Player Stats

Landon Cox 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

Receiving yards
1,109
Receptions
98
Touchdowns
8

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesRecRec YdsTDOverall
2007 Regular SeasonNorthern Illinois2219040.6
2008 PostseasonNorthern Illinois9215042.9
2008 Regular SeasonNorthern Illinois914111142.9
2009 PostseasonNorthern Illinois1217081
2009 Regular SeasonNorthern Illinois1244528481
2010 PostseasonNorthern Illinois13434068.9
2010 Regular SeasonNorthern Illinois1331395368.9

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2009 Postseason

Northern Illinois paired 535 primary output with 68.8 efficiency.

Supporting note

2010 Postseason role shape

target-driven usage with 73.8 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: Illinois

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 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 · Northern Illinois

Games

13

Receiving Yards / G

33

Efficiency

73.8

Usage

17.7

Consistency

62.5

Best Game by takeover score

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.

12345678910111213

Chronological game order.

Game by game trend chart. Fresno State: 34. Iowa State: 0. Illinois: 74. Minnesota: 19. Akron: 58. Temple: 52. Buffalo: 41. Central Michigan: 34. Western Michigan: 12. Toledo: 12. Ball State: 60. Eastern Michigan: 23. Miami (OH): 10

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. Fresno State: 4 by 56.7. Iowa State: 1 by 0. Illinois: 6 by 82.2. Minnesota: 1 by 100. Akron: 2 by 100. Temple: 5 by 69.3. Buffalo: 3 by 91.1. Central Michigan: 4 by 56.7. Western Michigan: 1 by 80. Toledo: 1 by 80. Ball State: 4 by 100. Eastern Michigan: 2 by 76.7. Miami (OH): 1 by 66.7

Split Comparison

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

Wins34.5 · Games = 10 · +6.5 vs Losses
Losses28 · Games = 3 · -6.5 vs Wins