Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2018 Regular Season
Central Michigan paired 29.5 primary output with 43 efficiency.
Player Stats
Michael Danna 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
- 188
- TFL
- 30
- Sacks
- 17
- QB hurries
- 15
- Passes defended
- 1
- Touchdowns
- 1
Season Ledger
Crawlable season-by-season stats
| Season | Team | Games | Tackles | TFL | Sacks | QB Hur | PD | TD | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2015 Regular Season | Central Michigan | 0 | 0 | - | 0 | - | - | 0 | - |
| 2016 Postseason | Central Michigan | 10 | 4 | - | 0 | - | - | 0 | 33.6 |
| 2016 Regular Season | Central Michigan | 10 | 27 | 4.5 | 1.5 | 2 | - | 0 | 33.6 |
| 2017 Postseason | Central Michigan | 13 | 2 | 0.5 | 0.5 | - | - | 0 | 55.1 |
| 2017 Regular Season | Central Michigan | 13 | 52 | 8 | 3.5 | 5 | - | 0 | 55.1 |
| 2018 Regular Season | Central Michigan | 12 | 65 | 14 | 8.5 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 73.1 |
| 2019 Postseason | Michigan | 12 | 3 | - | 0 | - | - | 0 | 25.4 |
| 2019 Regular Season | Michigan | 12 | 35 | 3 | 3 | 2 | - | 0 | 25.4 |
Player insights
Supporting note
2019 Postseason role shape
impact-led usage with 19.9 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value stayed steady
2019 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Multi-stop career journey
Production spans 2 team stops, with role shifts visible across Central Michigan, Michigan.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: Michigan State
Win with 2 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.
2019 Postseason · Michigan
Games
12
Havoc Plays / G
0.7
Efficiency
19.9
Usage
4.9
Consistency
13.9
Best Game by takeover score
Michigan State
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.
Chronological game order.
Game by game trend chart. Alabama: 0. Middle Tennessee: 1. Army: 0. Rutgers: 0. Iowa: 2. Illinois: 2. Penn State: 1. Notre Dame: 0. Maryland: 0. Michigan State: 2. Indiana: 0. Ohio State: 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. Alabama: 3 by 12.5. Middle Tennessee: 3 by 22.5. Army: 2 by 8.3. Rutgers: 4 by 16.7. Iowa: 5 by 40.8. Illinois: 4 by 36.7. Penn State: 1 by 14.2. Notre Dame: 2 by 8.3. Maryland: 3 by 12.5. Michigan State: 6 by 45. Indiana: 4 by 16.7. Ohio State: 1 by 4.2
Split Comparison
Compare how this player performed across different situations. "Games" shows how many matchups are included in each split.
Wins0.8 · Games = 9 · +0.4 vs Losses
Losses0.3 · Games = 3 · -0.4 vs Wins
Next best actions
Keep exploring Michael Danna
Move from the player story into the game log, career arc, team context, and video shelf.