Player Stats

Alex Aukerman 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
116
TFL
27
Sacks
12.5
QB hurries
2
Passes defended
1

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesTacklesTFLSacksQB HurPDTDOverall
2014 Regular SeasonArmy00-0--0-
2015 Regular SeasonArmy00-0--0-
2016 PostseasonArmy128211-059.4
2016 Regular SeasonArmy12389.54.5--059.4
2017 PostseasonArmy13211--075.9
2017 Regular SeasonArmy136814.5611075.9

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2017 Postseason

Army paired 25.5 primary output with 42.1 efficiency.

Supporting note

2017 Postseason role shape

impact-led usage with 42.1 efficiency.

Supporting note

Career value stayed steady

2017 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.

Supporting note

Peak game by takeover score: UTEP

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.

2017 Postseason · Army

Games

13

Havoc Plays / G

2.0

Efficiency

42.1

Usage

19.8

Consistency

61.7

Best Game by takeover score

UTEP

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. San Diego State: 3. Fordham: 2. Buffalo: 2.5. Ohio State: 0. Tulane: 4. UTEP: 4. Rice: 3. Eastern Michigan: 0. Temple: 1. Air Force: 3. Duke: 0. North Texas: 3. Navy: 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. San Diego State: 2 by 38.3. Fordham: 4 by 36.7. Buffalo: 5 by 45.8. Ohio State: 5 by 20.8. Tulane: 3 by 52.5. UTEP: 5 by 60.8. Rice: 4 by 46.7. Eastern Michigan: 2 by 8.3. Temple: 10 by 51.7. Air Force: 6 by 55. Duke: 7 by 29.2. North Texas: 7 by 59.2. Navy: 10 by 41.7

Split Comparison

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

Wins1.9 · Games = 10 · -0.5 vs Losses
Losses2.3 · Games = 3 · +0.5 vs Wins