Player Stats

Anfernee Jennings 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
185
TFL
32.5
Sacks
13.5
QB hurries
20
Passes defended
17
Touchdowns
1

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesTacklesTFLSacksQB HurPDTDOverall
2016 PostseasonAlabama102-0--016.3
2016 Regular SeasonAlabama1017203-016.3
2017 PostseasonAlabama10531--041.6
2017 Regular SeasonAlabama10363042041.6
2018 PostseasonAlabama1584.51-2067.3
2018 Regular SeasonAlabama15347.53.558167.3
2019 PostseasonAlabama13100.50.5--080
2019 Regular SeasonAlabama1373127.585080

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2019 Postseason

Alabama paired 34.5 primary output with 53.1 efficiency.

Supporting note

2019 Postseason role shape

impact-led usage with 53.1 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: LSU

Loss with backfield disruption leading the way. 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 · Alabama

Games

13

Havoc Plays / G

2.7

Efficiency

53.1

Usage

12.2

Consistency

66.7

Best Game by takeover score

LSU

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.

12345678910111213

Chronological game order.

Game by game trend chart. Michigan: 1. Duke: 0. New Mexico State: 4. South Carolina: 4. Southern Miss: 3. Ole Miss: 1. Texas A&M: 4. Tennessee: 2.5. Arkansas: 3. LSU: 5. Mississippi State: 1. Western Carolina: 5. Auburn: 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. Michigan: 10 by 51.7. Duke: 6 by 25. New Mexico State: 3 by 52.5. South Carolina: 6 by 65. Southern Miss: 5 by 50.8. Ole Miss: 9 by 47.5. Texas A&M: 8 by 73.3. Tennessee: 7 by 54.2. Arkansas: 4 by 46.7. LSU: 8 by 83.3. Mississippi State: 8 by 43.3. Western Carolina: 3 by 62.5. Auburn: 6 by 35

Split Comparison

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

Wins2.6 · Games = 11 · -0.4 vs Losses
Losses3 · Games = 2 · +0.4 vs Wins