Player Stats

Niko Small 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
138
TFL
3
Passes defended
16

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesTacklesTFLSacksQB HurPDTDOverall
2015 Regular SeasonTCU00-0--0-
2016 PostseasonTCU1312-0--048.2
2016 Regular SeasonTCU13711.50-9048.2
2017 PostseasonTCU104-0--025
2017 Regular SeasonTCU103310-4025
2018 PostseasonTCU60-0--041.2
2018 Regular SeasonTCU6180.50-3041.2

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2016 Postseason

TCU paired 12.5 primary output with 36.2 efficiency.

Supporting note

2018 Postseason role shape

impact-led usage with 21.7 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: California

Win 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.

2018 Postseason · TCU

Games

6

Havoc Plays / G

0.8

Efficiency

21.7

Usage

4.2

Consistency

71.9

Best Game by takeover score

California

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.

123456

Chronological game order.

Game by game trend chart. California: 1. Southern: 1. SMU: 1. Ohio State: 0.5. Texas: 0. Oklahoma 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. Southern: 5 by 30.8. SMU: 3 by 22.5. Ohio State: 5 by 25.8. Texas: 2 by 8.3. Oklahoma State: 3 by 22.5

Split Comparison

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

Wins1 · Games = 4 · +0.8 vs Losses
Losses0.3 · Games = 2 · -0.8 vs Wins