Usage Score
7.7
Player Dossier
2008-2011Bowling Green
Adrian Hodges
WR • 5'10" • Jacksonville, FL, USA
Reliable chain-moverPossession profile
Adrian Hodges reads as a reliable chain-mover based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Efficiency
62.6
Consistency
27.9
Season Value
36.5
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2009 Postseason · Bowling Green
0809091011
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 1
- Seasons Tracked
- 5
- Program Path
- Bowling Green
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: Wyoming
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.
Adrian Hodges, WR. Best season Best season by value score: 2009 Postseason · Bowling Green. Adrian Hodges reads as a reliable chain-mover based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Adrian Hodges played WR for Bowling Green. Across 4 tracked seasons, Adrian Hodges recorded 25 rushing yards, 821 receiving yards, and 4 touchdowns. His top tracked season came in 2009 with Bowling Green.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2009 Postseason
Bowling Green paired 417 primary output with 61.9 efficiency.
Supporting note
2011 Regular Season role shape
target-driven usage with 62.6 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value stayed steady
2011 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: Wyoming
Loss 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.
2011 Regular Season · Bowling Green
Games
9
Receiving Yards / G
21.9
Efficiency
62.6
Usage
7.7
Consistency
27.9
Best Game by takeover score
Northern Illinois
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.
Chronological game order.
Game by game trend chart. Idaho: 33. Unknown: 6. Wyoming: 90. Miami (OH): 6. West Virginia: 2. Western Michigan: 17. Toledo: 27. Temple: 11. Northern Illinois: 5
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. Idaho: 3 by 73.3. Unknown: 1 by 40. Wyoming: 4 by 100. Miami (OH): 1 by 40. West Virginia: 1 by 13.3. Western Michigan: 1 by 100. Toledo: 2 by 90. Temple: 1 by 73.3. Northern Illinois: 1 by 33.3
Split Comparison
Compare how this player performed across different situations. "Games" shows how many matchups are included in each split.
Wins16.7 · Games = 3 · -11.5 vs Losses
Losses28.2 · Games = 5 · +11.5 vs Wins
First Half27.4 · Games = 5 · +12.4 vs Second Half
Second Half15 · Games = 4 · -12.4 vs First Half
Game Log
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
9 games
Featured metric
Receiving Yards
Top game by takeover score
Wyoming
Best efficiency game
100 vs Western Michigan
| Result | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wed 11/9 | vs Northern Illinois | L 14-45 | — | 1 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 5 |
| Sat 10/22 | vs Temple | W 13-10 | — | 1 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 0 | 11 |
| Sat 10/15 | vs Toledo | L 21-28 | — | 2 | 27 | 13.5 | 13.50 | 0 | 15 |
| Sat 10/8 | @ Western Michigan | L 21-45 | — | 1 | 17 | 17 | 17 | 0 | 17 |
| Sat 10/1 | @ West Virginia | L 10-55 | — | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| Sat 9/24 | @ Miami (OH) | W 37-23 | — | 1 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 0 | 6 |
| Sat 9/17 | vs Wyoming | L 27-28 | — | 4 | 90 | 22.5 | 22.50 | 0 | 56 |
| Sat 9/10 | vs Unknown | — | — | 1 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 0 | 6 |
| Fri 9/2 | @ Idaho | W 32-15 | — | 3 | 33 | 11 | 11 | 0 | 22 |
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
Bowling Green
2008-2011
Opening stop
Season Progression
20082009200920102011
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2008 Regular Season | Bowling Green | 61 | 50 | 5.2 | — |
| 2009 Postseason | Bowling Green | 417 | 61.9 | 13.3 | 356 |
| 2009 Regular Season | Bowling Green | 417 | 61.9 | 13.3 | 0 |
| 2010 Regular Season | Bowling Green | 146 | 53.1 | 9.5 | -271 |
| 2011 Regular Season | Bowling Green | 197 | 62.6 | 7.7 | 51 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
Wyoming
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
90
Primary metric
90 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#2
Eastern Michigan
46
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
46 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#3
Western Michigan
35
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
35 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#4
Ball State
68
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
68 receiving yards with a 64.8 efficiency score.
#5
Kent State
73
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
73 receiving yards with a 60.8 efficiency score.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2009 Postseason · Bowling Green
417 primary output · 61.9 efficiency · 13.3 usage
56.4
#2
2009 Regular Season · Bowling Green
56.4
417 primary · 61.9 efficiency · 13.3 usage
#3
2010 Regular Season · Bowling Green
40
146 primary · 53.1 efficiency · 9.5 usage
Milestones
0
100+ receiving yards
2
8+ catch outings
0
2+ TD games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Recruit Profile
2★
Class 2007 · Rating 0.7444
First Coast · Jacksonville, FL
- Committed To
- Bowling Green
- Commit Date
- Jan 1, 2007
Career Facts
1
Career teams
5
Seasons tracked
821
Career Receiving Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 5 tracked seasons, 32 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.