Cincinnati Bengals vs Washington Commanders Match Player Stats
The Cincinnati Bengals vs Washington Commanders Match Player Stats from August 18, 2025, reveal how Cincinnati secured a 31-17 preseason victory through efficient quarterback play, strong receiving performances, and two important interceptions. Although Washington produced more rushing yards, Cincinnati made better use of its passing opportunities and converted its offensive possessions into touchdowns.
The preseason matchup offered an interesting look at individual performances on both sides. Jake Browning delivered two touchdown passes, Mitchell Tinsley caught two touchdown receptions, and Charlie Jones added another receiving score. Washington, meanwhile, showed considerable promise on the ground, with Chris Rodriguez Jr. averaging more than 10 yards per carry and Jacory Croskey-Merritt contributing a rushing touchdown.
The final score tells only part of the story. A closer examination of passing efficiency, rushing production, receiving contributions, defensive statistics, turnovers, and special teams helps explain why Cincinnati won despite Washington’s advantage in total rushing yards.
This article examines the individual performances and team statistics from the August 18 preseason game, using the supplied ESPN box-score data as its statistical reference.
Match Overview: Cincinnati Bengals vs Washington Commanders
The game took place on August 18, 2025, during the NFL preseason. Cincinnati finished with 31 points, while Washington managed 17.
Photo: Bengals Unveil Orange Uniform Pants for 2024 NFL Season After ‘Madden’ Leak
Cincinnati Bengals
31
Winner
17
FINAL
August 18, 2025
Washington Commanders News, Scores, Stats, Schedule | NFL.com
Washington Commanders
17
Defeated
| Match information | Details |
| Competition | NFL preseason |
| Date | August 18, 2025 |
| Final score | Cincinnati 31-17 Washington |
| Bengals record shown | 1-1 |
| Commanders record shown | 0-2 |
| ESPN game ID | 401772973 |
| Game status | Final |
Cincinnati’s 14-point winning margin reflected its stronger passing production and ability to create turnovers. Washington had some impressive individual rushing performances, but its passing offense struggled to produce points.
Quarter-by-Quarter Score Breakdown
The scoring pattern is one of the most interesting parts of this matchup. Washington started quickly, scoring 14 points in the opening quarter. Cincinnati responded with a much stronger second quarter, producing 21 unanswered points.
| Quarter | Cincinnati | Washington |
| First quarter | 7 | 14 |
| Second quarter | 21 | 0 |
| Third quarter | 0 | 3 |
| Fourth quarter | 3 | 0 |
| Final score | 31 | 17 |
First Quarter: Washington Takes the Early Lead
Washington began the game with an aggressive approach and scored 14 points in the opening period. Cincinnati responded with seven points but could not match the Commanders’ early scoring output.
The opening quarter demonstrated Washington’s ability to establish offensive momentum, particularly through its rushing attack.
Second Quarter: Cincinnati Changes the Game
The Bengals produced their strongest offensive period in the second quarter, scoring 21 points without allowing Washington to score.
This was the decisive stretch of the game. Cincinnati found opportunities through its passing offense and converted those opportunities into touchdowns.
Mitchell Tinsley’s receiving production was particularly important, as he finished with two touchdown catches.
Third Quarter: Washington Adds Three Points
Washington managed a field goal in the third quarter, increasing its total to 17.
Cincinnati did not score during this period, but its earlier advantage remained sufficient to keep control of the game.
Fourth Quarter: Cincinnati Protects Its Advantage
The Bengals added another three points in the final quarter. Washington failed to score again.
Cincinnati’s defense maintained its advantage, and the Bengals completed the preseason contest with a 31-17 victory.
Cincinnati Bengals vs Washington Commanders Match Player Stats
The individual performances provide a clearer picture of how the two teams approached the contest. Cincinnati relied on its passing game to generate touchdowns, while Washington depended more heavily on its running backs and mobile quarterbacks.
Team Statistical Comparison
| Statistical category | Bengals | Commanders |
| Total net yards | 293 | 270 |
| Passing yards (net) | 206 | 85 |
| Gross passing yards | 228 | 85 |
| Rushing yards | 87 | 185 |
| Passing completions | 26 | 10 |
| Passing attempts | 40 | 19 |
| Passing touchdowns | 3 | 0 |
| Rushing touchdowns | 1 | 2 |
| Interceptions thrown | 0 | 2 |
| Sacks allowed | 2 | 0 |
| First downs | 24 | 14 |
| Total offensive plays | 71 | 49 |
| Time of possession | 37:19 | 22:41 |
| Third-down efficiency | 6/15 | 4/10 |
| Fourth-down efficiency | 3/3 | 1/1 |
| Fumbles lost | 0 | 0 |
One important statistical distinction deserves attention. Cincinnati recorded 228 gross passing yards, but its net passing yardage was 206 after losing 22 yards on two sacks. The receiving table also totals 228 yards because receiving production is measured before sack losses.
What the Team Numbers Reveal
Three differences stand out.
- Cincinnati controlled the passing game.
The Bengals completed 26 of 40 attempts for 228 gross yards and three touchdowns. Washington completed only 10 of 19 passes for 85 yards and threw two interceptions.
- Washington was more productive on the ground.
The Commanders recorded 185 rushing yards on 30 attempts, averaging 6.2 yards per carry. Cincinnati finished with 87 rushing yards on 29 attempts, averaging 3.0 yards per carry.
- Cincinnati controlled possession.
The Bengals held the ball for 37 minutes and 19 seconds, compared with Washington’s 22 minutes and 41 seconds. That difference gave Cincinnati more opportunities to organize its offense and maintain pressure on the opposing defense.
The numbers show that Washington was not completely ineffective. Its running game was productive, but its passing limitations and turnovers made it difficult to convert that production into a competitive final score.
Cincinnati Bengals Passing Stats and Quarterback Performances
Cincinnati’s passing offense was the biggest difference between the teams. Three quarterbacks appeared in the box score, combining for 26 completions, 228 gross passing yards, and three touchdowns without throwing an interception.
Cincinnati Quarterback Statistics
| Quarterback | CMP/ATT | Yards | Average | TD | INT | Rating |
| Jake Browning | 16/25 | 159 | 6.4 | 2 | 0 | 108.6 |
| Joe Burrow | 9/14 | 62 | 4.4 | 1 | 0 | 97.9 |
| Desmond Ridder | 1/1 | 7 | 7.0 | 0 | 0 | 95.8 |
| Team total | 26/40 | 228 | 5.7 | 3 | 0 | 105.0 |
Jake Browning: Cincinnati’s Leading Passer
Jake Browning delivered the most productive passing performance for Cincinnati.
He completed 16 of 25 attempts for 159 yards and two touchdowns. His completion percentage was 64%, and he finished with a passer rating of 108.6.
His most important contribution was connecting with Mitchell Tinsley for two touchdown receptions during the second quarter.
Browning’s performance demonstrated several positive qualities:
- He completed more than 60% of his passing attempts.
- He generated 159 passing yards.
- He delivered two touchdown passes.
- He avoided interceptions.
- He produced the highest quarterback rating among Cincinnati’s three passers.
The two touchdown connections with Tinsley were especially valuable because they helped Cincinnati transform a tied game into a commanding advantage.
Browning also took one sack for five yards. Although the sack reduced his team’s net passing production, it did not significantly damage the overall efficiency of his performance.
Joe Burrow: Efficient Contributions in Limited Action
Joe Burrow completed nine of 14 passes for 62 yards and one touchdown.
His completion percentage was approximately 64.3%, and he finished with a 97.9 passer rating.
Burrow’s most important contribution was the four-yard touchdown pass to Charlie Jones in the second quarter. That score brought Cincinnati level with Washington at 14-14.
His statistics should be evaluated in the context of his limited workload. He attempted only 14 passes and played a relatively small portion of the preseason contest.
Burrow’s numbers included:
- 9 completions
- 14 passing attempts
- 62 passing yards
- 1 touchdown
- 0 interceptions
- 1 sack for 17 yards
- 97.9 passer rating
His contribution was important because the Bengals needed an offensive response after Washington’s two early touchdowns.
Desmond Ridder: Perfect Completion Record
Desmond Ridder had the smallest passing workload among Cincinnati’s quarterbacks.
He completed his only passing attempt for seven yards. He did not throw a touchdown or interception and finished with a passer rating of 95.8.
Although one attempt is too small a sample for meaningful conclusions about overall quarterback performance, Ridder successfully completed his opportunity.
He also recorded two rushing attempts for minus two yards.
Cincinnati’s Overall Passing Advantage
The combined quarterback performance was impressive when compared with Washington’s results.
Cincinnati produced:
- 228 gross passing yards.
- Three passing touchdowns.
- Zero interceptions.
- A 105.0 team passer rating.
- 26 completed passes.
Washington managed only 85 passing yards and failed to throw a touchdown.
That difference was a major reason the Bengals won by 14 points.
Washington Commanders Passing Stats and Quarterback Performances
Washington struggled to establish a consistent passing attack. Josh Johnson and Sam Hartman combined for 85 yards, no passing touchdowns, and two interceptions.
Washington Quarterback Statistics
| Quarterback | CMP/ATT | Yards | Average | TD | INT | Rating |
| Josh Johnson | 6/9 | 56 | 6.2 | 0 | 1 | 44.0 |
| Sam Hartman | 4/10 | 29 | 2.9 | 0 | 1 | 8.3 |
| Team total | 10/19 | 85 | 4.5 | 0 | 2 | 25.0 |
Josh Johnson: More Productive Passing Numbers
Josh Johnson completed six of nine attempts for 56 yards.
His completion percentage was approximately 66.7%, which was slightly higher than Browning’s. However, he failed to produce a passing touchdown and threw one interception.
His passer rating was 44.0.
Johnson also recorded one rushing attempt for zero yards and had one fumble that was recovered by Washington.
His passing statistics show that he was able to complete short and intermediate throws, but Washington needed more explosive plays through the air.
The absence of a passing touchdown limited the value of his completions.
Sam Hartman: A Difficult Passing Performance
Sam Hartman completed four of 10 passes for 29 yards.
His average was just 2.9 yards per attempt, and he threw one interception without recording a touchdown.
His passer rating of 8.3 reflected a difficult outing.
Hartman also contributed 25 rushing yards on four attempts, averaging 6.3 yards per carry. This was a more productive part of his performance.
The difference between his passing and rushing numbers suggests that Washington found more success when using his mobility than when asking him to generate offense through traditional passing plays.
Washington’s Passing Problems
The Commanders’ passing statistics reveal three major weaknesses.
Limited yardage: Washington generated only 85 passing yards, compared with Cincinnati’s 228 gross passing yards.
No passing touchdowns: The offense could not convert its passing opportunities into scores.
Turnovers: Both quarterbacks threw an interception, giving Cincinnati two additional opportunities to control the game.
The passing numbers were particularly important because Washington’s running game was productive. A more effective passing attack could have made its rushing production even more difficult to defend.
Cincinnati Bengals Rushing Stats
Cincinnati recorded 87 rushing yards on 29 attempts, averaging 3.0 yards per carry.
Although the Bengals did not dominate the ground game, their rushing attack contributed an important touchdown through Chase Brown.
Cincinnati Rushing Player Statistics
| Player | Carries | Yards | Average | Longest | TD |
| Tahj Brooks | 11 | 47 | 4.3 | 14 | 0 |
| Kendall Milton | 9 | 22 | 2.4 | 9 | 0 |
| Chase Brown | 5 | 16 | 3.2 | 6 | 1 |
| Samaje Perine | 1 | 3 | 3.0 | 3 | 0 |
| Jake Browning | 1 | 1 | 1.0 | 1 | 0 |
| Desmond Ridder | 2 | -2 | -1.0 | -1 | 0 |
| Team total | 29 | 87 | 3.0 | 14 | 1 |
Tahj Brooks Leads Cincinnati in Rushing Yards
Tahj Brooks was Cincinnati’s leading rusher.
He recorded 11 carries for 47 yards, averaging 4.3 yards per attempt. His longest run covered 14 yards.
Brooks did not score a rushing touchdown, but he provided the team’s most consistent ground production.
His average of 4.3 yards per carry was considerably better than the overall team average of 3.0.
This performance made him an important contributor in Cincinnati’s rushing rotation.
Kendall Milton Adds 22 Yards
Kendall Milton finished with nine carries for 22 yards.
His average was 2.4 yards per carry, and his longest run covered nine yards.
Milton received a relatively significant workload, but he struggled to generate the same efficiency as Brooks.
His numbers illustrate why rushing volume and rushing efficiency should be evaluated separately. Nine attempts gave him a substantial opportunity, but the overall yardage remained limited.
Chase Brown Scores a Touchdown
Chase Brown recorded five rushing attempts for 16 yards and one touchdown.
His most important contribution came on Cincinnati’s opening scoring drive, when he ran for a one-yard touchdown.
Although Brown averaged only 3.2 yards per carry, his touchdown was valuable because it gave Cincinnati an early response to Washington’s offensive production.
His receiving and rushing contributions also demonstrated his involvement in multiple areas of the Bengals’ offensive system.
Other Cincinnati Rushing Contributions
Samaje Perine recorded one carry for three yards.
Jake Browning added one rushing attempt for one yard, while Desmond Ridder finished with two attempts for minus two yards.
These smaller contributions did not significantly change the team’s overall rushing production, but they completed Cincinnati’s 29-attempt ground-game total.
Washington Commanders Rushing Stats
Washington produced its strongest statistical advantage in the rushing department.
The Commanders recorded 185 yards on 30 carries, averaging 6.2 yards per attempt.
Their ground game produced two touchdowns, including a 14-yard score from Jayden Daniels and a 27-yard touchdown from Jacory Croskey-Merritt.
Washington Rushing Player Statistics
| Player | Carries | Yards | Average | Longest | TD |
| Chris Rodriguez Jr. | 6 | 62 | 10.3 | 40 | 0 |
| Jacory Croskey-Merritt | 11 | 46 | 4.2 | 27 | 1 |
| Sam Hartman | 4 | 25 | 6.3 | 15 | 0 |
| Deebo Samuel Sr. | 1 | 19 | 19.0 | 19 | 0 |
| Jayden Daniels | 1 | 14 | 14.0 | 14 | 1 |
| Jeremy McNichols | 3 | 10 | 3.3 | 5 | 0 |
| Kazmeir Allen | 3 | 9 | 3.0 | 7 | 0 |
| Josh Johnson | 1 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Team total | 30 | 185 | 6.2 | 40 | 2 |
Chris Rodriguez Jr.: Washington’s Leading Rusher
Chris Rodriguez Jr. delivered the most impressive rushing performance of the game.
He recorded six carries for 62 yards, averaging 10.3 yards per attempt.
His longest run covered 40 yards.
Rodriguez did not score a touchdown, but his efficiency was outstanding. He generated more than 10 yards per carry and produced the longest rushing play among the listed players.
His performance was particularly notable because he needed only six attempts to reach 62 yards.
This is an important distinction when evaluating preseason running-back performances. A player who produces significant yardage on limited opportunities can demonstrate explosive potential without receiving a large workload.
Jacory Croskey-Merritt: Touchdown and Consistent Production
Jacory Croskey-Merritt finished with 11 carries for 46 yards and one touchdown.
He averaged 4.2 yards per carry and recorded a longest run of 27 yards.
His touchdown was one of Washington’s most important offensive plays. He scored a 27-yard rushing touchdown during the first quarter, helping the Commanders establish an early 14-7 advantage.
Croskey-Merritt also received two passing targets but did not record a reception.
His combined involvement in the rushing and passing game made him one of Washington’s more active offensive players.
Sam Hartman Contributes With His Legs
Hartman recorded four rushing attempts for 25 yards.
His average of 6.3 yards per carry was productive, especially considering his difficult passing performance.
His 15-yard longest run demonstrated that he could contribute as a mobile quarterback.
Although his passing statistics were disappointing, his rushing production gave Washington another option for moving the football.
Deebo Samuel Sr. Adds an Explosive Run
Deebo Samuel Sr. recorded one rushing attempt for 19 yards.
That single carry produced an average of 19.0 yards.
His performance was based on a limited opportunity, but it added another explosive play to Washington’s ground attack.
The 19-yard run showed how a versatile offensive player can contribute through designed rushing opportunities.
Jayden Daniels Scores a Rushing Touchdown
Jayden Daniels recorded one rushing attempt for 14 yards and a touchdown.
His scoring run helped Washington establish its early lead.
Although the statistical workload was limited, his touchdown was an important moment in the opening quarter.
Daniels’ contribution also highlighted the value of quarterback mobility in Washington’s offensive approach.
Washington’s Rushing Advantage Explained
Washington finished with 98 more rushing yards than Cincinnati.
The Commanders also averaged 3.2 more yards per carry.
However, this advantage did not translate into victory.
The reason was the difference between rushing production and overall offensive efficiency. Washington could move the football on the ground, but its passing attack failed to provide the additional production needed to keep pace with Cincinnati.
Cincinnati Bengals Receiving Stats
Cincinnati’s receiving unit played a major role in the victory. The Bengals recorded 26 receptions for 228 yards and three touchdowns.
Mitchell Tinsley was the leading receiver, while Charlie Jones also made an important contribution with a touchdown reception.
Cincinnati Receiving Player Statistics
| Player | Receptions | Targets | Yards | Average | Longest | TD |
| Mitchell Tinsley | 5 | 6 | 73 | 14.6 | 23 | 2 |
| Kendric Pryor | 3 | 5 | 35 | 11.7 | 20 | 0 |
| Charlie Jones | 4 | 7 | 32 | 8.0 | 13 | 1 |
| Andrei Iosivas | 2 | 2 | 26 | 13.0 | 14 | 0 |
| Tanner Hudson | 3 | 6 | 18 | 6.0 | 8 | 0 |
| Rashod Owens | 2 | 2 | 13 | 6.5 | 7 | 0 |
| Ja’Marr Chase | 1 | 1 | 11 | 11.0 | 11 | 0 |
| Tahj Brooks | 3 | 4 | 9 | 3.0 | 6 | 0 |
| Cole Burgess | 1 | 1 | 8 | 8.0 | 8 | 0 |
| Cam Grandy | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2.0 | 2 | 0 |
| Drew Sample | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1.0 | 1 | 0 |
| Isaiah Williams | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jordan Moore | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jamoi Mayes | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Team total | 26 | 39 | 228 | 8.8 | 23 | 3 |
Mitchell Tinsley: The Offensive Standout
Mitchell Tinsley was Cincinnati’s most productive receiver.
He caught five passes on six targets for 73 yards and two touchdowns.
His average was 14.6 yards per reception, and his longest catch covered 23 yards.
Tinsley’s two touchdown receptions came during the second quarter:
- A 13-yard touchdown reception from Jake Browning.
- A 21-yard touchdown reception from Jake Browning.
These two plays were particularly important because they helped Cincinnati build a 28-14 lead.
Tinsley accounted for two of Cincinnati’s three passing touchdowns, making him the standout receiving performer.
His five receptions also represented a reliable target for the Bengals’ quarterbacks.
Kendric Pryor Produces 35 Receiving Yards
Kendric Pryor finished with three receptions on five targets for 35 yards.
He averaged 11.7 yards per reception and recorded a longest catch of 20 yards.
Although he did not score, his production helped Cincinnati distribute the football beyond its primary touchdown contributors.
His numbers also showed that the Bengals could generate useful yardage from multiple receiving options.
Charlie Jones Adds a Touchdown
Charlie Jones recorded four receptions on seven targets for 32 yards and one touchdown.
His four-yard touchdown reception from Joe Burrow tied the game at 14-14.
Jones was particularly important because his score came before Tinsley’s two touchdowns.
His contribution helped Cincinnati regain momentum after Washington’s strong opening period.
He also recorded a 30-yard kickoff return, giving him value in both the receiving and special-teams departments.
Andrei Iosivas Provides Additional Receiving Support
Andrei Iosivas caught two passes on two targets for 26 yards.
He averaged 13.0 yards per reception and recorded a longest catch of 14 yards.
His perfect reception rate was a positive detail, even though his opportunities were limited.
Other Cincinnati Receiving Contributions
Tanner Hudson caught three passes for 18 yards, while Rashod Owens recorded two receptions for 13 yards.
Ja’Marr Chase finished with one reception for 11 yards on one target.
Tahj Brooks added three catches for nine yards, demonstrating his involvement as both a runner and receiver.
Cole Burgess, Cam Grandy, and Drew Sample also recorded receptions.
Several other players were targeted without making a catch, including Isaiah Williams, Jordan Moore, and Jamoi Mayes.
The distribution shows that Cincinnati involved a wide group of offensive players rather than relying on one receiver throughout the contest.
Washington Commanders Receiving Stats
Washington’s receiving production was considerably lower than Cincinnati’s.
The Commanders recorded 10 receptions for 85 yards and no receiving touchdowns.
Jaylin Lane led the team in receiving yards, while Tay Martin produced the highest average among the players with a recorded reception.
Washington Receiving Player Statistics
| Player | Receptions | Targets | Yards | Average | Longest | TD |
| Jaylin Lane | 3 | 6 | 42 | 14.0 | 16 | 0 |
| Tay Martin | 1 | 1 | 15 | 15.0 | 15 | 0 |
| K.J. Osborn | 1 | 2 | 9 | 9.0 | 9 | 0 |
| Cole Turner | 1 | 1 | 9 | 9.0 | 9 | 0 |
| Ja’Corey Brooks | 1 | 2 | 7 | 7.0 | 7 | 0 |
| Jeremy McNichols | 1 | 1 | 3 | 3.0 | 3 | 0 |
| Michael Gallup | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kazmeir Allen | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jacory Croskey-Merritt | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Ben Sinnott | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jacoby Jones | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Team total | 10 | 19 | 85 | 8.5 | 16 | 0 |
Jaylin Lane Leads Washington’s Receivers
Jaylin Lane was the Commanders’ leading receiver.
He recorded three receptions on six targets for 42 yards.
His average was 14.0 yards per catch, and his longest reception covered 16 yards.
Lane accounted for nearly half of Washington’s receiving yardage.
However, his performance did not include a touchdown, and the limited number of successful completions around him restricted the overall impact of the passing attack.
Tay Martin Records 15 Yards
Tay Martin caught one pass for 15 yards on one target.
His 15.0-yard average was the highest among Washington’s receivers with a recorded catch.
Although he had limited involvement, he successfully converted his opportunity into a meaningful gain.
K.J. Osborn and Cole Turner
K.J. Osborn recorded one reception for nine yards on two targets.
Cole Turner also caught one pass for nine yards, doing so on a single target.
Neither receiver produced a touchdown, but both contributed to Washington’s total passing yardage.
Other Washington Receiving Performances
Ja’Corey Brooks caught one pass for seven yards.
Jeremy McNichols recorded one reception for three yards.
Michael Gallup, Kazmeir Allen, Ben Sinnott, and Jacoby Jones were targeted without recording receptions.
Jacory Croskey-Merritt received two targets but did not catch either pass.
The overall receiving numbers show that Washington struggled to create a consistent connection between its quarterbacks and pass catchers.
Defensive Player Stats: Bengals vs Commanders
Defense was another major factor in the outcome.
Cincinnati recorded two interceptions, while Washington failed to intercept any passes.
The Bengals also recorded eight passes defended compared with Washington’s three.
Washington did generate two sacks, but those defensive plays were not enough to overcome its offensive problems.
Cincinnati Bengals Defensive Statistics
| Player | Total tackles | Solo tackles | Sacks | TFL | Passes defended |
| Shaka Heyward | 7 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| Barrett Carter | 7 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Tycen Anderson | 4 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| DJ Ivey | 4 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Oren Burks | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Maema Njongmeta | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Bralyn Lux | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| McKinnley Jackson | 3 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| Taven Bryan | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Daijahn Anthony | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Joseph Ossai | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Isaiah Thomas | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Howard Cross III | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Demetrius Knight Jr. | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Nate Brooks | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Marco Wilson | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Josh Newton | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Lance Robinson | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Eric Gregory | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| Jordan Battle | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Selected defensive contributors. The complete defensive team totals include additional players.
Barrett Carter Makes an Important Interception
Barrett Carter recorded seven total tackles, including three solo tackles.
He also produced one interception and returned it for 13 yards.
His interception was one of Cincinnati’s most important defensive contributions.
Creating turnovers is especially valuable in preseason football because it can change field position and provide additional opportunities for the offense.
Carter’s performance combined tackling responsibility with an important play against Washington’s passing attack.
Tycen Anderson Records an Interception
Tycen Anderson also intercepted a Washington pass.
He finished with four total tackles, including three solo tackles, and recorded two passes defended.
His interception helped Cincinnati finish the game with two takeaways through the passing defense.
Anderson’s two passes defended were also the highest individual total among Cincinnati’s listed defensive players.
Shaka Heyward Leads in Tackles
Shaka Heyward and Barrett Carter each recorded seven tackles, tying for the highest individual total among Cincinnati defenders.
Heyward also recorded one tackle for loss and one quarterback hit.
His performance demonstrated his involvement in stopping Washington’s offensive plays and applying pressure around the line of scrimmage.
Cincinnati’s Defensive Team Performance
The Bengals finished with:
- 58 total tackles.
- 30 solo tackles.
- Four tackles for loss.
- Eight passes defended.
- One quarterback hit.
- Zero sacks.
- Two interceptions.
Although Cincinnati did not record a sack, its secondary made important plays that limited Washington’s passing effectiveness.
Washington Commanders Defensive Statistics
| Player | Total tackles | Solo tackles | Sacks | TFL | Passes defended |
| Ale Kaho | 7 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Bobby Price | 6 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Duke Riley | 6 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| Kam Arnold | 5 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Robert McDaniel | 5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jeremy Reaves | 4 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Noah Igbinoghene | 4 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kain Medrano | 4 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Andre Jones Jr. | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| Percy Butler | 3 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Colson Yankoff | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Daron Payne | 1 | 0 | 0.5 | 0 | 0 |
| Cole Turner | 1 | 0 | 0.5 | 0 | 0 |
| Dorance Armstrong | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Frankie Luvu | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Quan Martin | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Marshon Lattimore | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Javon Kinlaw | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Essang Bassey | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Tyler Owens | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Selected defensive contributors. The complete defensive team totals include additional players.
Ale Kaho Leads Washington in Tackles
Ale Kaho recorded seven total tackles, the highest individual total for Washington.
He finished with two solo tackles.
His involvement demonstrated consistent defensive activity, although the Commanders struggled to prevent Cincinnati from producing three passing touchdowns.
Bobby Price and Duke Riley Make Defensive Contributions
Bobby Price recorded six tackles, all of which were solo tackles.
Duke Riley also finished with six tackles, including four solo tackles and one tackle for loss.
Both players were active in Washington’s defensive effort.
Andre Jones Jr. Records a Sack
Andre Jones Jr. recorded three tackles, one sack, one tackle for loss, and one quarterback hit.
He was one of Washington’s most productive defensive players in terms of disrupting Cincinnati’s passing game.
Daron Payne and Cole Turner each received credit for half a sack, contributing to Washington’s team total of two sacks.
Washington’s Defensive Team Totals
The Commanders recorded:
- 79 total tackles.
- 42 solo tackles.
- Two sacks.
- Three tackles for loss.
- Three passes defended.
- Five quarterback hits.
- Zero interceptions.
Washington’s defense produced more tackles and sacks than Cincinnati’s defense. However, the Bengals were more effective at creating turnovers.
This distinction is important. A higher tackle total does not automatically indicate a better defensive performance. The timing and impact of defensive plays matter just as much as their volume.
Turnovers and Special Teams Performance
Special teams and turnovers also contributed to the result.
Cincinnati avoided losing a fumble and intercepted two passes. Washington recorded one fumble but recovered it, while its quarterbacks threw two interceptions.
Interception Comparison
| Team | Interceptions made | Interceptions thrown |
| Cincinnati Bengals | 2 | 0 |
| Washington Commanders | 0 | 2 |
Barrett Carter and Tycen Anderson recorded Cincinnati’s interceptions.
These defensive plays helped the Bengals control Washington’s passing offense.
Fumble Statistics
| Team or player | Fumbles | Lost |
| Cincinnati team | 0 | 0 |
| Josh Johnson | 1 | 0 |
| Washington team | 1 | 0 |
Neither team lost a fumble.
Therefore, interceptions were the primary difference in turnover production.
Kicking Statistics
| Kicker | Field goals | Longest FG | Extra points | Total points |
| Evan McPherson | 1/1 | 54 yards | 4/4 | 7 |
| Matt Gay | 1/1 | 27 yards | 2/2 | 5 |
Both kickers converted all their recorded field-goal attempts and extra points.
McPherson’s 54-yard field goal was particularly notable because it demonstrated his ability to convert from long range.
Punting Statistics
| Punter | Punts | Total yards | Average | Longest | Inside 20 |
| Ryan Rehkow | 4 | 161 | 40.3 | 51 | 2 |
| Tress Way | 4 | 203 | 50.8 | 59 | 1 |
Tress Way produced the higher punting average, finishing with 50.8 yards per punt.
Ryan Rehkow averaged 40.3 yards but placed two punts inside the 20-yard line.
The statistics demonstrate two different strengths: Washington gained more distance per punt, while Cincinnati recorded more punts inside the opponent’s 20-yard line.
Kick Return Statistics
| Team | Returner | Returns | Yards | Average | Longest |
| Cincinnati | Samaje Perine | 2 | 34 | 17.0 | 19 |
| Cincinnati | Charlie Jones | 1 | 30 | 30.0 | 30 |
| Cincinnati | Isaiah Williams | 1 | 24 | 24.0 | 24 |
| Washington | Kazmeir Allen | 3 | 82 | 27.3 | 33 |
| Washington | Demetric Felton | 1 | 26 | 26.0 | 26 |
| Washington | Jaylin Lane | 1 | 22 | 22.0 | 22 |
Washington produced 130 kickoff return yards, compared with Cincinnati’s 88.
Kazmeir Allen was Washington’s leading kickoff returner, recording 82 yards on three returns.
Punt Return Statistics
| Team | Returner | Returns | Yards | Average | Longest |
| Cincinnati | Isaiah Williams | 2 | 28 | 14.0 | 28 |
| Cincinnati | Charlie Jones | 1 | 4 | 4.0 | 4 |
| Washington | Jaylin Lane | 1 | 11 | 11.0 | 11 |
| Washington | Kazmeir Allen | 1 | 2 | 2.0 | 2 |
Cincinnati finished with 32 punt return yards, while Washington recorded 13.
Isaiah Williams was Cincinnati’s most productive punt returner, averaging 14 yards per return.
Overall, Washington had the advantage in kickoff returns, but Cincinnati produced more punt return yards.
Why the Cincinnati Bengals Won the Game
The final score of 31-17 was the result of several important differences between the teams.
Washington showed better rushing efficiency, but Cincinnati performed more effectively in the passing game and made better use of its scoring opportunities.
1. Better Quarterback Production
Cincinnati’s quarterbacks combined for three passing touchdowns without throwing an interception.
Washington’s quarterbacks failed to produce a passing touchdown and threw two interceptions.
This was arguably the most important statistical difference.
2. Mitchell Tinsley’s Touchdown Performance
Tinsley’s two touchdown receptions helped Cincinnati establish a comfortable advantage during the second quarter.
His five receptions for 73 yards made him the leading receiver in the game.
3. Cincinnati’s Defensive Turnovers
Barrett Carter and Tycen Anderson each recorded an interception.
Those two defensive plays limited Washington’s passing opportunities and helped Cincinnati maintain control.
4. Better Offensive Possession Management
Cincinnati controlled possession for more than 37 minutes.
Washington held the ball for approximately 22 minutes and 41 seconds.
The difference in possession time gave Cincinnati additional opportunities to move the football and score.
5. Washington Could Not Convert Its Rushing Success
Washington’s 185 rushing yards were impressive, but the team could not generate enough passing production to complement its ground attack.
The Commanders needed more balance to challenge Cincinnati’s offensive output.
Most Important Statistical Takeaways
The following table highlights the players and performances that deserve the most attention when reviewing this matchup.
| Category | Player | Performance |
| Leading passer | Jake Browning | 159 yards, 2 TD |
| Leading Cincinnati rusher | Tahj Brooks | 47 yards |
| Leading Washington rusher | Chris Rodriguez Jr. | 62 yards |
| Leading receiver | Mitchell Tinsley | 73 yards, 2 TD |
| Leading Washington receiver | Jaylin Lane | 42 yards |
| Cincinnati defensive standout | Barrett Carter | 7 tackles, 1 INT |
| Additional interception | Tycen Anderson | 1 INT |
| Washington tackle leader | Ale Kaho | 7 tackles |
| Cincinnati kicking leader | Evan McPherson | 54-yard FG |
| Washington rushing touchdown leader | Jacory Croskey-Merritt | 1 rushing TD |
What These Player Statistics Tell Us About Both Teams
The statistical comparison provides several useful lessons for evaluating football performances.
Passing Efficiency Can Outweigh Rushing Volume
Washington gained 98 more rushing yards than Cincinnati.
However, the Bengals generated three passing touchdowns and avoided interceptions.
This demonstrates why total rushing yardage should not be used as the only measure of offensive success.
A team can dominate one statistical category and still lose because it struggles in another.
Explosive Plays Change the Direction of a Game
Chris Rodriguez Jr.’s 40-yard run demonstrated Washington’s ability to produce explosive rushing plays.
Mitchell Tinsley’s two touchdown receptions showed how Cincinnati created scoring opportunities through the air.
Both types of plays can change the momentum of a football game.
However, Cincinnati converted its explosive offensive opportunities into a more substantial scoring advantage.
Defensive Statistics Need Context
Washington recorded 79 tackles compared with Cincinnati’s 58.
It also generated two sacks, while Cincinnati did not record any.
Despite those numbers, Cincinnati’s defense produced two interceptions.
This is why evaluating defensive performances requires more than counting tackles and sacks. Turnovers, field position, and the ability to stop scoring opportunities are equally important.
Preseason Statistics Require Careful Interpretation
Preseason games provide opportunities to evaluate players in different roles and situations.
However, their statistics should not automatically be treated as predictions of regular-season performance.
Several factors can affect preseason production:
- Players receive different amounts of playing time.
- Coaches evaluate different offensive combinations.
- Some starters have limited workloads.
- Backup players receive opportunities to demonstrate their abilities.
- Teams may use different offensive and defensive strategies.
For example, Browning’s 159 passing yards and Tinsley’s two touchdowns were excellent individual results. However, a single preseason performance does not establish how those players will perform over an entire regular season.
Similarly, Rodriguez’s 10.3 yards per carry was impressive, but six rushing attempts are not enough to establish a reliable long-term performance average.
The most useful approach is to consider the statistics alongside playing time, opportunity, consistency, and the role each player was given.
Official Box Score and Statistical Reference
For readers who want to examine the original game information, the official Washington Commanders game box score provides the scoring breakdown, player statistics, and team comparisons.
The ESPN game identifier associated with this matchup is 401772973.
The statistical analysis in this article uses the supplied game data, with the gross and net passing-yardage distinction explained in the team comparison section.
Frequently Asked Questions
1. Who won the Cincinnati Bengals vs Washington Commanders game on August 18, 2025?
The Cincinnati Bengals defeated the Washington Commanders 31-17 in their NFL preseason matchup on August 18, 2025. Cincinnati scored 21 points in the second quarter to establish control of the game.
2. How many passing yards did Jake Browning record?
Jake Browning completed 16 of 25 passes for 159 yards and two touchdowns. He did not throw an interception and finished with a passer rating of 108.6.
3. Who was the leading receiver in the game?
Mitchell Tinsley was the leading receiver. He recorded five receptions for 73 yards and two touchdowns, averaging 14.6 yards per catch.
4. Which Washington player recorded the most rushing yards?
Chris Rodriguez Jr. led Washington with 62 rushing yards on six carries. He averaged 10.3 yards per attempt and recorded a longest run of 40 yards.
5. How many interceptions were recorded during the game?
Cincinnati recorded two interceptions through Barrett Carter and Tycen Anderson. Washington did not intercept a pass. Both Washington quarterbacks threw one interception.
6. What were the final team rushing statistics?
Washington recorded 185 rushing yards on 30 attempts, averaging 6.2 yards per carry. Cincinnati recorded 87 rushing yards on 29 attempts, averaging 3.0 yards per carry.
Conclusion
The August 18, 2025, preseason matchup between Cincinnati and Washington ended with a 31-17 victory for the Bengals. Although Washington demonstrated greater rushing efficiency, Cincinnati produced a more effective passing performance and made important defensive plays.
Jake Browning led Cincinnati’s passing attack with 159 yards and two touchdowns. Mitchell Tinsley was the standout receiver with 73 yards and two scores, while Charlie Jones contributed another touchdown reception. Tahj Brooks led the Bengals in rushing, and Chase Brown added a rushing touchdown.
Washington’s strongest offensive performance came from its ground game. Chris Rodriguez Jr. recorded 62 yards, Jacory Croskey-Merritt scored a rushing touchdown, and Jayden Daniels added another rushing score. However, the Commanders could not establish a productive passing attack.
Defensively, Barrett Carter and Tycen Anderson made important contributions by recording interceptions. Washington generated more tackles and sacks, but its defense could not prevent Cincinnati from scoring 31 points.
Ultimately, the most important difference was Cincinnati’s ability to convert passing opportunities into touchdowns while protecting the football. The individual performances, team statistics, and scoring sequence together explain how the Bengals secured their preseason victory.
