Usage Score
15.6
Player Dossier
2014-2017Rice
Emmanuel Ellerbee
LB • 6'1" • 235 lbs • Houston, TX, USA
Ball-hunting defenderSplash play profile
Emmanuel Ellerbee shows a ball-hunting defender profile with 46.9 disruption score.
Efficiency
52.2
Consistency
49.3
Season Value
32.1
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2016 Regular Season · Rice
14151617
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 1
- Seasons Tracked
- 4
- Program Path
- Rice
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: North Texas
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.
Emmanuel Ellerbee, LB. Best season Best season by value score: 2016 Regular Season · Rice. Emmanuel Ellerbee shows a ball-hunting defender profile with 46.9 disruption score.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2016 Regular Season
Rice paired 13.5 primary output with 52.2 efficiency.
Supporting note
2016 Regular Season role shape
impact-led usage with 52.2 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value cooled off
2017 Regular Season fell back from the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: North Texas
Loss with 3.5 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet. 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.
2016 Regular Season · Rice
Games
11
Havoc Plays / G
1.2
Efficiency
52.2
Usage
15.6
Consistency
49.3
Best Game by takeover score
Stanford
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. Western Kentucky: 0. Army: 1. Baylor: 0. North Texas: 3.5. Southern Miss: 3. UTSA: 2. Unknown: 1. Louisiana Tech: 0. Charlotte: 1. UTEP: 2. Stanford: 0
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. Western Kentucky: 8 by 33.3. Army: 9 by 47.5. Baylor: 14 by 50. North Texas: 11 by 80.8. Southern Miss: 10 by 71.7. UTSA: 12 by 70. Louisiana Tech: 7 by 29.2. Charlotte: 16 by 60. UTEP: 10 by 61.7. Stanford: 14 by 50
Split Comparison
Compare how this player performed across different situations. "Games" shows how many matchups are included in each split.
Wins1.5 · Games = 2 · +0.3 vs Losses
Losses1.2 · Games = 8 · -0.3 vs Wins
First Half1.6 · Games = 6 · +0.8 vs Second Half
Second Half0.8 · Games = 5 · -0.8 vs First Half
Game Log
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
11 games
Featured metric
Havoc Plays
Top game by takeover score
North Texas
Best efficiency game
80.8 vs North Texas
| Result | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sun 11/27 | @ Stanford10+ tackles | L 17-41 | 14 | 8 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 11/19 | vs UTEP10+ tackles | W 44-24 | 10 | 4 | — | 1 | 0 | — | 1 | — | — |
| Sat 11/12 | @ Charlotte10+ tackles | W 22-21 | 16 | 11 | — | 1 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 10/29 | @ Louisiana Tech | L 16-61 | 7 | 4 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 10/22 | vs Unknown | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1 | — | — | — |
| Sat 10/15 | vs UTSA10+ tackles | L 13-14 | 12 | 6 | — | 1 | 1 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 10/1 | @ Southern Miss10+ tackles | L 28-44 | 10 | 8 | — | 1.50 | 1.50 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 9/24 | vs North Texas10+ tackles · Splash game | L 35-42 | 11 | 4 | — | 2.50 | 1 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 9/17 | vs Baylor10+ tackles | L 10-38 | 14 | 13 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 9/10 | @ Army | L 14-31 | 9 | 7 | — | 1 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Fri 9/2 | @ Western Kentucky | L 14-46 | 8 | 2 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
Rice
2014-2017
Opening stop
Season Progression
2014201520162017
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2014 Regular Season | Rice | 0 | — | — | — |
| 2015 Regular Season | Rice | 0 | — | — | 0 |
| 2016 Regular Season | Rice | 13.5 | 52.2 | 15.6 | 13.5 |
| 2017 Regular Season | Rice | 10 | 46.9 | 11 | -3.5 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
North Texas
Loss with 3.5 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
3.5
Primary metric
3.5 disruption/tackle impact with 66.4 takeover score.
#2
UTEP
3
Primary metric
Win with 3 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
3 disruption/tackle impact with 62.8 takeover score.
#3
Southern Miss
3
Primary metric
Loss with 3 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
3 disruption/tackle impact with 60.9 takeover score.
#4
Old Dominion
2
Primary metric
Loss with 2 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
2 disruption/tackle impact with 51.1 takeover score.
#5
UTSA
2
Primary metric
Loss with 2 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
2 disruption/tackle impact with 47.9 takeover score.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2016 Regular Season · Rice
13.5 primary output · 52.2 efficiency · 15.6 usage
32.1
#2
2017 Regular Season · Rice
24.3
10 primary · 46.9 efficiency · 11 usage
#3
2014 Regular Season · Rice
—
0 primary · — efficiency · — usage
Milestones
3
Impact games
2
Splash games
13
10+ tackle games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Recruit Profile
2★
Class 2014 · Rating 0.7685
Strake Jesuit · Houston, TX
- Committed To
- Rice
- Commit Date
- Jan 1, 2014
Career Facts
1
Career teams
4
Seasons tracked
231
Career Tackles
Data Context
Coverage spans 4 tracked seasons, 23 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.