Usage Score
4.2
Player Dossier
2016-2019Pittsburgh
DB • 6'0" • 190 lbs • Coraopolis, PA, USA
Dane Jackson shows a ball-hunting defender profile with 26.5 disruption score.
Usage Score
4.2
Efficiency
26.5
Consistency
41.3
Season Value
28.1
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2017 Regular Season · Pittsburgh
Snapshot
Scouting Read
Best season and peak-game context are pinned here so the rest of the page can stay analytical without losing the headline story.
Dane Jackson, DB. Best season Best season by value score: 2017 Regular Season · Pittsburgh. Dane Jackson shows a ball-hunting defender profile with 26.5 disruption score.
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2017 Regular Season
Pittsburgh paired 14 primary output with 25.5 efficiency.
Supporting note
2019 Postseason role shape
impact-led usage with 26.5 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value stayed steady
2019 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: Duke
Win with 4 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet. It landed in the 100th percentile of the selected season.
Analysis workspace
Filter the strongest season sample, inspect game-level shape, and then drop into the full log without losing the story of the year.
Understand the selected season before dropping into the full game log.
Games
13
Havoc Plays / G
1.3
Efficiency
26.5
Usage
4.2
Consistency
41.3
Best Game by takeover score
Eastern Michigan
Active game
Hover over a point
Hover or select a game to keep its context visible here without the page shifting around.
Follow how the selected stat changes from one game to the next. Spikes mark standout outings, while dips show quieter weeks.
Chronological game order.
Game by game trend chart. Eastern Michigan: 0. Virginia: 1.5. Ohio: 1. Penn State: 0. UCF: 1. Unknown: 1. Duke: 4. Syracuse: 3. Miami: 1. Georgia Tech: 0. North Carolina: 2. Virginia Tech: 0. Boston College: 2
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. Eastern Michigan: 3 by 12.5. Virginia: 5 by 35.8. Ohio: 2 by 18.3. Penn State: 1 by 4.2. UCF: 6 by 35. Unknown: 4 by 26.7. Duke: 5 by 60.8. Syracuse: 1 by 34.2. Miami: 4 by 26.7. Georgia Tech: 1 by 4.2. North Carolina: 4 by 36.7. Virginia Tech: 4 by 16.7. Boston College: 3 by 32.5
Compare how this player performed across different situations. "Games" shows how many matchups are included in each split.
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
13 games
Featured metric
Havoc Plays
Top game by takeover score
Duke
Best efficiency game
60.8 vs Duke
| Result | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fri 12/27 | @ Eastern Michigan | W 34-30 | 3 | 2 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 11/30 | vs Boston College | L 19-26 | 3 | 3 | — | 1 | 0 | — | 1 | — | — |
| Sat 11/23 | @ Virginia Tech | L 0-28 | 4 | 3 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Fri 11/15 | vs North Carolina | W 34-27 | 4 | 3 | — | 1 | 0 | — | 1 | — | — |
| Sat 11/2 | @ Georgia Tech | W 20-10 | 1 | 0 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 10/26 | vs Miami | L 12-16 | 4 | 2 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 1 | — | — |
| Fri 10/18 | @ Syracuse | W 27-20 | 1 | 0 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 3 | — | — |
| Sun 10/6 | @ Duke | W 33-30 | 5 | 4 | — | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | — | — |
| Sat 9/28 | vs Unknown | — | 4 | 2 | — | 0.50 | 0.50 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 9/21 | vs UCF | W 35-34 | 6 | 5 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 1 | — | — |
| Sat 9/14 | @ Penn State | L 10-17 | 1 | 1 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 9/7 | vs Ohio | W 20-10 | 2 | 2 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 1 | — | — |
| Sat 8/31 | vs Virginia | L 14-30 | 5 | 3 | — | 0.50 | 0 | — | 1 | — | — |
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
Pittsburgh
2016-2019
Opening stop
Season Progression
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2016 Regular Season | Pittsburgh | 5 | 15.6 | 2.1 | — |
| 2017 Regular Season | Pittsburgh | 14 | 25.5 | 5.9 | 9 |
| 2018 Postseason | Pittsburgh | 17 | 28.4 | 4.6 | 3 |
| 2018 Regular Season | Pittsburgh | 17 | 28.4 | 4.6 | 0 |
| 2019 Postseason | Pittsburgh | 16.5 | 26.5 | 4.2 | -0.5 |
| 2019 Regular Season | Pittsburgh | 16.5 | 26.5 | 4.2 | 0 |
#1 Featured game
Wake Forest
Win with 5 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
5
Primary metric
5 disruption/tackle impact with 56.8 takeover score.
#2
Duke
4
Primary metric
Win with 4 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
4 disruption/tackle impact with 56.6 takeover score.
#3
Oklahoma State
3
Primary metric
Loss with 3 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
3 disruption/tackle impact with 54.3 takeover score.
#4
Duke
3
Primary metric
Win with 3 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
3 disruption/tackle impact with 51.5 takeover score.
#5
Syracuse
3
Primary metric
Win with 3 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
3 disruption/tackle impact with 51.2 takeover score.
#1 Season by value score
2017 Regular Season · Pittsburgh
14 primary output · 25.5 efficiency · 5.9 usage
29.8
#2
2018 Postseason · Pittsburgh
28.2
17 primary · 28.4 efficiency · 4.6 usage
#3
2018 Regular Season · Pittsburgh
28.2
17 primary · 28.4 efficiency · 4.6 usage
0
Impact games
0
Splash games
0
10+ tackle games
Recruit Profile
Class 2015 · Rating 0.8136
Quaker Valley · Leetsdale, PA
Career Facts
1
Career teams
6
Seasons tracked
142
Career Tackles
Data Context
Coverage spans 6 tracked seasons, 45 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.
Dane Jackson quick answers
Recruiting profile
3-star recruit