The matchup between the Pittsburgh Steelers and the Las Vegas Raiders has long been one of the NFL’s more storied rivalries. According to historical records, the Raiders lead the overall series 17–16, with a regular-season edge of 14–13. In their recent meeting (Oct 13, 2024), the Steelers posted a convincing 32-13 victory.
In this article we dig deep into the numbers: overall team stats, rushing, passing, defence, special teams, plus key individual performances and what they tell us about which team truly controlled the contest.
Table of Contents
Historical Context
Before diving into the game, it is helpful to place this contest into the broader rivalry context:
The Steelers and Raiders first met in 1970.
From 1972 to 1976 they faced off in five straight playoff games (an NFL record streak) — a sign of how intense their clashes were.
Historically the Raiders have held a slight edge in the matchup, though in recent years the Steelers have closed the gap and are competitive.
Thus, each meeting carries not just current-season implications but also a legacy dimension. With that in mind, let’s zoom into the game at hand.
Game Overview
On October 13, 2024, the Steelers visited the Raiders and produced a 32-13 win. The final score alone tells a story of one team pulling away, but the detailed stats tell the full story of dominance.
Key Game Facts
Final Score: Steelers 32, Raiders 13.
According to the official box score, the Steelers had 293 net total yards to the Raiders’ 275.
Time of possession: Steelers ~31:51, Raiders ~28:09.
Penalties: Steelers had 7 penalties for 50 yards; Raiders had 4 for 42 yards.
So while the yardage difference was moderate, the scoreboard and key plays reveal a more one-sided affair.
Team Statistical Breakdown
Offence
Steelers
Total net yards: 293.
Time of possession: majority of the game (~31:51).
Balanced attack: The Steelers ran the ball effectively (with standout performance from their running back), and their quarterback added key rushing scores.
Their kicker—Chris Boswell—contributed significantly with multiple field goals.
Raiders
Total net yards: 275.
Despite reasonable yardage, the Raiders could not translate drives into enough points.
Their starting quarterback—Aidan O’Connell—threw a touchdown and an interception.
Defence
Steelers
They held the Raiders to only 13 points — a strong showing.
Key plays: The interception thrown by O’Connell hampered Raiders momentum.
Penalties: They were penalised more in number and yards than the Raiders (7 for 50 yards) but still maintained control.
Raiders
Allowed 32 points — not enough stops to keep the Steelers in check.
Their offence was unable to get into rhythm after the early lead.
Special Teams
Steelers’ Boswell: 4 field goals in the game.
Raiders’ kicking game did not provide enough or timely scoring.
The scoreboard gap and shortfall in converting opportunities magnified the difference.
Individual Player Highlights & Breakdown
Here we highlight key individual contributions that shaped the outcome.
Steelers
Najee Harris (RB): Rushed for 106 yards and a touchdown. His breakaway 36-yard touchdown run in the third quarter (-4:21) gave Pittsburgh a decisive lead.
Justin Fields (QB): Completed 145 passing yards and rushed for 59 yards and two rushing touchdowns.While those numbers aren’t astronomical through the air, the two rushing scores and his mobility added a dimension beyond the pass game.
Chris Boswell (K): Made four field goals (including from 52, 49, 37, and 36 yards).
Defensive contributors: While I don’t have individual sack/interception totals from the publicly accessible box score for this game, the interception by O’Connell implies that the Steelers’ defence forced at least one turnover.
Raiders
Aidan O’Connell (QB): Threw for 227 yards, one touchdown and one interception in his first start of the season.
Alexander Mattison (RB): Rushed for a touchdown (3-yard rush, first quarter) to give the Raiders a 7-3 lead.
Kristian Wilkerson (WR): Caught a 9-yard touchdown pass from O’Connell with 4:54 remaining, cutting the gap to 29-13 before Pittsburgh’s final field goal.
The Raiders’ offense had spurts, but were hampered by turnovers and an inability to sustain drives.
Drive & Momentum Analysis
Key moments that shifted momentum in favour of the Steelers:
The game began with the Steelers kicking a 52-yard field goal (Boswell) to take a 3-0 lead.
Raiders responded late in the first quarter via Mattison’s 3-yard rushing TD to lead 7-3.
On the final play of the half, Fields faked a hand-off on play-action, sprinted left for a 3-yard rushing touchdown and Pittsburgh took a 12-7 lead at the half.
In the 3rd quarter, Harris broke off a 36-yard rushing TD, pushing the lead to 22-7.
Fields’ second rushing touchdown (7 yards) early in the 4th made it 29-7.
Raiders scored late via Wilkerson’s TD, but the Steelers answered with another field goal (Boswell 36 yards with 3:55 left) to seal the 32-13 margin.
From these sequences we can infer:
The Steelers’ ability to strike just before halftime and early in the second half changed the momentum.
The Raiders’ early lead did not hold; the Steelers responded methodically.
Multiple scoring methods by Pittsburgh (rushing TDs, field goals) show offensive versatility.
The Raiders’ lone late TD didn’t shift momentum—it was too little, too late.
Who Dominated? Subjective & Objective View
Based on the data and flow of the game, it is clear that the Steelers dominated this matchup. Let’s break that conclusion down analytically:
Why the Steelers dominated:
They held the Raiders to just 13 points despite the Raiders gaining nearly as many yards (275). This indicates the Steelers’ defence was effective in red-zone or scoring-drive scenarios.
Pittsburgh scored through both the run game (Harris) and QB rushes (Fields) and used the kicker to extend the lead — showing a balanced and complete offensive approach.
The Steelers dictated the tempo: greater time of possession (~31:51 vs ~28:09) and key drives when it mattered.
The scoring differential (19 points) is more telling than yardage differential (~18 yards) — in terms of dominance, finishing drives is what counts.
Momentum swings tilted early towards Pittsburgh (just before and after halftime) which often defines dominance in football.
Why the Raiders fell short:
Despite accumulating yardage (275 yards), they converted that into only 13 points — fails in efficiency.
Turnover(s) (the interception) and inability to sustain scoring drives hurt them.
The Steelers responded quickly to whenever the Raiders tried to gain or maintain a lead, eroding any advantage.
Late scoring didn’t matter — when the opponent controls the game in the middle quarters, the late effort is too little.
Caveats & nuance:
Yardage difference was small, suggesting the Raiders weren’t completely overwhelmed in terms of movement — but football is about points, not yards.
The Steelers had more penalties and slightly more penalty yards (50 vs 42) — though that didn’t derail them.
The statistical dominance is more subtle than a blow-out yardage gap; it’s in timing, conversion, and scoring efficiency.
Thus: While the Raiders showed some competitiveness, the Steelers executed better at the crucial junctures — meaning they dominated effectively.
Also Read – Nick Dougherty & Selena Oliver
What the Numbers Reveal: Deeper Insights
Efficiency & Scoring Drives
The Steelers turned key opportunities into touchdowns and field goals.
The Raiders stalled when they needed to convert yardage into points.
Example: Raiders got the first TD, but the Steelers closed the half with one, overtook them early in the second half, and never relinquished control.
Running game superiority
Harris’s 106 yards and long touchdown (36 yards) shows Pittsburgh’s run game was a weapon.
Fields’s rushing yards and TDs added an extra dimension the defence had to account for.
The Raiders’ rushing output is less highlighted — their success relied more on passing or short runs, with fewer game-changing plays.
Pass game & QB impact
Steelers: Fields threw for 145 yards (modest) but his rushing ability and the run game created openings.
Raiders: O’Connell threw for 227 yards, one TD, but an interception and perhaps limited big chunk plays hindered the conversion.
Turnovers and defensive impact
While a singular interception (or more) is noted, the impact of not giving up points was huge on Pittsburgh’s side.
The Steelers’ defence may have bent but didn’t break; the Raiders didn’t cash in when they had chances.
Special teams & scoring consistency
Boswell’s four field goals illustrate the Steelers were disciplined and consistent when the touchdown wasn’t available.
The Raiders lacked equivalent reliability in the kicking/field-goal domain in this game (or at least, didn’t convert as many).
Implications & What It Means Going Forward
For the Steelers
This performance suggests the Steelers have the capacity to control key matchups even against historically tough rivals.
Their balanced offense, combined with opportunistic defence and consistent special teams, is a recipe for success.
The ability of Fields to run and pass gives them flexibility. Harris’s effectiveness in the ground attack cannot be understated.
For the Raiders
This game highlights where they need improvement: converting yardage into points, protecting the ball, sustaining drives.
While yardage was respectable, the defensive lapses and inability to stop Pittsburgh in crucial moments is concerning.
They must perhaps work on red-zone offence, or third-down conversion, to ensure yardage turns into scoring.
Rivalry & momentum
Historically the Raiders held the upper hand, but Pittsburgh’s victory here tilts psychological edge somewhat.
Going forward, each meeting will draw from that legacy — the Steelers now can lean on this as evidence of progress.
Statistical Appendix (Selected Figures)
Steelers total net yards: 293.
Raiders total net yards: 275.
Time of possession: Steelers ~31:51; Raiders ~28:09.
Penalties: Steelers 7 for 50; Raiders 4 for 42.
Najee Harris: 106 rushing yards, 1 TD.
Justin Fields: 145 passing yards; 59 rushing yards; 2 rushing TDs.
Aidan O’Connell: 227 passing yards; 1 TD; 1 INT.
Final Score: Steelers 32, Raiders 13.
FAQs
Q1: What was the turning point of the game?
A1: The key turning point came just before halftime when Justin Fields rushed for a 3-yard touchdown on a play-action fake, giving the Steelers a lead they would not relinquish. The momentum shifted visibly then.
Q2: Was the yardage difference large?
A2: No — the Steelers had 293 net yards vs the Raiders’ 275, a difference of only 18 yards. However, the scoring difference (19 points) was much larger. This illustrates that yardage alone doesn’t determine dominance — finishing drives does.
Q3: Which player had the best performance?
A3: While multiple players stood out, Najee Harris’s 106 rushing yards and a major long touchdown run, and Justin Fields’s two rushing touchdowns plus 59 rushing yards (in addition to his passing) make them top candidates for best performance on the Steelers.
Q4: Did penalties affect the outcome?
A4: The Steelers were penalised more (7 for 50 yards) than the Raiders (4 for 42 yards), but the difference wasn’t enough to reverse the momentum or scoring. Pittsburgh still maintained control despite the penalty burden.
Q5: What weaknesses did the Raiders show?
A5: The Raiders showed weakness in converting yardage into points, in dealing with momentum shifts (especially after the halftime turnover), and in avoiding turnovers (O’Connell’s interception tuned the tide). They also failed to stop the Steelers’ run game when it mattered.
Q6: Does this result impact the rivalry between the two teams?
A6: Yes. In a rivalry as tight as this one (17–16 series lead for Raiders historically) each win carries extra weight. This dominant showing by Pittsburgh helps shift the psychological edge slightly in their favour and could influence future matchups.
Q7: How did special teams play a role?
A7: The Steelers’ kicker, Chris Boswell, made four field goals including from long range (52, 49, 37, 36 yards), which kept the scoreboard ticking and denied the Raiders any comeback. Special teams therefore were a reliable component of Pittsburgh’s dominance.
Conclusion
The Steelers’ 32-13 win over the Raiders was not merely a win — it was a statement. Despite a modest yardage margin, Pittsburgh converted at a higher rate, executed in the clutch, and controlled the game when it mattered most. The Raiders, while showing some promise in yardage gained, failed to turn that into adequate points, failed to halt Pittsburgh’s momentum swings, and ultimately were out-managed.
