carried goods like wine, grain, and tools. News and laws spread fast from Rome to distant lands. Without cesta roman, the empire might have fallen apart sooner. Engineers planned them with care, using local materials. They even built bridges and tunnels where needed. This network linked Europe, North Africa, and parts of Asia. It fostered cultural mixes, like sharing art and religion. Cesta roman was not just stone paths; it was the backbone of a civilization.

History of Cesta Roman

Origins of Cesta Roman

Cesta roman began in the early days of the Roman Republic. The first major road, the Via Appia, was built in 312 BC by censor Appius Claudius Caecus. It linked Rome to Capua, about 132 miles south. This path helped during wars against the Samnites. Romans saw the need for reliable routes to move troops and supplies. Before that, paths were dirt tracks that turned muddy in rain. Cesta roman changed this with paved surfaces. Laws like the Twelve Tables mentioned road upkeep. By the 2nd century BC, more roads spread out from Rome. They followed a hub-and-spoke model, with Rome at the center. This setup made control easier. The origins show how military needs drove innovation in building.

As the republic grew, cesta roman expanded to new territories. Conquered lands got new roads to secure Roman rule. For example, after taking Gaul, Julius Caesar built paths there. These connected to the main system. Funding came from taxes and rich officials who wanted fame. Building a road was a way to gain votes or honor. Engineers, often from the army, led the work. Slaves and locals provided labor. The origins of cesta roman tie to Rome’s rise as a power. Without them, expansion would have been slow and risky. They turned rough lands into organized provinces.

Will You Check This Article: Chicago Bears vs Green Bay Packers Match Player Stats: In-Depth Analysis of the 2026 NFC Wild Card Thriller

Development During the Empire

Under emperors, cesta roman reached its peak. Augustus fixed old roads and built new ones around 20 BC. He set up a board to manage them. The empire added roads in Britain, Spain, and the East. Total length hit about 250,000 miles including minor paths. Milestones marked distances every Roman mile, about 4,800 feet. These stones showed who built the road and when. Inns and stations appeared along routes for rest. Horses could be changed at mutationes. This system sped up travel. A message from Rome to Britain took weeks instead of months. Development focused on efficiency. Cesta roman became symbols of Roman skill and unity.

Trade boomed thanks to cesta roman growth. Safe paths meant more wagons and caravans. Goods like olive oil from Spain reached Germany. This created a common market. Cultural spread followed, with Latin language and Roman customs moving along. Armies used them for quick responses to rebellions. Emperors like Trajan added grand roads in new provinces. In Dacia, he built paths over mountains. Engineering feats included viaducts and cuttings through rock. The development phase shows cesta roman as a tool for empire-building. It knit diverse peoples into one state.

Decline and Fall

Cesta roman started to decline in the 3rd century AD. Wars and economic troubles meant less money for repairs. Invaders damaged roads in border areas. By the 5th century, the Western Empire fell, and upkeep stopped. In the East, Byzantines maintained some. Over time, weather and overuse wore them down. Many became overgrown or were robbed for stones. Yet, their design was so good that parts survived. Medieval travelers still used them. The decline mirrors the empire’s fate. Without strong central power, the network broke apart. Cesta roman’s fall left a gap in travel that took centuries to fill. It marked the end of an era of connected lands.

In later years, some cesta roman paths were revived. During the Middle Ages, pilgrims and traders followed old routes. The Renaissance saw interest in Roman methods. But full decline set in with no organized care. Floods and earthquakes added to the damage. Locals sometimes fixed sections for their needs. The story of decline teaches about maintenance. Great works need constant effort to endure. Cesta roman’s legacy lived on in maps and stories, even as physical roads faded.

Construction Techniques in Cesta Roman

Romans built cesta roman to last. They started with surveying the land using tools like the groma for straight lines. Then, workers dug a trench about 3-5 feet deep. The bottom layer was large stones or gravel for drainage. Next came smaller stones packed tight. A layer of concrete or sand followed. The top was paved with flat stones fitted together. Edges had curbs to hold it in place. In soft ground, they used wooden piles. This method kept roads dry and firm. Cesta roman could handle heavy carts and bad weather. The techniques show smart engineering without modern machines.

Slopes were managed with care in cesta roman building. Roads went straight over hills if possible, with cuts or fills. Gradients stayed under 10% for easy wagon travel. Bridges crossed rivers, made of stone arches. Some, like the Pont du Gard, were aqueducts too. Tunnels went through mountains, lit by shafts. Labor came from legions, who built while not fighting. Tools included picks, shovels, and levels. Quality control was strict; bad work meant penalties. These techniques made cesta roman reliable. They set standards for later builders.

Materials varied by location for cesta roman. In Italy, basalt lava was common for paving. Elsewhere, local stone or gravel sufficed. Lime mortar bound layers. The width was usually 4-6 meters for two-way traffic. Shoulders allowed pedestrians. Milestones and signs guided users. Construction took time; the Via Appia took years. Costs were high but worth it for the benefits. Cesta roman’s methods highlight Roman practicality. They used what was available to create lasting infrastructure.

Famous Cesta Roman Routes

The Via Appia

The Via Appia is the queen of cesta roman. Built in 312 BC, it ran from Rome to Brindisi, over 350 miles. It passed through marshes drained by Romans. Tombs lined the start, like a cemetery. The road helped win wars and boost trade. Parts are still walkable today. It shows early cesta roman style with large stone slabs. Cicero praised its straightness. The Via Appia carried armies to the East. It linked to ports for sea travel. This route embodies cesta roman’s role in history. Visitors can see ancient wheel ruts in the stones.

Over time, the Via Appia got extensions and repairs. Emperors like Trajan improved it. It became a model for other roads. In modern Italy, it’s a park with biking paths. The fame comes from its age and survival. Cesta roman like this inspired poets and artists. It connects past to present.

Via Egnatia

Via Egnatia was a key cesta roman in the East. Built around 146 BC, it linked the Adriatic to Byzantium, about 700 miles. It crossed Greece and Macedonia. This road helped control Balkan lands. Trade in silk and spices used it. Paul the Apostle traveled it to spread Christianity. Construction included mountain passes and bridges. Today, parts form highways in Albania and Turkey. Via Egnatia shows cesta roman’s reach beyond Italy. It bridged cultures from West to East.

The route faced challenges like rough terrain. Romans built it strong to last. It aided military campaigns against Parthians. Cesta roman such as this fostered unity in diverse areas.

Watling Street in Britain

Watling Street is a British cesta roman. Built after Claudius’s invasion in 43 AD, it ran from Dover to Wroxeter, over 200 miles. It connected ports to inland towns. Romans used it to move legions north. The road passed through London, then Londinium. Boudica’s revolt damaged parts, but it was rebuilt. Today, the A5 highway follows much of it. Watling Street highlights cesta roman in conquered provinces. It brought Roman ways to Celtic lands.

Archaeologists find artifacts along it, like coins and pots. Cesta roman here adapted to wet climate with extra drainage.

Related: Understanding RSS Letter No 0876: A Full Breakdown

Legacy of Cesta Roman in Modern Times

Cesta roman influences today’s world. Many European highways follow old Roman paths. For example, the A1 in Italy traces the Via Flaminia. Modern engineers study Roman methods for durability. Concrete recipes from then are similar to ours. The grid system in cities like Turin comes from Roman planning. Cesta roman taught the value of infrastructure. Nations invest in roads inspired by this. The legacy is in efficient transport that boosts economies. Without it, Europe might look different.

In law, Roman road rights affect property today. Some paths are public forever. Cesta roman also sparks tourism, bringing money to sites. Books and films feature them. The legacy endures in how we connect places.

Cultural impact of cesta roman is huge. Phrases like “all roads lead to Rome” come from it. Maps still show their lines. Preservation efforts save them from development. UNESCO lists some as heritage. Cesta roman reminds us of human achievement. It links generations.

Exploring Cesta Roman Today

You can visit cesta roman sites across Europe. In Italy, walk the Via Appia Antica park. Guided tours explain history. In England, hike Hadrian’s Wall paths tied to roads. Museums display artifacts found nearby. Apps map remaining sections for self-tours. Wear good shoes; some are uneven. Best time is spring or fall for mild weather. Exploring cesta roman offers exercise and learning. It makes history real.

Preservation groups work on cesta roman. They fix erosion and fight vandalism. Volunteers help with cleanups. Governments fund digs. You can join as a tourist or donor. This keeps the heritage alive.

In other lands, like Tunisia, see Roman roads in deserts. Turkey has parts of Via Egnatia. Plan trips with local guides for safety. Cesta roman exploration builds appreciation for past skills.

Conclusion

Cesta roman represents one of the greatest feats in history. These roads built empires, spread cultures, and shaped lands. From simple beginnings to vast networks, they show Roman ingenuity. Today, they teach lessons in building and connecting. Whether walking ancient stones or driving modern versions, cesta roman touches lives. It proves good infrastructure lasts. As a guide, this covers the basics and more, helping you understand and enjoy this topic.

The Chicago Bears and Green Bay Packers have one of the oldest rivalries in the NFL. Their latest clash came in the 2026 NFC Wild Card playoff game on January 10, 2026, at Soldier Field. The Bears pulled off a stunning 31-27 comeback win after trailing 21-3 at halftime. This match showcased impressive Chicago Bears vs Green Bay Packers match player stats, with quarterbacks Caleb Williams and Jordan Love putting up big numbers. Fans saw a mix of strong passing games, key rushes, and defensive plays that turned the tide. This post breaks down the stats in detail to help you understand what made this game special.

The game started slow for the Bears, who scored just a field goal in the first quarter. The Packers built a solid lead with three touchdowns in the first half. But the Bears fought back in the fourth quarter, scoring 25 points to seal the victory. Time of possession favored the Bears at 32:41 compared to the Packers’ 27:19. The Bears had 24 first downs, while the Packers had 21. Third-down conversions were 10-of-19 for Chicago and 6-of-15 for Green Bay. Total yards were close, with Chicago at 445 and Green Bay at 421. These team stats highlight how the Bears controlled the game late.

Game Overview

The Bears opened with a long 16-play drive ending in a 27-yard field goal by Cairo Santos, taking a 3-0 lead. The Packers answered with a 9-play, 85-yard drive, capped by a 7-yard touchdown pass from Jordan Love to Christian Watson. In the second quarter, Love threw an 18-yard touchdown to Jayden Reed after a Bears turnover on downs. Later, Love found Romeo Doubs for a 1-yard score after a fumble recovery near the goal line. The Packers led 21-3 at halftime. The third quarter saw the Bears add a 34-yard field goal, making it 21-6. The fourth quarter was all Bears, with 25 points including touchdowns by D’Andre Swift, Olamide Zaccheaus, and DJ Moore.

Key moments included the Packers’ defense forcing two interceptions in the first half, one by Carrington Valentine and another by Tyrel Hopper. The Bears’ comeback started with a strip sack by Lukas Van Ness, leading to a field goal. Devin Duvernay’s 37-yard punt return set up good field position. Late in the game, the Packers missed two field goals, including a 44-yarder that could have tied it. Williams’ 25-yard touchdown pass to Moore with 1:43 left gave the Bears the lead. The Packers’ final drive ended with incomplete passes. This game marked the Bears’ biggest playoff comeback ever, overcoming an 18-point deficit.

Will You Check This Article: Chicago Bears vs 49ers Match Player Stats: Detailed Breakdown of the December 28, 2025 Game

Chicago Bears Offensive Stats

Passing Stats

Caleb Williams led the Bears’ passing attack, completing 24 of 48 attempts for 361 yards, two touchdowns, and two interceptions. His passer rating was 71.6. Williams showed grit in the fourth quarter, throwing both touchdowns during the comeback. He also added 20 rushing yards on four carries. This performance set a Bears postseason record for passing yards, beating Mitchell Trubisky’s 303 yards from 2019. It was Williams’ highest yardage in the 2025 season and second-highest in his career. His ability to extend plays with his legs helped on key downs. Overall, the Bears’ net passing yards were 352, showing a strong aerial game despite early struggles.

Rushing Stats

The Bears’ rushing game totaled 93 net yards on 28 carries. D’Andre Swift was the top rusher with 13 attempts for 54 yards and one touchdown, his longest run being 8 yards. Kyle Monangai added 8 carries for 27 yards, with a long of 9 yards. Williams contributed 20 yards on 4 scrambles. Cole Kmet had 1 yard on one carry, while Laviska Burden III and DJ Moore had negative yards on end-arounds. The rushing attack picked up in the second half, helping control the clock. Swift’s 5-yard touchdown run in the fourth quarter was crucial, cutting the deficit to 21-16. This balanced approach supported the passing game late.

Receiving Stats

Colston Loveland stood out with 8 receptions on 15 targets for 137 yards, his longest catch 29 yards. DJ Moore caught 6 of 7 targets for 64 yards and one touchdown, with a 25-yard long. Rome Odunze had 2 catches for 44 yards, Laviska Burden III 3 for 42 yards. Swift added 2 receptions for 38 yards, Monangai 1 for 22 yards. Olamide Zaccheaus scored on an 8-yard catch. Durham Smythe had 1 catch for 6 yards. Loveland’s performance made him the first rookie tight end in NFL history with 8 catches and 100 yards in a playoff game. His yards rank second in Bears postseason history for a receiver.

Green Bay Packers Offensive Stats

Passing Stats

Jordan Love completed 24 of 46 passes for 323 yards, four touchdowns, and no interceptions, earning a 103.8 passer rating. He added 11 rushing yards on one scramble. Love’s four touchdowns tied a Packers playoff record shared with Aaron Rodgers, Lynn Dickey, and Bart Starr. This was his second playoff game with three or more touchdown passes, joining Rodgers, Favre, and Starr. Love became one of three quarterbacks since 1970 to have nine wins and 25 passing touchdowns in each of his first three starting seasons. Despite the loss, his clean game with no picks was notable. The Packers’ net passing yards were 322.

Rushing Stats

The Packers rushed for 99 net yards on 23 carries. Josh Jacobs led with 19 attempts for 55 yards, his longest 13 yards. Chris Brooks had 1 carry for 16 yards, Jayden Reed 1 for 14 yards, Love 1 for 11 yards, and Emanuel Wilson 1 for 3 yards. Jacobs’ runs were stronger in the first half, setting up passing plays. The ground game slowed after halftime, contributing to the collapse. No rushing touchdowns, but it helped in time management early. Jacobs fumbled a kickoff return, but it was recovered by his team. This rushing output supported Love’s passing but lacked big plays late.

Receiving Stats

Romeo Doubs caught 8 of 11 targets for 124 yards and one touchdown, with a 34-yard long. Matthew Golden had 4 catches for 84 yards and one score, longest 36 yards. Jayden Reed grabbed 4 for 43 yards and a touchdown, long 20 yards. Christian Watson had 3 for 36 yards and a touchdown, long 22 yards. Brooks 1 for 11, Luke Musgrave 1 for 9, Josh Whyle 1 for 7, David Kinnard 1 for 6, Jacobs 1 for 3. Doubs’ one-handed 34-yard catch was a highlight. The receivers spread the field well, but second-half stalls hurt. Four different receivers scored touchdowns.

Defensive Stats for Both Teams

The Packers’ defense recorded one sack by Lukas Van Ness and two interceptions: one by Carrington Valentine and one by Tyrel Hopper. Edgerrin Cooper led tackles with 6 solo and 2 assists. Evan Williams had 6-1, Keisean Nixon 4-2. They forced one fumble but recovered none lost. The Bears’ defense had one sack by Amen Ogbongbemiga and no interceptions. Tremaine Edmunds led with 5-1 tackles, Jaquan Brisker 5-4. They forced four fumbles from the Packers but lost none themselves. Both teams had solid tackle numbers, but the Bears’ low penalties (2 for 5 yards) helped. The Packers had 7 penalties for 65 yards. Defensive plays were key in turnovers.

Special Teams and Key Plays

Cairo Santos was perfect for the Bears, making all three field goals (longest 51 yards, a postseason record for Chicago) and two extra points. The Packers’ Brandon McManus missed two field goals and one extra point. Daniel Whelan punted four times for the Packers, averaging 48.8 yards with one inside the 20. The Bears had no punts, a first in their postseason history. Devin Duvernay’s 37-yard punt return was the second-longest in Bears playoff history. Kickoff returns included Keisean Nixon’s 28-yard for Green Bay. These special teams moments, like missed kicks and big returns, shifted momentum. The Bears’ perfect kicking was vital in the comeback.

Related: Tennessee Titans vs Jacksonville Jaguars Match Player Stats: A Detailed Breakdown

Standout Players and Performances

Caleb Williams earned praise for his 361-yard game, leading seven game-winning drives this season, tied for most by a young quarterback since 1950. Colston Loveland’s 137 yards set rookie records. For the Packers, Jordan Love’s four touchdowns without interceptions made him just the third quarterback to lose a playoff game with those stats. Romeo Doubs’ 124 yards included key catches. D’Andre Swift’s all-around play with 54 rush yards, a touchdown, and 38 receiving yards was crucial. Defensively, Van Ness’ strip sack sparked the Bears. These players’ efforts highlight the high level of Chicago Bears vs Green Bay Packers match player stats in this game.

Historical Context and Records Set

This win was the Bears’ fourth-largest comeback ever and biggest in playoffs. They became the fourth team to rally from 15+ points in the fourth quarter of a playoff game since Super Bowl LI. The 25 fourth-quarter points are third-most in NFL playoff history. Ben Johnson became the first Bears coach to win a postseason game in his debut year. The Bears scored 21+ points in their last four games against the Packers, longest streak since 1949-1952. They won without a takeaway, rare for a team that led the league with 33 in the regular season. Fewest penalties (5 yards) since 2020. These records add depth to the rivalry’s history.

Conclusion

This Chicago Bears vs Green Bay Packers match player stats breakdown shows a game full of drama and skill. The Bears’ comeback from 18 points down highlights their resilience under pressure. Key stats like Williams’ 361 yards and Love’s four touchdowns define the contest. Defensive turnovers and special teams plays were decisive. For fans, this playoff thriller adds another chapter to the rivalry. If you’re analyzing team strategies or player growth, these details provide a full picture. Keep an eye on both teams as the Bears advance in the playoffs.