Usage Score
28.9
Player Dossier
2007-2010Miami (OH)
WR • 6'1" • Reynoldsburg, OH, USA
Armand Robinson reads as a alpha target based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Usage Score
28.9
Efficiency
74.3
Consistency
70.3
Season Value
68.4
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by Season Value: 2010 Postseason · Miami (OH)
Snapshot
Scouting Read
Best season and peak-game context are pinned here so the rest of the page can stay analytical without losing the headline story.
Armand Robinson, WR. Best season Best season by Season Value: 2010 Postseason · Miami (OH). Armand Robinson reads as a alpha target based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Armand Robinson played WR for Miami (OH). Across 4 tracked seasons, Armand Robinson recorded 54 rushing yards, 2,478 receiving yards, and 15 touchdowns. His top tracked season came in 2010 with Miami (OH).
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2010 Postseason
Miami (OH) paired 1,062 primary output with 74.3 efficiency.
Supporting note
2010 Postseason role shape
target-driven usage with 74.3 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value stayed steady
2010 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: Northern Illinois
Win with an explosive receiving profile. It landed in the 100th percentile of the selected season.
Analysis workspace
Filter the strongest season sample, inspect game-level shape, and then drop into the full log without losing the story of the year.
Understand the selected season before dropping into the full game log.
Games
14
Receiving Yards / G
75.9
Efficiency
74.3
Usage
28.9
Consistency
70.3
Best Game by takeover score
Northern Illinois
Active game
Hover over a point
Hover or select a game to keep its context visible here without the page shifting around.
Follow how the selected stat changes from one game to the next. Spikes mark standout outings, while dips show quieter weeks.
Chronological game order.
Game by game trend chart. Middle Tennessee: 81. Florida: 111. Eastern Michigan: 89. Colorado State: 83. Missouri: 99. Kent State: 28. Cincinnati: 87. Central Michigan: 102. Ohio: 15. Buffalo: 25. Bowling Green: 57. Akron: 66. Temple: 43. Northern Illinois: 176
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. Middle Tennessee: 4 by 100. Florida: 11 by 67.3. Eastern Michigan: 7 by 84.8. Colorado State: 4 by 100. Missouri: 10 by 66. Kent State: 6 by 31.1. Cincinnati: 9 by 64.4. Central Michigan: 9 by 75.6. Ohio: 1 by 100. Buffalo: 3 by 55.6. Bowling Green: 5 by 76. Akron: 5 by 88. Temple: 6 by 47.8. Northern Illinois: 14 by 83.8
Compare how this player performed across different situations. "Games" shows how many matchups are included in each split.
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
14 games
Featured metric
Receiving Yards
Top game by takeover score
Northern Illinois
Best efficiency game
100 vs Middle Tennessee
| Result | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fri 1/7 | vs Middle Tennessee | W 35-21 | — | 4 | 81 | 13 | 20.30 | 0 | 70 |
| Sat 12/4 | vs Northern Illinois100 receiving yards · High volume | W 26-21 | — | 14 | 176 | 12.6 | 12.60 | 1 | 33 |
| Wed 11/24 | vs Temple | W 23-3 | — | 6 | 43 | 7.2 | 7.20 | 1 | 23 |
| Wed 11/17 | @ Akron | W 19-14 | — | 5 | 66 | 12 | 13.20 | 0 | 27 |
| Thu 11/11 | @ Bowling Green | W 24-21 | — | 5 | 57 | 11.4 | 11.40 | 0 | 19 |
| Sat 10/30 | @ Buffalo | W 21-9 | — | 3 | 25 | 8.3 | 8.30 | 0 | 10 |
| Sat 10/23 | vs Ohio | L 13-34 | — | 1 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 1 | 15 |
| Sat 10/16 | @ Central Michigan100 receiving yards · High volume | W 27-20 | — | 9 | 102 | 10.7 | 11.30 | 0 | 28 |
| Sat 10/9 | @ CincinnatiHigh volume | L 3-45 | — | 9 | 87 | 9.7 | 9.70 | 0 | 15 |
| Sat 10/2 | vs Kent State | W 27-21 | — | 6 | 28 | 4.9 | 4.70 | 1 | 15 |
| Sat 9/25 | @ MissouriHigh volume | L 13-51 | — | 10 | 99 | 9.9 | 9.90 | 0 | 45 |
| Sat 9/18 | vs Colorado State | W 31-10 | — | 4 | 83 | 20.6 | 20.80 | 1 | 62 |
| Sat 9/11 | vs Eastern Michigan | W 28-21 | — | 7 | 89 | 12.7 | 12.70 | 1 | 24 |
| Sat 9/4 | @ Florida100 receiving yards · High volume | L 12-34 | — | 11 | 111 | 7.4 | 10.10 | 0 | 19 |
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
Miami (OH)
2007-2010
Opening stop
Season Value Progression
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2007 Regular Season | Miami (OH) | 399 | 76.8 | 13.7 | — |
| 2008 Regular Season | Miami (OH) | 229 | 74.2 | 8.6 | -170 |
| 2009 Regular Season | Miami (OH) | 788 | 75.6 | 24.1 | 559 |
| 2010 Postseason | Miami (OH) | 1,062 | 74.3 | 28.9 | 274 |
| 2010 Regular Season | Miami (OH) | 1,062 | 74.3 | 28.9 | 0 |
#1 Featured game
Northern Illinois
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
176
Primary metric
176 receiving yards with a 83.8 efficiency score.
#2
Northern Illinois
123
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
123 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#3
Kent State
86
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
86 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#4
Charleston Southern
79
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
79 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#5
Kent State
115
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
115 receiving yards with a 85.2 efficiency score.
#1 Season by Season Value
2010 Postseason · Miami (OH)
1,062 primary output · 74.3 efficiency · 28.9 usage
68.4
#2
2010 Regular Season · Miami (OH)
68.4
1,062 primary · 74.3 efficiency · 28.9 usage
#3
2009 Regular Season · Miami (OH)
60.6
788 primary · 75.6 efficiency · 24.1 usage
7
100+ receiving yards
9
8+ catch outings
2
2+ TD games
Career Facts
1
Career teams
5
Seasons tracked
2,478
Career Receiving Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 5 tracked seasons, 44 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.
Next best actions
Move from the player story into the game log, career arc, team context, and video shelf.