Player Stats

Charles Clay 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
3,455
Rushing yards
911
Receiving yards
2,544
Touchdowns
38

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesScrimmageRush YdsRec YdsTDOverall
2007 PostseasonTulsa141184969173.8
2007 Regular SeasonTulsa141,210255955773.8
2008 PostseasonTulsa12-70-7038.7
2008 Regular SeasonTulsa126161454711138.7
2009 Regular SeasonTulsa127662365301250.1
2010 PostseasonTulsa131006238050.3
2010 Regular SeasonTulsa13652164488750.3

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2007 Postseason

Tulsa paired 1,328 primary output with 73.4 efficiency.

Supporting note

2010 Postseason role shape

backfield-heavy usage with 66.5 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: Bowling Green

Win with 108 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.

2010 Postseason · Tulsa

Games

13

Scrimmage Yards / G

57.8

Efficiency

66.5

Usage

9.5

Consistency

51

Best Game by takeover score

Bowling Green

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.

12345678910111213

Chronological game order.

Game by game trend chart. Hawai'i: 100. East Carolina: 86. Bowling Green: 108. Oklahoma State: 18. Central Arkansas: 39. Memphis: 34. SMU: 30. Tulane: 96. Notre Dame: 6. Rice: 28. Houston: 75. UTEP: 99. Southern Miss: 33

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. Hawai'i: 6 by 100. East Carolina: 8 by 89.6. Bowling Green: 8 by 100. Oklahoma State: 4 by 46.9. Central Arkansas: 3 by 68.8. Memphis: 7 by 26.5. SMU: 5 by 31.3. Tulane: 7 by 70.8. Notre Dame: 1 by 50. Rice: 3 by 38.9. Houston: 11 by 67.2. UTEP: 12 by 74. Southern Miss: 2 by 100

Split Comparison

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

Wins61.8 · Games = 10 · +17.1 vs Losses
Losses44.7 · Games = 3 · -17.1 vs Wins