Detroit Lions vs the 49ers match player stats tell a story of two very different games that still carried the same weight. One was a regular-season track meet in Santa Clara that Detroit stole with precision throws and explosive gains. The other was the NFC Championship, decided by a furious second half and a quarterback who found enough angles when it mattered. Read together, the numbers sketch the outline of a rivalry that is beginning to define the NFC hierarchy, and a checklist for what each side must fix before the next meeting. The tape shows speed. The stat lines show leverage.
Why these two box scores matter now
When Detroit beat San Francisco 40–34 on December 30, 2024, the result underlined a late-season blueprint: get efficient early possessions, hit intermediate shots to tight ends and slot receivers, and let the backs create explosives in space. In that game, Jared Goff threw three touchdowns without an interception and posted a passer rating north of 130. Brock Purdy answered with 377 passing yards and three touchdowns, but two interceptions altered the math. The Lions finished with 152 rushing yards and did not punt. That is the skeleton key of their offense at its best. Those are Detroit Lions vs 49ers match player stats that travel in January, even on the road. For the possession-by-possession receipts, study the official box score.
Four weeks earlier, the NFC Championship had turned on the axis of the third quarter. The Detroit Lions built a 24–7 halftime lead, but San Francisco surged out of the locker room, stacked a 17–0 third quarter, and won 34–31 behind clutch plays from Brock Purdy and Christian McCaffrey. Detroit still outgained San Francisco 442 to 413 and rushed for 182 yards, but the 49ers owned the most important possessions, including two short fields that became touchdowns. These Detroit Lions vs 49ers match player stats captured the difference between yardage and control.
The quarterbacks in focus
There is a clean way to read Goff’s week-to-week pictures against San Francisco. In late December, his line was clinical: 26 of 34 for 303 yards, three touchdowns, zero interceptions. The ball came out on time to multiple levels, and Detroit used motion to isolate leverage for Sam LaPorta and Amon-Ra St. Brown. The 132.4 passer rating matched the eye test. Goff carried the pocket without drifting and minimized negative plays, taking only two sacks. In the championship game, the Lions still moved the ball but leaned more on their run game for explosives. The box score reflects a plan that worked for 30 minutes but did not close.
Purdy’s profile across the two contests reads differently. In the December shootout, he threw for 377 yards with three touchdowns and two interceptions while taking two sacks. The yards per attempt were in the double digits and the intermediate seams to George Kittle and Ricky Pearsall were consistent. The turnovers, however, tilted expected value. In the January title game, the raw totals were smaller but situational play improved. Purdy went 20 of 31 for 267 yards with one touchdown and one interception. His scrambles mattered. His throws on the move pulled Detroit’s zones apart at the edges of the numbers. The Detroit Lions vs 49ers match player stats from January underline that efficiency plus timing can outlast pure volume. Reuters’ recap of the comeback provides the snapshot of that hinge moment without the noise: 49ers storm back in the second half to stun the Lions.
Run games that set the terms
Detroit’s run blueprint traveled into Levi’s Stadium twice. In the title game, the Lions posted 182 rushing yards on 29 attempts. David Montgomery hammered A and B gaps for 93 yards and a touchdown on 15 carries. Jahmyr Gibbs added 45 yards and a touchdown on 12 carries. Jameson Williams erased angles on a 42-yard jet for another score. The Lions averaged 6.3 per carry and used the run to stay out of long yardage. The problem was not volume. It was sequence. Those yards did not correspond to fourth quarter control.
In December, Detroit again ran with balance, finishing at 152 rush yards. Gibbs was the fulcrum with 117 yards and a touchdown on 18 carries, repeatedly pressing frontside to cut back behind patient double teams. That is the version that and-ones passing rhythm instead of replacing it. San Francisco’s run chart in that game was significantly quieter, held to 75 yards on 18 attempts. On those nights, rushing style tells you who is steering the game.
For San Francisco, the January answer was Christian McCaffrey’s timing in the red area. He scored twice and totaled 90 rushing yards. The 49ers were not bulldozing, but their carries bought the down-and-distance that unlocked Purdy’s movement throws. The number that matters is three rushing touchdowns to match Detroit’s three. The bar was possession leverage, not pure yards.
Receivers and tight ends who changed leverage
The December tape frames Detroit’s receiving spine. Jameson Williams hit a 41-yard shot and punctured off-speed coverage for 77 and a touchdown on five catches. Sam LaPorta added six for 64 and a score. Amon-Ra St. Brown accumulated volume in traffic with eight for 60 and a touchdown. The spread was the point. There was no single bellcow target that San Francisco could tilt coverage toward. It was a short and intermediate clinic that never asked Goff to hold the ball.
San Francisco’s answers were just as layered. Rookie Ricky Pearsall went for 141 yards and a touchdown on eight catches. Kittle stacked another 112 on eight receptions. Jauan Jennings and the backs combined for chain-movers. That is a portrait of an offense that does not rely on one superstar to move the sticks. In January, the roles shifted toward McCaffrey and situational throws to the perimeter without gaudy receiving totals. The lesson across both games is simple. These teams can win two different ways. They can choose violence in space with speed, or they can choose precision with leverage routes. The right choice depends on score and quarter.
Explosives vs control
Explosive plays are the bright neon numbers inside any Detroit Lions vs 49ers match player stats review, but they only matter if they correspond to red-zone decisions. In the December meeting, Detroit’s explosives were paired with clean special teams and mistake-free quarterbacking. That combination is why the Lions did not need to punt and could live with a field goal or two in the fourth quarter. In the January meeting, the 49ers bought back control with a 17–0 third quarter that reset the entire game. The team stats showed Detroit with more yards, more first downs and a better rushing average, but San Francisco captured sequencing. The 49ers turned third downs into touchdowns. That is an efficiency problem, not a yardage problem.
Third downs and the beginning of the end
Situational football is a reliability test. The NFC title game totals showed two offenses that were both efficient between the 20s. The split lived on third down and in the Lions’ fourth down decisions. The numbers alone do not contain the entire story of game management, but they do highlight a rhythm change after halftime. Detroit’s drives in the third quarter stalled. San Francisco’s did not. One side converted stress into points. The other converted yards into punts and turnovers on downs. The scoreboard accepted the offer.
Turnovers as the quiet divider
Across both games, turnover margin and turnover location wrote the footnotes. In December, Detroit played clean in the passing game, and that let the Lions absorb a few negative plays in the run game without losing pace. Purdy’s pair of interceptions, including one into a drifting zone, added hidden points. In January, the margin was even, but the distribution was not. A single interception that steals a possession after a long drive is worth more than a midfield giveaway that ends a short one. The box score lists one-to-one. The film knows which one cut deeper.
Front sevens and pressure pictures
Neither game was defined by a meltdown up front, but the pass rush timing mattered. In December, Detroit kept Goff mostly clean with quick game structure and play-action that flattened San Francisco’s angles. Two sacks on 34 attempts at 8.9 yards per attempt is elite efficiency. In January, San Francisco’s fronts narrowed Detroit’s choice architecture, especially on third downs after halftime. Even without piling up sacks, the 49ers moved Goff off his preferred launch points and took away a fraction of the middle of the field. That fraction was the difference between a first down and a punt.
Back sevens and tackling discipline
Detroit’s best defensive sequence across both games featured rally-and-tackle discipline on the perimeter with timely breaks on outbreaking routes. The December numbers tell on that reality. Even while San Francisco hit chunk plays through Kittle and Pearsall, the Lions forced kicks and created two turnovers. In January, the back seven’s first half was composed, but the second half saw pursuit angles crack a beat late and crossers find grass after the catch. A single missed tackle can mathematically equal a busted coverage in the explosive ledger. The third quarter held several such margins.
Red zone math
Red zone trips are not all created equal. In the title game, the 49ers converted carries and scrambles into short-yard scores that kept the clock in their favor. In the December game, Detroit’s red zone profile was a collection of layered throws and a Gibbs cutback that punished an overplay. The grand takeaway is predictable. If the Lions reach the low red with the tight end active and the run game live, they can close. If San Francisco reaches it with two-way threats to McCaffrey and a quarterback who will pull and throw on the move, they can shift the field. The stat pages are the receipts.
Special teams as leverage
Hidden points materialized on kicks. In the December meeting, Detroit’s kicker went two-for-two with a long of 57 and the team did not punt. San Francisco went 0-for-2 on field goals that day. Drive-end outcomes swing win probability quietly. In a one-score environment, four lost points are backbreaking. In January, specialists went mostly to script, and the game turned on offense and defense. If there is a lesson for the next installment, it is this: do not leave doorways open in a coin-flip game. Kicking is a doorway. Reuters’ desk note on the December game is a tidy companion to the box: Lions beat 49ers as showdown with Vikings awaits.
Coaching adjustments and the halftime hinge
Detroit’s plan has been consistent. Get on schedule. Avoid long-developing five-step concepts unless play-action protects the launch point. Use speed to change angles, not just to chase explosives. It worked perfectly in December. In January, the script worked until halftime. San Francisco’s adjustment was to force Goff off his first read and to demand tighter windows outside the numbers. Offensive coordinator Kyle Shanahan tuned the intermediate menu and used McCaffrey as an axis. Defensive tweaks kept two safeties patient and sent a message on early downs that discouraged straight-line runs. The 17–0 third quarter did not require a brand-new playbook. It required small changes, applied with commitment.
What the numbers say about the rematch
The head-to-head recent arc is now split. Detroit proved it can win a shootout on the road by throwing efficiently and running with intent. San Francisco proved it can flip a deficit with situational mastery. If this is the NFC’s defining rivalry for the next two years, the Detroit Lions vs 49ers match player stats suggest the template for both sides. For Detroit, it is a low-turnover Goff, a live tight end, and a run game that gets the ball to Gibbs and Montgomery with angles not collisions. For San Francisco, it is a Purdy who trusts the scramble rules, a red zone McCaffrey plan that squeezes space, and a back seven that rallies through the catch point. For broader context on trends and the team’s current arc, keep an eye on our dedicated Detroit Lions coverage.
The Lions can live with San Francisco’s chunk plays if they land a turnover and turn their red zone visits into touchdowns. The 49ers can live with Detroit’s rushing totals if the carries end in field goals. Neither side can live with a special teams gap. Neither can live with a third quarter that belongs entirely to the other. Those are the pressure points for every meeting going forward. They are also the places where coaching habit beats scheme novelty, and where postseason games are decided in minutes rather than quarters.
Players who swing the next one
Jared Goff: clean platforms equal clean numbers. His December line, according to sports news, is the bull case. If Detroit can keep early downs honest and hit the quick game without tips and batted balls, Goff’s risk profile stays friendly. If San Francisco muddies the picture post-snap, the offense must find more second-reaction throws or lean back on Gibbs in space.
Brock Purdy: the January version is the template. He does not need 400 yards. He needs three or four throws off movement that change a possession, and one scramble that steals a first down where the coverage had the call. The variance in his December line came from the two interceptions. The Lions’ disguise work can pull eyes. The counter is rhythm and patience.
Christian McCaffrey: touchdowns in the red zone are the only currency that matters in these games. Even when the carry totals are modest, his gravity alters splits and forces linebackers to honor motion and angle routes. January is the proof.
Amon-Ra St. Brown and Sam LaPorta: Detroit’s best path is often through the middle of the field. In December, the pair combined for 14 receptions, 124 yards and two touchdowns. That spread allows Ben Johnson to layer option routes and screens that blunt the rush. The 49ers’ adjustment late in January took away some of those clean access throws. Where the next meeting is played will influence how free those windows feel.
George Kittle and the emerging wideouts: San Francisco used Kittle’s intermediate gravity to open seams for Pearsall, Jennings and the backs. The December numbers were loud. The January version asked Kittle to be a bouncer at the numbers and a decoy at the hash. That elasticity is part of what makes this offense so difficult to script against twice.
The broader arc of the rivalry
Strip away the emotions and the scoreboard, and the team stats from the NFC Championship actually resembled Detroit’s ideal winning formula. More yards. More first downs. Better rush average. The scoreboard did not care. A 17–0 third quarter and a few pressure snaps told a different story. That is why coaches stress sequencing and middle-eight control in modern football. In the December meeting, Detroit controlled both. In January, San Francisco took the wheel. The split is exactly why the Detroit Lions vs 49ers match player stats will remain a magnet for the next rematch. It is not one team outclassing the other. It is a swing of small edges inside similar production.
What it means for the NFC
Detroit’s path to a conference crown runs through games like these. The Lions are built to score from anywhere, but their security blanket remains a run game that pairs Montgomery’s patience with Gibbs’ burst. When the tight end unlocks the middle and St. Brown wins leverage, they become very hard to keep behind the sticks. The 49ers’ path is familiar. They do not require explosive totals to win. They require timely stops, red zone clarity, and a quarterback who refuses the one mistake that turns a coin flip into a chase. The January film is the footnote. It is also the benchmark. These teams are not leaving the stage.
Bottom line for bettors and fans of tendencies
If you chase trends, the safest ones are simple. Detroit does not punt when the quick game is clean and the backs are involved early on counters and duo looks that hit from two backs. San Francisco erases deficits when Purdy’s scrambles steal one first down per quarter and McCaffrey touches the ball inside the 10. The rest can be noise. The next game will hinge on those three notes more than it will on any one player chasing 150 yards. The last two games already told us as much, inside every line of the Detroit Lions vs 49ers match player stats.
