Player Stats

Alex Square College Stats

Career production, season-by-season totals, and the selected-season workbench are grouped here for stat-first searches.

Stat Footprint

Career production snapshot

Scrimmage yards
49
Rushing yards
40
Receiving yards
9

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesScrimmageRush YdsRec YdsTDOverall
2006 Regular SeasonColorado State1440034.6
2007 Regular SeasonColorado State00000-
2008 PostseasonColorado State6000050
2008 Regular SeasonColorado State6000050
2009 Regular SeasonColorado State545369042.7

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2008 Postseason

Colorado State paired 0 primary output with — efficiency.

Supporting note

2009 Regular Season role shape

backfield-heavy usage with 43.8 efficiency.

Supporting note

Career value cooled off

2009 Regular Season fell back from the prior stop by season value score.

Supporting note

Peak game by takeover score: TCU

Loss with 38 yards from scrimmage and efficient touch value. It landed in the 100th percentile of the selected season.

Analysis workspace

Season Workbench

Filter the strongest season sample, inspect game-level shape, and compare the statistical profile without scrolling through the full player page.

Season Explorer

Understand the selected season before dropping into the full game log.

2009 Regular Season · Colorado State

Games

5

Scrimmage Yards / G

9

Efficiency

43.8

Usage

4.8

Consistency

13.3

Best Game by takeover score

TCU

Hover a point or expand a game row to keep the active game context visible here.

Active game

Hover over a point

Hover or select a game to keep its context visible here without the page shifting around.

Game-by-Game Trend

Follow how the selected stat changes from one game to the next. Spikes mark standout outings, while dips show quieter weeks.

12345

Chronological game order.

Game by game trend chart. Nevada: -2. Utah: 9. TCU: 38. UNLV: 0. New Mexico: 0

Volume vs Efficiency

Each dot is a game. Farther right means the player carried more of the workload, and higher means they were more efficient with those chances.

Low volumeHigh quality

High volumeHigh quality

Low volumeLower quality

High volumeLower quality

Volume on the x-axis, quality on the y-axis.

Volume versus efficiency scatter chart. Nevada: 3 by 0. Utah: 1 by 75. TCU: 7 by 56.5

Split Comparison

Compare how this player performed across different situations. "Games" shows how many matchups are included in each split.

Wins-2 · Games = 1 · -13.8 vs Losses
Losses11.8 · Games = 4 · +13.8 vs Wins