Usage Score
18
Player Dossier
2007-2010Texas Tech
Lyle Leong
WR • 6'1" • Abilene, TX, USA
Vertical playmakerExplosive finisher
Lyle Leong reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Efficiency
79.1
Consistency
63
Season Value
65
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2010 Postseason · Texas Tech
0707080809091010
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 1
- Seasons Tracked
- 8
- Program Path
- Texas Tech
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: SMU
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.
Lyle Leong, WR. Best season Best season by value score: 2010 Postseason · Texas Tech. Lyle Leong reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2010 Postseason
Texas Tech paired 926 primary output with 79.1 efficiency.
Supporting note
2010 Postseason role shape
target-driven usage with 79.1 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: SMU
Win with an explosive receiving profile. It landed in the 100th percentile of the selected season.
Analysis workspace
Season Workbench
Filter the strongest season sample, inspect game-level shape, and then drop into the full log without losing the story of the year.
Season Explorer
Understand the selected season before dropping into the full game log.
2010 Postseason · Texas Tech
Games
13
Receiving Yards / G
71.2
Efficiency
79.1
Usage
18
Consistency
63
Best Game by takeover score
Northwestern
Hover a point or expand a game row to keep the active game context visible here.
Game-by-Game Trend
12345678910111213
Chronological game order.
Game by game trend chart. Northwestern: 118. SMU: 142. New Mexico: 75. Texas: 34. Iowa State: 125. Baylor: 85. Oklahoma State: 28. Colorado: 32. Texas A&M: 67. Missouri: 123. Oklahoma: 14. Unknown: 37. Houston: 46
Volume vs Efficiency
Low volume / high quality
High volume / high quality
Low volume / lower quality
High volume / lower quality
Volume on the x-axis, quality on the y-axis.
Volume versus efficiency scatter chart. Northwestern: 10 by 78.7. SMU: 11 by 86.1. New Mexico: 5 by 100. Texas: 4 by 56.7. Iowa State: 9 by 92.6. Baylor: 5 by 100. Oklahoma State: 3 by 62.2. Colorado: 5 by 42.7. Texas A&M: 5 by 89.3. Missouri: 9 by 91.1. Oklahoma: 2 by 46.7. Unknown: 3 by 82.2. Houston: 3 by 100
Split Comparison
Wins88.7 · n=7 · +35.1 vs Losses
Losses53.6 · n=5 · -35.1 vs Wins
First Half86.7 · n=7 · +33.5 vs Second Half
Second Half53.2 · n=6 · -33.5 vs First Half
Game Log
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
13 games
Featured metric
Receiving Yards
Top game by takeover score
SMU
Best efficiency game
100 vs Houston
| Result | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 1/1 | vs Northwestern100 receiving yards · High volume | W 45-38 | — | 10 | 118 | 11.8 | 11.80 | 2 | 30 |
| Sun 11/28 | vs Houston | W 35-20 | — | 3 | 46 | 15.3 | 15.30 | 1 | 24 |
| Sat 11/20 | vs Unknown | — | — | 3 | 37 | 12.3 | 12.30 | 1 | 23 |
| Sat 11/13 | @ Oklahoma | L 7-45 | — | 2 | 14 | 7 | 7 | 0 | 9 |
| Sun 11/7 | vs Missouri100 receiving yards · High volume | W 24-17 | — | 9 | 123 | 13.7 | 13.70 | 2 | 36 |
| Sat 10/30 | @ Texas A&M2+ TD | L 27-45 | — | 5 | 67 | 13.4 | 13.40 | 3 | 35 |
| Sat 10/23 | @ Colorado | W 27-24 | — | 5 | 32 | 6.4 | 6.40 | 1 | 11 |
| Sat 10/16 | vs Oklahoma State | L 17-34 | — | 3 | 28 | 9.3 | 9.30 | 0 | 13 |
| Sat 10/9 | vs Baylor | W 45-38 | — | 5 | 85 | 17 | 17 | 0 | 40 |
| Sat 10/2 | @ Iowa State100 receiving yards · High volume | L 38-52 | — | 9 | 125 | 13.9 | 13.90 | 3 | 26 |
| Sun 9/19 | vs Texas | L 14-24 | — | 4 | 34 | 8.5 | 8.50 | 1 | 15 |
| Sun 9/12 | @ New Mexico2+ TD | W 52-17 | — | 5 | 75 | 15 | 15 | 2 | 25 |
| Sun 9/5 | vs SMU100 receiving yards · High volume | W 35-27 | — | 11 | 142 | 12.9 | 12.90 | 3 | 34 |
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
Texas Tech
2007-2010
Opening stop
Season Progression
20072007200820082009200920102010
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2007 Postseason | Texas Tech | 174 | 71.7 | 4.6 | — |
| 2007 Regular Season | Texas Tech | 174 | 71.7 | 4.6 | 0 |
| 2008 Postseason | Texas Tech | 206 | 71.2 | 4.4 | 32 |
| 2008 Regular Season | Texas Tech | 206 | 71.2 | 4.4 | 0 |
| 2009 Postseason | Texas Tech | 571 | 77.4 | 10.1 | 365 |
| 2009 Regular Season | Texas Tech | 571 | 77.4 | 10.1 | 0 |
| 2010 Postseason | Texas Tech | 926 | 79.1 | 18 | 355 |
| 2010 Regular Season | Texas Tech | 926 | 79.1 | 18 | 0 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
SMU
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
142
Primary metric
142 receiving yards with a 86.1 efficiency score.
#2
Rice
117
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
117 receiving yards with a 86.7 efficiency score.
#3
Missouri
123
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
123 receiving yards with a 91.1 efficiency score.
#4
Iowa State
125
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
125 receiving yards with a 92.6 efficiency score.
#5
SMU
43
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
43 receiving yards with a 95.6 efficiency score.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2010 Postseason · Texas Tech
926 primary output · 79.1 efficiency · 18 usage
65
#2
2010 Regular Season · Texas Tech
65
926 primary · 79.1 efficiency · 18 usage
#3
2009 Postseason · Texas Tech
54.7
571 primary · 77.4 efficiency · 10.1 usage
Milestones
5
100+ receiving yards
5
8+ catch outings
10
2+ TD games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Recruit Profile
3★
Class 2006 · Rating 0.8144
Abilene · Abilene, TX
- Committed To
- Texas Tech
- Commit Date
- Jan 1, 2006
Career Facts
1
Career teams
8
Seasons tracked
1,877
Career Receiving Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 8 tracked seasons, 45 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.