Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2010 Postseason
Virginia Tech paired 3,402 primary output with 66.9 efficiency.
Player Stats
Career production, season-by-season totals, and the selected-season workbench are grouped here for stat-first searches.
Stat Footprint
Season Ledger
| Season | Team | Games | Total Offense | Pass Yds | Rush Yds | TD | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2007 Postseason | Virginia Tech | 11 | 9 | 11 | -2 | 0 | 51.1 |
| 2007 Regular Season | Virginia Tech | 11 | 1,338 | 916 | 422 | 11 | 51.1 |
| 2008 Postseason | Virginia Tech | 12 | 187 | 140 | 47 | 1 | 59.5 |
| 2008 Regular Season | Virginia Tech | 12 | 1,587 | 896 | 691 | 8 | 59.5 |
| 2009 Postseason | Virginia Tech | 13 | 235 | 209 | 26 | 1 | 67.9 |
| 2009 Regular Season | Virginia Tech | 13 | 2,446 | 2,102 | 344 | 17 | 67.9 |
| 2010 Postseason | Virginia Tech | 14 | 244 | 222 | 22 | 1 | 78.5 |
| 2010 Regular Season | Virginia Tech | 14 | 3,158 | 2,521 | 637 | 28 | 78.5 |
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2010 Postseason
Virginia Tech paired 3,402 primary output with 66.9 efficiency.
Supporting note
2010 Postseason role shape
pass-led usage with 66.9 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: Central Michigan
Win with balanced pass-rush production and strong creator value. It landed in the 85.7th percentile of the selected season.
Analysis workspace
Filter the strongest season sample, inspect game-level shape, and compare the statistical profile without scrolling through the full player page.
Understand the selected season before dropping into the full game log.
Games
14
Primary Metric / G
243
Efficiency
66.9
Usage
26.7
Consistency
87.6
Best Game by takeover score
Central Michigan
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. Stanford: 244. Boise State: 259. James Madison: 210. East Carolina: 231. Boston College: 247. NC State: 244. Central Michigan: 288. Wake Forest: 323. Duke: 327. Georgia Tech: 194. North Carolina: 246. Miami: 102. Virginia: 200. Florida State: 287
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. Stanford: 47 by 53. Boise State: 38 by 71.1. James Madison: 29 by 67.1. East Carolina: 25 by 71.4. Boston College: 30 by 65.6. NC State: 40 by 62.9. Central Michigan: 32 by 78.7. Wake Forest: 34 by 76.2. Duke: 23 by 88.7. Georgia Tech: 34 by 63.3. North Carolina: 36 by 55.1. Miami: 24 by 53.5. Virginia: 30 by 63.6. Florida State: 39 by 66.1
Compare how this player performed across different situations. "Games" shows how many matchups are included in each split.
Next best actions
Move from the player story into the game log, career arc, team context, and video shelf.