Player Stats

Jason Beck 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
181
TFL
9
Sacks
0.5
QB hurries
2
Passes defended
4

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesTacklesTFLSacksQB HurPDTDOverall
2014 Regular SeasonEastern Michigan20-0--022.7
2015 Regular SeasonEastern Michigan10-0--042.7
2016 PostseasonEastern Michigan13610--070.8
2016 Regular SeasonEastern Michigan139860.523070.8
2017 Regular SeasonEastern Michigan127720-1030.9

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2016 Postseason

Eastern Michigan paired 12.5 primary output with 42.9 efficiency.

Supporting note

2017 Regular Season role shape

impact-led usage with 29.7 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: Central Michigan

Loss with 1 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.

2017 Regular Season · Eastern Michigan

Games

12

Havoc Plays / G

0.3

Efficiency

29.7

Usage

5.8

Consistency

13.9

Best Game by takeover score

Central Michigan

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. Charlotte: 1. Rutgers: 0. Ohio: 0. Kentucky: 1. Toledo: 0. Army: 0.5. Western Michigan: 0. Northern Illinois: 0.5. Ball State: 0. Central Michigan: 1. Miami (OH): 0. Bowling Green: 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. Charlotte: 2 by 18.3. Rutgers: 2 by 8.3. Ohio: 8 by 33.3. Kentucky: 3 by 22.5. Toledo: 8 by 33.3. Army: 7 by 34.2. Western Michigan: 13 by 50. Northern Illinois: 7 by 34.2. Ball State: 4 by 16.7. Central Michigan: 8 by 43.3. Miami (OH): 8 by 33.3. Bowling Green: 7 by 29.2

Split Comparison

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

Wins0.2 · Games = 5 · -0.2 vs Losses
Losses0.4 · Games = 7 · +0.2 vs Wins