Player Stats

Chris Burns 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
111
Rushing yards
98
Receiving yards
13
Touchdowns
1

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesScrimmageRush YdsRec YdsTDOverall
2009 Regular SeasonPittsburgh329290041.6
2010 Regular SeasonPittsburgh749490146.7
2012 Regular SeasonMassachusetts3332013036.7

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2010 Regular Season

Pittsburgh paired 49 primary output with 24.2 efficiency.

Supporting note

2012 Regular Season role shape

backfield-heavy usage with 13.4 efficiency.

Supporting note

Career value cooled off

2012 Regular Season fell back from the prior stop by season value score.

Supporting note

Multi-stop career journey

Production spans 2 team stops, with role shifts visible across Pittsburgh, Massachusetts.

Supporting note

Peak game by takeover score: UConn

Loss with 30 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.

2012 Regular Season · Massachusetts

Games

3

Scrimmage Yards / G

11

Efficiency

13.4

Usage

14.9

Consistency

23.2

Best Game by takeover score

UConn

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. UConn: 30. Vanderbilt: -1. Central Michigan: 4

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. UConn: 13 by 19.3. Vanderbilt: 1 by 0. Central Michigan: 2 by 20.8

Split Comparison

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

First Half14.5 · Games = 2 · +10.5 vs Second Half
Second Half4 · Games = 1 · -10.5 vs First Half