Player Stats

Jontrell Rocquemore 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

Tackles
109
TFL
9
Sacks
3
QB hurries
5
Passes defended
2
Touchdowns
2

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesTacklesTFLSacksQB HurPDTDOverall
2014 Regular SeasonUtah State00-0--0-
2015 Regular SeasonUtah State10-0--150
2016 Regular SeasonUtah State9401.5111044.3
2017 PostseasonUtah State61-0--040.1
2017 Regular SeasonUtah State612-0--040.1
2018 PostseasonUtah State123-0--064.1
2018 Regular SeasonUtah State12537.5241164.1

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2018 Postseason

Utah State paired 17.5 primary output with 34.5 efficiency.

Supporting note

2018 Postseason role shape

impact-led usage with 34.5 efficiency.

Supporting note

Career value stayed steady

2018 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.

Supporting note

Peak game by takeover score: BYU

Win with 4 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 compare the statistical profile without scrolling through the full player page.

Season Explorer

Understand the selected season before dropping into the full game log.

2018 Postseason · Utah State

Games

12

Havoc Plays / G

1.5

Efficiency

34.5

Usage

9.4

Consistency

43.9

Best Game by takeover score

BYU

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.

123456789101112

Chronological game order.

Game by game trend chart. North Texas: 0. Michigan State: 2. New Mexico State: 0.5. Tennessee Tech: 2. Air Force: 2. BYU: 4. UNLV: 1. Wyoming: 1. New Mexico: 1. Hawai'i: 0. San José State: 3. Colorado State: 1

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. North Texas: 3 by 12.5. Michigan State: 9 by 57.5. New Mexico State: 4 by 21.7. Tennessee Tech: 2 by 28.3. Air Force: 13 by 70. BYU: 4 by 56.7. UNLV: 5 by 30.8. Wyoming: 5 by 30.8. New Mexico: 4 by 26.7. Hawai'i: 2 by 8.3. San José State: 5 by 50.8

Split Comparison

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

Wins1.4 · Games = 11 · -0.6 vs Losses
Losses2 · Games = 1 · +0.6 vs Wins