Usage Score
16.5
Player Dossier
2015-2018Notre Dame
Jalen Guyton
WR • 6'1" • 208 lbs • Allen, TX, USA
Vertical playmakerExplosive finisher
Jalen Guyton reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Efficiency
83.2
Consistency
59.6
Season Value
64.8
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2018 Postseason · North Texas
151617171818
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 2
- Seasons Tracked
- 6
- Program Path
- Notre Dame • North Texas
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: Southern Miss
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.
Jalen Guyton, WR. Best season Best season by value score: 2018 Postseason · North Texas. Jalen Guyton reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2018 Postseason
North Texas paired 805 primary output with 83.2 efficiency.
Supporting note
2018 Postseason role shape
target-driven usage with 83.2 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value stayed steady
2018 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 Notre Dame, North Texas.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: Southern Miss
Win with an explosive receiving profile. 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 · North Texas
Games
13
Receiving Yards / G
61.9
Efficiency
83.2
Usage
16.5
Consistency
59.6
Best Game by takeover score
Utah State
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. Utah State: 103. SMU: 95. Unknown: 111. Arkansas: 42. Liberty: 34. Louisiana Tech: 51. UTEP: 13. Southern Miss: 124. UAB: 48. Rice: 16. Old Dominion: 28. Florida Atlantic: 62. UTSA: 78
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. Utah State: 4 by 100. SMU: 7 by 90.5. Unknown: 5 by 100. Arkansas: 2 by 100. Liberty: 4 by 56.7. Louisiana Tech: 5 by 68. UTEP: 1 by 86.7. Southern Miss: 7 by 100. UAB: 5 by 64. Rice: 2 by 53.3. Old Dominion: 3 by 62.2. Florida Atlantic: 4 by 100. UTSA: 5 by 100
Split Comparison
Wins58 · n=8 · +0.5 vs Losses
Losses57.5 · n=4 · -0.5 vs Wins
First Half64.1 · n=7 · +4.8 vs Second Half
Second Half59.3 · n=6 · -4.8 vs First Half
Game Log
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
13 games
Featured metric
Receiving Yards
Top game by takeover score
Southern Miss
Best efficiency game
100 vs Utah State
| Result | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 12/15 | vs Utah State100 receiving yards | L 13-52 | — | 4 | 103 | 25.8 | 25.80 | 1 | 75 |
| Sun 11/25 | @ UTSA | W 24-21 | — | 5 | 78 | 15.6 | 15.60 | 0 | 19 |
| Fri 11/16 | vs Florida Atlantic | W 41-38 | — | 4 | 62 | 15.5 | 15.50 | 1 | 23 |
| Sat 11/10 | @ Old Dominion | L 31-34 | — | 3 | 28 | 9.3 | 9.30 | 0 | 11 |
| Sat 10/27 | vs Rice | W 41-17 | — | 2 | 16 | 8 | 8 | 0 | 13 |
| Sat 10/20 | @ UAB | L 21-29 | — | 5 | 48 | 9.6 | 9.60 | 0 | 12 |
| Sat 10/13 | vs Southern Miss100 receiving yards | W 30-7 | — | 7 | 124 | 17.7 | 17.70 | 1 | 53 |
| Sat 10/6 | @ UTEP | W 27-24 | — | 1 | 13 | 13 | 13 | 0 | 13 |
| Sat 9/29 | vs Louisiana Tech | L 27-29 | — | 5 | 51 | 10.2 | 10.20 | 0 | 16 |
| Sat 9/22 | @ Liberty | W 47-7 | — | 4 | 34 | 8.5 | 8.50 | 0 | 12 |
| Sat 9/15 | @ Arkansas | W 44-17 | — | 2 | 42 | 21 | 21 | 0 | 31 |
| Sat 9/8 | vs Unknown100 receiving yards | — | — | 5 | 111 | 22.2 | 22.20 | 1 | 46 |
| Sat 9/1 | vs SMU2+ TD | W 46-23 | — | 7 | 95 | 13.6 | 13.60 | 2 | 29 |
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
Notre Dame
2015
Opening stop
- 2
North Texas
2016-2018
Final stop
Season Progression
201520162017201720182018
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2015 Regular Season | Notre Dame | 0 | — | — | — |
| 2016 Regular Season | North Texas | 0 | — | — | 0 |
| 2017 Postseason | North Texas | 775 | 76.3 | 18.4 | 775 |
| 2017 Regular Season | North Texas | 775 | 76.3 | 18.4 | 0 |
| 2018 Postseason | North Texas | 805 | 83.2 | 16.5 | 30 |
| 2018 Regular Season | North Texas | 805 | 83.2 | 16.5 | 0 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
Southern Miss
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
211
Primary metric
211 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#2
Southern Miss
124
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
124 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#3
UTSA
182
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
182 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#4
Utah State
103
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
103 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#5
Unknown
111
Primary metric
Game with an explosive receiving profile.
111 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2018 Postseason · North Texas
805 primary output · 83.2 efficiency · 16.5 usage
64.8
#2
2018 Regular Season · North Texas
64.8
805 primary · 83.2 efficiency · 16.5 usage
#3
2017 Postseason · North Texas
57.3
775 primary · 76.3 efficiency · 18.4 usage
Milestones
6
100+ receiving yards
2
8+ catch outings
3
2+ TD games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Recruit Profile
3★
Class 2015 · Rating 0.8869
Allen · Allen, TX
- Committed To
- Notre Dame
- Commit Date
- Jan 1, 2015
Career Facts
2
Career teams
6
Seasons tracked
1,580
Career Receiving Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 6 tracked seasons, 25 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.