Usage Score
10.1
Player Dossier
2015-2018Michigan State
Andrew Dowell
LB • 6'1" • 225 lbs • North Ridgeville, OH, USA
Ball-hunting defenderSplash play profile
Andrew Dowell shows a ball-hunting defender profile with 47 disruption score.
Efficiency
47
Consistency
54.9
Season Value
33.9
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2018 Postseason · Michigan State
151617171818
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 1
- Seasons Tracked
- 6
- Program Path
- Michigan State
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: Michigan
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.
Andrew Dowell, LB. Best season Best season by value score: 2018 Postseason · Michigan State. Andrew Dowell shows a ball-hunting defender profile with 47 disruption score.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2018 Postseason
Michigan State paired 21.5 primary output with 47 efficiency.
Supporting note
2018 Postseason role shape
impact-led usage with 47 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: Michigan
Loss with 4 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 then drop into the full log without losing the story of the year.
Season Explorer
Understand the selected season before dropping into the full game log.
2018 Postseason · Michigan State
Games
13
Havoc Plays / G
1.7
Efficiency
47
Usage
10.1
Consistency
54.9
Best Game by takeover score
Oregon
Hover a point or expand a game row to keep the active game context visible here.
Game-by-Game Trend
12345678910111213
Chronological game order.
Game by game trend chart. Oregon: 2. Utah State: 0. Arizona State: 2. Indiana: 4. Central Michigan: 1. Northwestern: 0. Penn State: 1. Michigan: 4. Purdue: 3. Maryland: 0. Ohio State: 1. Nebraska: 2. Rutgers: 1.5
Volume vs Efficiency
Low volume / high quality
High volume / high quality
Low volume / lower quality
High volume / lower quality
Volume on the x-axis, quality on the y-axis.
Volume versus efficiency scatter chart. Oregon: 7 by 49.2. Utah State: 6 by 25. Arizona State: 6 by 45. Indiana: 9 by 77.5. Central Michigan: 6 by 35. Northwestern: 7 by 29.2. Penn State: 7 by 39.2. Michigan: 10 by 81.7. Purdue: 4 by 46.7. Maryland: 6 by 25. Ohio State: 14 by 60. Nebraska: 10 by 61.7. Rutgers: 5 by 35.8
Split Comparison
Wins1.5 · n=7 · -0.3 vs Losses
Losses1.8 · n=6 · +0.3 vs Wins
First Half1.4 · n=7 · -0.5 vs Second Half
Second Half1.9 · n=6 · +0.5 vs First Half
Game Log
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
13 games
Featured metric
Havoc Plays
Top game by takeover score
Michigan
Best efficiency game
81.7 vs Michigan
| Result | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mon 12/31 | @ Oregon | L 6-7 | 7 | 6 | — | 0.50 | 0.50 | — | 1 | — | — |
| Sat 11/24 | vs Rutgers | W 14-10 | 5 | 0 | — | 0.50 | 0 | — | 1 | — | — |
| Sat 11/17 | @ Nebraska10+ tackles | L 6-9 | 10 | 4 | — | 1 | 0 | — | 1 | — | — |
| Sat 11/10 | vs Ohio State10+ tackles | L 6-26 | 14 | 2 | — | 1 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 11/3 | @ Maryland | W 24-3 | 6 | 2 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 10/27 | vs Purdue | W 23-13 | 4 | 1 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 3 | — | — |
| Sat 10/20 | vs Michigan10+ tackles · Splash game | L 7-21 | 10 | 3 | — | 2 | 1 | — | 1 | — | — |
| Sat 10/13 | @ Penn State | W 21-17 | 7 | 4 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 1 | — | — |
| Sat 10/6 | vs Northwestern | L 19-29 | 7 | 3 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 9/29 | vs Central Michigan | W 31-20 | 6 | 2 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 1 | — | — |
| Sat 9/22 | @ Indiana2+ sacks · Splash game | W 35-21 | 9 | 7 | — | 2 | 2 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sun 9/9 | @ Arizona StateSplash game | L 13-16 | 6 | 4 | — | 2 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Fri 8/31 | vs Utah State | W 38-31 | 6 | 3 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
Michigan State
2015-2018
Opening stop
Season Progression
201520162017201720182018
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2015 Regular Season | Michigan State | 0 | — | — | — |
| 2016 Regular Season | Michigan State | 8 | 29.9 | 6.9 | 8 |
| 2017 Postseason | Michigan State | 8.5 | 30.6 | 6.3 | 0.5 |
| 2017 Regular Season | Michigan State | 8.5 | 30.6 | 6.3 | 0 |
| 2018 Postseason | Michigan State | 21.5 | 47 | 10.1 | 13 |
| 2018 Regular Season | Michigan State | 21.5 | 47 | 10.1 | 0 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
Michigan
Loss with 4 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
4
Primary metric
4 disruption/tackle impact with 67.9 takeover score.
#2
Indiana
4
Primary metric
Win with backfield disruption leading the way.
4 disruption/tackle impact with 66.1 takeover score.
#3
Western Michigan
2
Primary metric
Win with 2 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
2 disruption/tackle impact with 52.5 takeover score.
#4
Ohio State
2
Primary metric
Loss with 2 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
2 disruption/tackle impact with 51.8 takeover score.
#5
Notre Dame
2
Primary metric
Win with 2 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
2 disruption/tackle impact with 51.1 takeover score.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2018 Postseason · Michigan State
21.5 primary output · 47 efficiency · 10.1 usage
33.9
#2
2018 Regular Season · Michigan State
33.9
21.5 primary · 47 efficiency · 10.1 usage
#3
2017 Postseason · Michigan State
22.1
8.5 primary · 30.6 efficiency · 6.3 usage
Milestones
2
Impact games
3
Splash games
4
10+ tackle games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Recruit Profile
4★
Class 2015 · Rating 0.892
St. Edward · Lakewood, OH
- Committed To
- Michigan State
- Commit Date
- Jan 1, 2015
Career Facts
1
Career teams
6
Seasons tracked
239
Career Tackles
Data Context
Coverage spans 6 tracked seasons, 38 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.