New England Patriots vs Bengals Match Player Stats
The new england patriots vs bengals match player stats from November 23, 2025, reveal how the New England Patriots secured a 26-20 road victory over the Cincinnati Bengals in an important NFL regular-season matchup. The Patriots combined Drake Maye’s 294 passing yards, Hunter Henry’s outstanding receiving performance, and Marcus Jones’ game-changing defensive touchdown to overcome Cincinnati. Although the Bengals produced more rushing yards and recorded several impressive defensive performances, they could not turn those advantages into enough points to win.
Played during Week 12 of the 2025 NFL regular season, the contest featured two contrasting approaches. New England found success through its passing attack, reliable kicking, and timely defensive plays. Cincinnati relied heavily on Chase Brown’s rushing production but struggled to generate consistent passing offense through Joe Flacco.
The final score was New England Patriots 26, Cincinnati Bengals 20. The result reflected an important difference between gaining yards and converting opportunities into points. Both teams had productive individual performers, but New England made better use of its most valuable possessions.
This detailed breakdown examines the final score, quarterback statistics, rushing performances, receiving production, defensive contributions, special teams, and the individual plays that shaped the outcome. Every statistical figure discussed below is based on the supplied ESPN box-score data for this game.
New England Patriots vs Bengals Match Player Stats: Game Overview
The November 23 meeting offered an interesting comparison between a Patriots team enjoying a strong season and a Bengals team trying to improve its position.
New England entered the matchup with a 10-2 record and an impressive 6-0 away record. Cincinnati entered with a 3-8 record and a 2-4 home record.
The Patriots demonstrated why their road performances had become an important part of their season. They maintained offensive balance, protected their scoring opportunities, and received a major contribution from their defense.
Cincinnati had its own strengths. Chase Brown delivered an excellent rushing performance, while the Bengals defense recorded 81 total tackles and an interception-return touchdown. However, those individual achievements were not enough to produce a home victory.
Final Score and Team Records
| Game Information | New England Patriots | Cincinnati Bengals |
| Final score | 26 | 20 |
| Game result | Win | Loss |
| Season record | 10-2 | 3-8 |
| Home/away record | 6-0 away | 2-4 home |
| First quarter | 0 | 3 |
| Second quarter | 17 | 10 |
| Third quarter | 3 | 0 |
| Fourth quarter | 6 | 7 |
| Passing yards | 294 | 197 |
| Rushing yards | 107 | 120 |
| Total tackles | 62 | 81 |
| Interception-return touchdowns | 1 | 1 |
The numbers show that New England held a significant advantage in passing production. The Patriots finished with 97 more passing yards than Cincinnati.
The Bengals, meanwhile, gained 13 more rushing yards. This difference demonstrates that Cincinnati was not completely ineffective offensively. Its rushing attack created opportunities, but the passing game did not provide enough additional production.
Quarter-by-Quarter Scoring Breakdown
The scoring pattern explains how New England established control and why Cincinnati remained competitive until the final period.
| Quarter | Patriots | Bengals |
| First | 0 | 3 |
| Second | 17 | 10 |
| Third | 3 | 0 |
| Fourth | 6 | 7 |
| Total | 26 | 20 |
Cincinnati opened the scoring with three points in the first quarter. The Patriots did not score during the opening period, but their response in the second quarter changed the direction of the contest.
New England scored 17 points in the second quarter, creating a meaningful advantage before halftime. Cincinnati managed 10 points during the same period, keeping the difference manageable.
The third quarter was quieter. New England added three points, while Cincinnati failed to score.
The Bengals produced seven points in the fourth quarter, but the Patriots added six more and maintained their advantage.
One important detail is that New England’s six fourth-quarter points cannot be treated as ordinary field-goal production without considering the defensive touchdown recorded in the game. Marcus Jones’ interception return was a defining contribution to the Patriots’ scoring effort.
Quarterback Performance: Drake Maye vs Joe Flacco
Quarterback production was one of the most important differences between these teams.
Drake Maye delivered a more productive passing performance than Joe Flacco. He completed more passes, gained significantly more yardage, and generated a stronger overall passer rating.
Flacco had opportunities to move Cincinnati’s offense, but the Patriots limited his effectiveness through coverage, pressure, and defensive discipline.
Drake Maye’s Passing Statistics
New England Patriots quarterback
| Statistic | Drake Maye |
| Completions | 22 |
| Attempts | 35 |
| Completion percentage | 62.9% |
| Passing yards | 294 |
| Yards per attempt | 8.4 |
| Passing touchdowns | 1 |
| Interceptions | 1 |
| Sacks | 1 |
| Sack yards lost | 9 |
| QBR | 63.6 |
| Passer rating | 87.1 |
Maye completed 22 of his 35 attempts, giving him a completion percentage of approximately 62.9%.
His 294 passing yards were particularly important because they represented a large share of New England’s offensive production.
An average of 8.4 yards per attempt indicates that the Patriots generated meaningful yardage through their passing game. Rather than relying entirely on short completions, Maye was able to move the ball downfield and create opportunities for his receivers.
His connection with Hunter Henry was especially valuable.
Henry recorded seven receptions for 115 yards and a touchdown. That performance gave Maye a dependable target who could gain substantial yardage after receiving the football.
However, Maye’s performance was not completely mistake-free.
He threw one interception, which gave Cincinnati an opportunity to change possession and create a scoring chance. The Patriots also allowed one sack for a nine-yard loss.
Despite those setbacks, Maye maintained enough passing efficiency to help New England finish with 294 passing yards.
His 63.6 QBR and 87.1 passer rating provide additional context. They reflect a productive but not perfect quarterback performance.
Joe Flacco’s Passing Statistics
Cincinnati Bengals quarterback
| Statistic | Joe Flacco |
| Completions | 19 |
| Attempts | 37 |
| Completion percentage | 51.4% |
| Passing yards | 183 |
| Yards per attempt | 4.9 |
| Passing touchdowns | 1 |
| Interceptions | 1 |
| Sacks | 1 |
| Sack yards lost | 10 |
| QBR | 26.3 |
| Passer rating | 63.2 |
Flacco attempted 37 passes, two more than Maye, but completed only 19.
His completion percentage of approximately 51.4% was considerably lower than the Patriots quarterback’s figure.
The biggest difference was passing efficiency.
Flacco averaged 4.9 yards per attempt, compared with Maye’s 8.4. This difference suggests that Cincinnati struggled to generate the same level of consistent forward progress through the air.
Flacco still threw one touchdown, showing that the Bengals were capable of producing scoring opportunities through passing.
However, his interception and lower QBR made the overall performance less effective.
The Patriots defense also recorded six quarterback hits, demonstrating that its pressure contributed to the difficulty Cincinnati experienced moving the football.
Jake Browning’s Limited Appearance
Jake Browning also appeared for Cincinnati and completed his only passing attempt.
| Statistic | Jake Browning |
| Completions | 1 |
| Attempts | 1 |
| Completion percentage | 100% |
| Passing yards | 14 |
| Yards per attempt | 14.0 |
| Touchdowns | 0 |
| Interceptions | 0 |
| QBR | 99.4 |
| Passer rating | 118.8 |
Browning’s statistical line was efficient, but it came from only one attempt.
A 100% completion percentage and 14.0 yards per attempt look impressive. Nevertheless, one pass is not enough to establish a meaningful comparison with Maye or Flacco.
His appearance should be understood as a limited contribution rather than evidence of a complete quarterback performance.
Quarterback Comparison
| Category | Drake Maye | Joe Flacco |
| Completions | 22 | 19 |
| Attempts | 35 | 37 |
| Passing yards | 294 | 183 |
| Completion rate | 62.9% | 51.4% |
| Yards per attempt | 8.4 | 4.9 |
| Touchdowns | 1 | 1 |
| Interceptions | 1 | 1 |
| QBR | 63.6 | 26.3 |
| Passer rating | 87.1 | 63.2 |
The comparison clearly favors Maye in passing production and efficiency.
Both quarterbacks recorded one touchdown and one interception, so the difference was not simply about avoiding turnovers. Maye gained 111 more passing yards and averaged 3.5 additional yards per attempt.
That advantage helped New England create more productive offensive possessions.
Rushing Statistics: Chase Brown Leads the Ground Game
Although New England won the game, Cincinnati produced the stronger individual rushing performance.
Chase Brown was the leading rusher for the Bengals and one of the most productive offensive players on either team.
His ability to gain yards on the ground helped Cincinnati maintain offensive balance, even when the passing attack struggled.
Patriots Rushing Performance
| Player | Carries | Rushing Yards | Average | Touchdowns |
| TreVeyon Henderson | 18 | 66 | 3.7 | 0 |
| Drake Maye | 5 | 22 | Not specified | 0 |
| DeMario Douglas | 1 | 14 | Not specified | 0 |
| Rhamondre Stevenson | 6 | 5 | Not specified | 0 |
| Terrell Jennings | 1 | 0 | Not specified | 0 |
| Team total | 31 | 107 | 3.5 | 0 |
New England recorded 107 rushing yards on 31 attempts.
TreVeyon Henderson handled the largest share of the rushing workload. He carried the football 18 times for 66 yards.
His longest run was nine yards, and he did not score a rushing touchdown.
Henderson’s contribution was important because he provided the Patriots with a consistent rushing option. Although his average was 3.7 yards per carry, his workload helped New England maintain a balanced offensive approach.
Drake Maye added 22 rushing yards on five attempts.
His mobility provided another dimension to the offense. Quarterbacks who can gain yards outside traditional passing plays can force defenses to account for additional possibilities.
DeMario Douglas contributed 14 rushing yards on one attempt. His limited rushing involvement produced a useful gain, although Henderson remained the primary option.
Rhamondre Stevenson had a quieter performance, finishing with five yards on six carries.
The Patriots did not record a rushing touchdown. Their scoring production therefore depended more heavily on passing and kicking contributions.
Bengals Rushing Performance
| Player | Carries | Rushing Yards | Average | Touchdowns |
| Chase Brown | 19 | 107 | 5.6 | 0 |
| Andrei Iosivas | 1 | 5 | Not specified | 0 |
| Tahj Brooks | 2 | 5 | Not specified | 0 |
| Joe Flacco | 1 | 3 | Not specified | 0 |
| Team total | 23 | 120 | 5.2 | 0 |
Chase Brown was Cincinnati’s most productive rusher.
He gained 107 yards on 19 carries, averaging 5.6 yards per attempt.
His longest run covered 21 yards.
Brown’s performance was particularly impressive because he generated nearly all of Cincinnati’s listed rushing production.
He demonstrated the ability to create positive yardage without needing an unusually large number of carries.
However, the most important limitation was the absence of a rushing touchdown.
Brown gained significant yardage, but Cincinnati could not consistently turn those gains into points through its ground game.
The supporting rushing contributions were relatively small.
Andrei Iosivas recorded five yards on one carry, while Tahj Brooks also gained five yards on two attempts. Flacco added three rushing yards.
Rushing Comparison
| Category | Patriots | Bengals |
| Total carries | 31 | 23 |
| Total rushing yards | 107 | 120 |
| Average yards per carry | 3.5 | 5.2 |
| Rushing touchdowns | 0 | 0 |
| Leading rusher | TreVeyon Henderson | Chase Brown |
| Leading rusher’s yards | 66 | 107 |
Cincinnati finished with more rushing yards despite having eight fewer attempts.
This is a meaningful statistical advantage for the Bengals.
However, rushing production alone does not determine a football game’s outcome.
New England gained substantially more passing yards, and its defense generated a touchdown through an interception return.
The Patriots therefore made better use of their combined offensive and defensive opportunities.
Receiving Statistics: Hunter Henry Delivers a Standout Performance
The receiving numbers provide one of the clearest explanations for New England’s passing advantage.
Hunter Henry was the Patriots’ leading receiver and one of the most influential players in the game.
He recorded 115 receiving yards and a touchdown, creating a major contribution to Maye’s passing production.
Cincinnati had several players involved in the passing game, but none matched Henry’s overall yardage total.
Patriots Receiving Leaders
| Player | Receptions | Receiving Yards | Average | Touchdowns |
| Hunter Henry | 7 | 115 | 16.4 | 1 |
| Austin Hooper | 3 | 39 | Not specified | 0 |
| DeMario Douglas | 1 | 37 | Not specified | 0 |
| Mack Hollins | 2 | 30 | Not specified | 0 |
| Stefon Diggs | 2 | 20 | Not specified | 0 |
| Kyle Williams | 1 | 18 | Not specified | 0 |
| Kayshon Boutte | 2 | 15 | Not specified | 0 |
| TreVeyon Henderson | 3 | 15 | Not specified | 0 |
| Rhamondre Stevenson | 1 | 5 | Not specified | 0 |
| Team total | 22 | 294 | 13.4 | 1 |
Henry’s seven receptions came from 10 targets.
His 115 receiving yards represented a substantial portion of New England’s 294 passing yards.
He averaged 16.4 yards per reception and recorded a longest reception of 28 yards.
These figures show that Henry was not simply collecting short completions. He provided meaningful downfield production and helped the Patriots maintain offensive momentum.
His receiving touchdown was another important contribution.
A tight end who can combine reliable hands with significant yardage creates matchup problems for opposing defenses. Henry’s performance demonstrated that value.
Austin Hooper also contributed three receptions for 39 yards.
DeMario Douglas recorded one reception for 37 yards, providing an efficient contribution despite receiving only one completed pass.
Mack Hollins added 30 yards on two catches, while Stefon Diggs finished with 20 yards on two receptions.
The distribution of receiving production shows that Maye had several available options.
This matters because an offense becomes easier to defend when opponents can focus exclusively on one receiver.
New England’s ability to spread the ball among different players helped create opportunities for Henry to produce his standout numbers.
Bengals Receiving Leaders
| Player | Receptions | Receiving Yards | Average | Touchdowns |
| Andrei Iosivas | 4 | 61 | 15.3 | 0 |
| Mike Gesicki | 4 | 35 | Not specified | 0 |
| Tee Higgins | 5 | 31 | Not specified | 0 |
| Mitchell Tinsley | 2 | 29 | Not specified | 1 |
| Chase Brown | 2 | 23 | Not specified | 0 |
| Tanner Hudson | 1 | 9 | Not specified | 0 |
| Noah Fant | 1 | 9 | Not specified | 0 |
| Drew Sample | 1 | 0 | Not specified | 0 |
| Charlie Jones | 0 | 0 | Not specified | 0 |
| Tahj Brooks | 0 | 0 | Not specified | 0 |
| Team total | 20 | 197 | 9.9 | 1 |
Andrei Iosivas led Cincinnati with 61 receiving yards on four receptions.
His average of 15.3 yards per reception showed that he was capable of generating meaningful gains when the passing game connected.
Mike Gesicki added 35 yards on four receptions.
Tee Higgins recorded five catches for 31 yards, making him the team’s reception leader among the listed players.
Mitchell Tinsley produced two receptions for 29 yards and a touchdown.
His touchdown was an important contribution to Cincinnati’s scoring effort.
Chase Brown added another 23 receiving yards on two catches, showing that his offensive involvement extended beyond rushing.
The Bengals finished with 20 receptions and 197 receiving yards.
Their average of 9.9 yards per reception was lower than New England’s 13.4.
This difference is another indication that the Patriots generated more explosive passing production.
Receiving Comparison
| Category | Patriots | Bengals |
| Receptions | 22 | 20 |
| Receiving yards | 294 | 197 |
| Average yards per reception | 13.4 | 9.9 |
| Receiving touchdowns | 1 | 1 |
| Leading receiver | Hunter Henry | Andrei Iosivas |
| Leading receiver yards | 115 | 61 |
The Patriots gained 97 more receiving yards and recorded two more receptions.
The biggest individual difference came from Henry’s 115-yard performance.
He gained 54 more yards than Cincinnati’s leading receiver, Iosivas.
That advantage helped create a more productive passing offense and gave New England an important statistical edge.
Defensive Player Stats: Patriots and Bengals Make Big Plays
Defense played a major role in the result.
Both teams recorded an interception-return touchdown, making turnovers especially important in this matchup.
New England received a decisive contribution from Marcus Jones, while Cincinnati benefited from Geno Stone’s interception return.
The defensive statistics also reveal an interesting contrast. Cincinnati recorded more total tackles, but the Patriots created important plays that directly affected the scoreboard.
Patriots Defensive Leaders
| Player | Total Tackles | Solo Tackles | Sacks | Interceptions |
| Carlton Davis III | 8 | 4 | 0 | 0 |
| Craig Woodson | 6 | 3 | 0 | 0 |
| Robert Spillane | 5 | 3 | 0 | 0 |
| Marcus Jones | 5 | 3 | 0 | 1 |
| Christian Elliss | 5 | 3 | 0 | 0 |
| Harold Landry III | 4 | 3 | 1 | 0 |
| Jaylinn Hawkins | 4 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| Christian Gonzalez | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 |
Carlton Davis III led New England with eight total tackles, including four solo tackles.
His contribution was important in a defensive performance that required the Patriots to manage Cincinnati’s rushing attack and prevent the Bengals from generating consistent passing production.
Craig Woodson recorded six tackles, while Robert Spillane and Marcus Jones each finished with five.
Harold Landry III was another important defensive contributor.
He recorded four total tackles and one sack, giving New England a direct contribution in the pass-rushing department.
The Patriots finished with six quarterback hits and five passes defended.
These numbers show that New England was active around the line of scrimmage and in coverage.
Marcus Jones Changes the Game
Marcus Jones delivered one of the most important defensive performances of the contest.
His defensive statistics included:
- Five total tackles.
- Three solo tackles.
- One interception.
- 33 interception-return yards.
- One interception-return touchdown.
The touchdown was particularly significant because it converted a defensive opportunity into points.
An interception can stop an opponent’s drive, but returning it for a touchdown creates an immediate scoring advantage.
That is an important distinction when evaluating defensive production.
Jones did more than prevent Cincinnati from completing a pass. He turned the turnover into a major scoreboard contribution.
His performance demonstrated how defensive backs can influence a game without recording a large number of tackles or sacks.
Bengals Defensive Leaders
| Player | Total Tackles | Solo Tackles | Sacks | Interceptions |
| Barrett Carter | 16 | 8 | 0 | 0 |
| Geno Stone | 13 | 6 | 0 | 1 |
| Demetrius Knight Jr. | 8 | 3 | 0 | 0 |
| Joseph Ossai | 6 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| Jordan Battle | 6 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Dax Hill | 4 | 3 | 0 | 0 |
| Kris Jenkins Jr. | 4 | 2 | 1 | 0 |
Barrett Carter led Cincinnati with 16 total tackles and eight solo tackles.
His tackle total was the highest individual figure among the listed defensive players from either team.
Geno Stone also delivered a productive performance.
He recorded 13 total tackles, six solo tackles, and one interception.
His interception return covered 32 yards and resulted in a touchdown.
That play gave Cincinnati an important defensive scoring contribution.
Kris Jenkins Jr. recorded one sack and four total tackles, helping the Bengals generate pressure against Maye.
The Cincinnati defense also recorded:
- 81 total tackles.
- 33 solo tackles.
- One sack.
- Three tackles for loss.
- Five passes defended.
- Three quarterback hits.
The Patriots recorded fewer total tackles, but their defensive contributions were especially valuable in terms of scoring impact.
Team Defensive Comparison
| Defensive Category | Patriots | Bengals |
| Total tackles | 62 | 81 |
| Solo tackles | 34 | 33 |
| Sacks | 1 | 1 |
| Tackles for loss | 1 | 3 |
| Passes defended | 5 | 5 |
| Quarterback hits | 6 | 3 |
| Interceptions | 1 | 1 |
| Interception-return touchdowns | 1 | 1 |
One important lesson from this comparison is that total tackles do not automatically indicate which defense performed better.
Cincinnati recorded 19 more tackles than New England.
However, the Patriots produced six quarterback hits compared with Cincinnati’s three.
Both teams recorded an interception-return touchdown, so the difference came from the broader impact of their defensive performances.
New England’s defense helped limit Cincinnati to 197 passing yards and contributed directly to the Patriots’ scoring total.
Special Teams Statistics: Andy Borregales Makes the Difference
Special teams provided another important advantage for New England.
Kicker Andy Borregales converted all four of his field-goal attempts and both extra-point attempts.
His perfect performance gave the Patriots a dependable scoring option throughout the contest.
Patriots Kicking Statistics
| Statistic | Andy Borregales |
| Field goals made | 4 |
| Field goals attempted | 4 |
| Field-goal percentage | 100% |
| Longest field goal | 52 yards |
| Extra points made | 2 |
| Extra points attempted | 2 |
| Total points | 14 |
Borregales scored 14 points.
That total was especially valuable because the Patriots did not record a rushing touchdown.
His four successful field goals allowed New England to collect points from offensive possessions that did not necessarily end with a touchdown.
His longest successful field goal covered 52 yards, demonstrating his ability to contribute from distance.
The two successful extra points also supported New England’s touchdown production.
A kicker’s performance can be overlooked when analyzing a game dominated by quarterback and receiver statistics. However, this matchup demonstrated how important reliable kicking can become in a competitive contest.
Bengals Kicking Statistics
| Statistic | Evan McPherson |
| Field goals made | 2 |
| Field goals attempted | 2 |
| Field-goal percentage | 100% |
| Longest field goal | 63 yards |
| Extra points made | 2 |
| Extra points attempted | 2 |
| Total points | 8 |
Evan McPherson also completed every listed kicking attempt.
He converted two field goals and both extra points.
His longest field goal covered an impressive 63 yards.
McPherson finished with eight points, six fewer than Borregales.
Both kickers were perfect on their attempts, so accuracy was not the deciding factor.
The difference was the number of scoring opportunities each kicker converted.
New England attempted four field goals, while Cincinnati attempted two.
That difference helped the Patriots build their final advantage.
Punting Comparison
| Statistic | Bryce Baringer | Ryan Rehkow |
| Punts | 2 | 5 |
| Total punt yards | 98 | 227 |
| Average | 49.0 | 45.4 |
| Longest punt | 53 | 60 |
| Touchbacks | 0 | 1 |
| Inside the 20 | 1 | 3 |
Bryce Baringer averaged 49.0 yards across two punts.
Ryan Rehkow punted five times for 227 yards, averaging 45.4 yards.
Rehkow placed three punts inside the 20-yard line, compared with one for Baringer.
Although Cincinnati’s punter had more opportunities, New England’s average was higher.
Punting statistics should always be considered alongside possession and field position. A higher number of punts may reflect an offense that struggled to sustain drives rather than a punter’s individual weakness.
Kick and Punt Returns
| Team | Returner | Returns | Yards | Average |
| Patriots | Kyle Williams | 3 | 86 | 28.7 |
| Patriots | Terrell Jennings | 1 | 20 | 20.0 |
| Bengals | Charlie Jones | 3 | 72 | 24.0 |
| Bengals | Gary Brightwell | 1 | 24 | 24.0 |
| Bengals | Tahj Brooks | 1 | 20 | 20.0 |
Kyle Williams led the Patriots with 86 kick-return yards on three attempts.
His average of 28.7 yards per return provided New England with useful starting field position.
The longest return was 36 yards.
Terrell Jennings added another 20 yards on one return.
Cincinnati finished with 116 total kick-return yards across five returns, compared with New England’s 106 yards across four.
Charlie Jones also recorded two punt returns for 14 yards.
Marcus Jones handled one punt return for New England, which produced no return yardage.
The return statistics show that both teams had opportunities to influence field position through special teams.
However, New England’s kicking production provided the more important scoring advantage.
Why the Patriots Won: Five Important Factors
The final result was influenced by several connected performances rather than one isolated statistic.
Although Cincinnati had a productive running game and more total defensive tackles, New England performed better in several areas that directly influenced the scoreboard.
1. Drake Maye Created More Passing Production
The most obvious difference was quarterback efficiency.
Maye gained 294 passing yards, while Flacco finished with 183.
That created a 111-yard advantage for New England.
Maye also averaged 8.4 yards per attempt, compared with Flacco’s 4.9.
This difference helped the Patriots generate more meaningful offensive gains.
Maye did throw an interception, but his overall passing production remained strong enough to support the winning effort.
2. Hunter Henry Became the Most Productive Receiver
Henry’s seven receptions for 115 yards and one touchdown gave New England an important offensive weapon.
His 16.4 yards per reception showed that he contributed more than routine short gains.
He also accounted for a substantial share of the Patriots’ receiving production.
Cincinnati had several receivers involved, but none reached Henry’s yardage total.
His performance was one of the clearest individual advantages for New England.
3. Marcus Jones Produced a Defensive Touchdown
A defensive touchdown can change the value of a possession immediately.
Marcus Jones intercepted a pass and returned it 33 yards for a touchdown.
This play helped New England turn a defensive stop into points.
It also placed additional pressure on Cincinnati because the Bengals had to respond to a score produced by the opposing defense.
4. Andy Borregales Converted Every Attempt
Borregales completed four field goals and two extra points.
His 14 points made him a major contributor to the Patriots’ final total.
Cincinnati’s McPherson was also perfect, but he had fewer field-goal opportunities.
The difference in successful field goals helped New England maintain its advantage.
5. New England Generated More Productive Passing Plays
The Patriots finished with 294 passing yards, while Cincinnati recorded 197.
They also averaged 13.4 yards per reception, compared with Cincinnati’s 9.9.
This difference suggests that New England was more successful at generating meaningful gains through completed passes.
Cincinnati’s running game was effective, but it did not receive enough support from the passing attack.
The combination of Maye’s production and Henry’s receiving performance made the Patriots more dangerous through the air.
Statistical Turning Points That Defined the Game
Looking beyond the final score provides a better understanding of how the game developed.
Several statistical differences explain why New England won despite Cincinnati’s advantages in certain areas.
New England’s Second-Quarter Scoring Run
The Patriots scored 17 points in the second quarter.
That was their highest-scoring period and the most productive quarter for either team.
Cincinnati scored 10 points during the same period.
The Patriots’ ability to create a seven-point advantage in that quarter was important because it allowed them to establish control before the second half.
The Passing-Yard Difference
New England finished with 97 more passing yards.
This advantage was not created by one player alone, although Maye and Henry were the central contributors.
The Patriots spread receiving production across several players, giving their quarterback different options.
Cincinnati’s passing production was more limited.
Flacco completed only 51.4% of his attempts, and the team finished with 197 receiving yards.
The Interception Returns
Both defenses scored an interception-return touchdown.
Marcus Jones recorded 33 return yards for New England.
Geno Stone recorded 32 return yards for Cincinnati.
These plays are particularly important because they demonstrate that turnovers were not simply possession-changing events.
They directly produced touchdowns.
The nearly identical return yardage also makes the comparison interesting. Neither player needed a particularly long return to make a major impact.
The Field-Goal Advantage
Borregales converted four field goals, while McPherson converted two.
Both kickers were perfect, but New England created more opportunities for its kicker to contribute.
This helped the Patriots build a winning total without depending on rushing touchdowns.
What the Statistics Reveal About Both Teams
The game provides several useful lessons about how individual performance and team results can differ.
New England Patriots: A Balanced Winning Performance
The Patriots’ strongest statistical feature was their passing production.
Maye completed 22 passes for 294 yards, while Henry delivered 115 receiving yards and a touchdown.
The defense also produced an important scoring play.
New England’s kicking performance was another major advantage.
Borregales scored 14 points and converted every listed attempt.
However, the Patriots’ running game was less dominant.
They gained 107 rushing yards on 31 carries, averaging 3.5 yards per attempt.
Henderson handled most of the rushing workload, but the team did not record a rushing touchdown.
This indicates that New England relied more heavily on passing and field-goal production than ground-based scoring.
Cincinnati Bengals: Strong Rushing, Limited Passing Efficiency
Cincinnati’s most impressive offensive statistic was its rushing production.
The team gained 120 yards on 23 attempts, averaging 5.2 yards per carry.
Brown’s 107 rushing yards were particularly valuable.
The Bengals also had defensive contributions from Carter, Stone, and Jenkins.
However, the passing game did not match New England’s production.
Flacco completed 19 of 37 attempts for 183 yards.
The Bengals averaged only 4.9 yards per passing attempt.
Their receiving production was also less explosive.
These limitations made it harder to turn Brown’s rushing success into enough points.
Why More Total Tackles Did Not Mean a Victory
Cincinnati recorded 81 total tackles, compared with New England’s 62.
That is a significant difference.
However, tackle totals measure defensive involvement, not necessarily defensive success.
A defense can record many tackles because its opponent completes multiple passes or gains several yards before being stopped.
A more useful evaluation combines tackles with:
- Sacks.
- Quarterback hits.
- Interceptions.
- Passes defended.
- Tackles for loss.
- Defensive touchdowns.
- Points allowed.
Cincinnati recorded more tackles and tackles for loss, but both teams had one sack and one interception-return touchdown.
The Patriots’ six quarterback hits were also higher than Cincinnati’s three.
This broader view helps explain why tackle totals alone do not describe the quality of a defensive performance.
How to Read NFL Match Player Statistics Correctly
For readers who regularly follow NFL box scores, understanding the difference between individual and team statistics is important.
A player’s impressive number does not always indicate that the team performed well overall.
This matchup provides several useful examples.
Passing Yards Versus Passing Efficiency
Passing yards measure how much ground a quarterback gains through completed passes.
However, the total does not explain how efficiently those yards were generated.
For example, Maye recorded 294 passing yards on 35 attempts.
Flacco gained 183 yards on 37 attempts.
Looking at yards per attempt makes the difference easier to understand.
Maye averaged 8.4 yards per attempt, while Flacco averaged 4.9.
This additional measure helps readers compare quarterbacks more accurately.
Rushing Attempts Versus Rushing Average
A running back’s total yards are important, but carries and yards per attempt provide additional context.
Henderson gained 66 yards on 18 carries.
Brown gained 107 yards on 19 carries.
Brown produced more total yardage despite receiving only one additional carry.
His 5.6-yard average was also higher than Henderson’s 3.7.
This makes Brown the stronger individual rushing performer in this game.
Receiving Yards Versus Receptions
Receiving yards show the total distance gained through completed catches.
Receptions show how frequently a player successfully caught the football.
Henry recorded seven receptions for 115 yards.
Iosivas recorded four receptions for 61 yards.
Henry led both categories among the two teams’ leading receivers.
A useful additional measure is yards per reception.
This shows how much yardage a player generated each time he completed a catch.
Defensive Statistics Require Context
Defensive performance is more difficult to evaluate through a single number.
Carter’s 16 tackles were impressive, but Jones’ five tackles included a game-changing interception-return touchdown.
Both performances had value, but their impact was different.
When evaluating defensive players, it is useful to examine the full statistical line and consider the situation in which the plays occurred.
Special Teams Can Change the Final Score
Kicking statistics deserve attention because field goals and extra points contribute directly to the final result.
Borregales scored 14 points.
McPherson scored eight.
Both were perfect on their attempts, but the difference in field-goal volume helped New England create its scoring advantage.
For anyone analyzing an NFL box score, ignoring special teams can leave out an important part of the game’s explanation.
Official Box Score and Statistical Reliability
The figures in this article come from the supplied ESPN box-score information for the November 23, 2025 matchup.
The official game record identifies the contest as Game ID 401772781.
Readers who want to examine the original statistical record can consult the ESPN NFL box score for Patriots vs Bengals.
A box score is useful because it separates individual contributions from team totals.
It allows readers to compare:
- Passing completions and attempts.
- Rushing attempts and yardage.
- Receptions and receiving yards.
- Defensive tackles and sacks.
- Interceptions and return touchdowns.
- Field goals and extra points.
- Kick returns and punting production.
When comparing statistics, it is important to use the same game and the same statistical categories.
For example, team passing yards should not be confused with total offensive yards. Passing yards measure passing production, while total offensive yardage also includes rushing production.
The supplied statistics show 294 passing yards and 107 rushing yards for New England, compared with 197 passing yards and 120 rushing yards for Cincinnati.
Those separate figures provide a clearer picture of each team’s offensive approach.
Frequently Asked Questions
1. Who won the New England Patriots vs Cincinnati Bengals game on November 23, 2025?
The New England Patriots defeated the Cincinnati Bengals 26-20 in their Week 12 NFL regular-season matchup on November 23, 2025. New England improved its record to 10-2, while Cincinnati fell to 3-8.
2. How many passing yards did Drake Maye record against the Bengals?
Drake Maye completed 22 of 35 passes for 294 yards. He recorded one passing touchdown and one interception, averaging 8.4 yards per attempt. His passer rating was 87.1.
3. Who was the leading receiver in the Patriots vs Bengals matchup?
Hunter Henry was the leading receiver for New England. He caught seven passes for 115 yards and one touchdown on 10 targets. His longest reception covered 28 yards.
4. How many rushing yards did Chase Brown record?
Chase Brown rushed for 107 yards on 19 carries, averaging 5.6 yards per attempt. His longest run covered 21 yards. He did not record a rushing touchdown.
5. Which defensive players scored interception-return touchdowns?
Marcus Jones scored an interception-return touchdown for New England, returning his interception for 33 yards. Geno Stone recorded Cincinnati’s interception-return touchdown with a 32-yard return.
6. How many points did Andy Borregales score?
Andy Borregales scored 14 points for New England. He converted all four field-goal attempts and both extra-point attempts. His longest successful field goal covered 52 yards.
Conclusion
The November 23, 2025 matchup between the New England Patriots and Cincinnati Bengals demonstrated how passing efficiency, defensive scoring, and reliable special teams can determine an NFL result.
New England secured a 26-20 victory through a combination of productive quarterback play and important contributions from different units.
Drake Maye finished with 294 passing yards, one touchdown, and one interception. Hunter Henry delivered the strongest receiving performance with 115 yards and a touchdown. TreVeyon Henderson led the Patriots’ rushing attack with 66 yards.
Defensively, Marcus Jones provided one of the game’s defining moments with a 33-yard interception return for a touchdown. Andy Borregales also played an important role by scoring 14 points without missing a field goal or extra-point attempt.
Cincinnati had several impressive individual performances. Chase Brown rushed for 107 yards, Barrett Carter recorded 16 tackles, and Geno Stone returned an interception for a touchdown.
However, the Bengals’ 120 rushing yards could not compensate for their limited passing production. Joe Flacco finished with 183 passing yards, and Cincinnati ended the contest with 197 receiving yards.
The statistical comparison ultimately highlights New England’s advantage in passing production and scoring opportunities. Cincinnati performed better in rushing yardage and total tackles, but the Patriots made more effective use of their offensive and defensive opportunities.
The final 26-20 score captures a competitive contest in which individual performances across offense, defense, and special teams all played a meaningful role.
