Player Stats

Jordan Asberry 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
1,384
Rushing yards
947
Receiving yards
437
Touchdowns
12

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesScrimmageRush YdsRec YdsTDOverall
2015 Regular SeasonArmy825321340041.1
2016 PostseasonArmy1236360162.6
2016 Regular SeasonArmy12466366100562.6
2017 PostseasonArmy10550042.2
2017 Regular SeasonArmy1018811078142.2
2018 PostseasonArmy11856322160.1
2018 Regular SeasonArmy11351154197460.1

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2016 Postseason

Army paired 502 primary output with 68 efficiency.

Supporting note

2018 Postseason role shape

backfield-heavy usage with 67.2 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: Houston

Win with 85 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.

2018 Postseason · Army

Games

11

Scrimmage Yards / G

39.6

Efficiency

67.2

Usage

6.4

Consistency

68.3

Best Game by takeover score

Houston

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.

1234567891011

Chronological game order.

Game by game trend chart. Houston: 85. Duke: 22. Oklahoma: 36. Buffalo: 33. San José State: 55. Miami (OH): 14. Eastern Michigan: 72. Air Force: 38. Lafayette: 47. Colgate: 33. Navy: 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. Houston: 7 by 100. Duke: 2 by 91.7. Oklahoma: 5 by 75. Buffalo: 5 by 40. San José State: 3 by 93.8. Miami (OH): 3 by 48.6. Eastern Michigan: 9 by 46.7. Air Force: 4 by 49. Lafayette: 5 by 89.2. Colgate: 2 by 100. Navy: 2 by 5.2

Split Comparison

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

Wins42 · Games = 9 · +13 vs Losses
Losses29 · Games = 2 · -13 vs Wins