Player Stats

Iona Pritchard 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

Scrimmage yards
62
Rushing yards
44
Receiving yards
18

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesScrimmageRush YdsRec YdsTDOverall
2008 Regular SeasonBYU1303034.2
2009 Regular SeasonBYU00000-
2010 Regular SeasonBYU00000-
2011 Regular SeasonBYU00000-
2012 PostseasonBYU8-1-10049.5
2012 Regular SeasonBYU840400049.5
2013 Regular SeasonBYU320515037.1

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2012 Postseason

BYU paired 39 primary output with 31.7 efficiency.

Supporting note

2013 Regular Season role shape

backfield-heavy usage with 35 efficiency.

Supporting note

Career value cooled off

2013 Regular Season fell back from the prior stop by season value score.

Supporting note

Peak game by takeover score: Wisconsin

Loss with 11 yards from scrimmage and efficient touch value. 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.

2013 Regular Season · BYU

Games

3

Scrimmage Yards / G

6.7

Efficiency

35

Usage

2.8

Consistency

54

Best Game by takeover score

Wisconsin

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.

123

Chronological game order.

Game by game trend chart. Middle Tennessee: 4. Wisconsin: 11. Idaho State: 5

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. Middle Tennessee: 1 by 33.3. Wisconsin: 2 by 45.8. Idaho State: 2 by 26

Split Comparison

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

Wins4.5 · Games = 2 · -6.5 vs Losses
Losses11 · Games = 1 · +6.5 vs Wins