Player Stats

Aaron Hansford 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
157
TFL
18.5
Sacks
7
QB hurries
8
Passes defended
7

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesTacklesTFLSacksQB HurPDTDOverall
2017 Regular SeasonTexas A&M44-0--037.3
2018 Regular SeasonTexas A&M00-0--0-
2019 Regular SeasonTexas A&M11153232043.9
2020 Regular SeasonTexas A&M9497331061.6
2021 Regular SeasonTexas A&M12898.5224065.4

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2021 Regular Season

Texas A&M paired 16.5 primary output with 44.3 efficiency.

Supporting note

2021 Regular Season role shape

impact-led usage with 44.3 efficiency.

Supporting note

Career value stayed steady

2021 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.

Supporting note

Peak game by takeover score: Arkansas

Loss with 3.5 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet. It landed in the 91.7th 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.

2021 Regular Season · Texas A&M

Games

12

Havoc Plays / G

1.4

Efficiency

44.3

Usage

9.5

Consistency

38.1

Best Game by takeover score

Arkansas

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.

123456789101112

Chronological game order.

Game by game trend chart. Kent State: 1. Colorado: 2. New Mexico: 4. Arkansas: 3.5. Mississippi State: 0.5. Alabama: 0. Missouri: 3. South Carolina: 0. Auburn: 0. Ole Miss: 1.5. Prairie View A&M: 1. LSU: 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. Kent State: 8 by 43.3. Colorado: 3 by 32.5. New Mexico: 4 by 56.7. Arkansas: 8 by 68.3. Mississippi State: 13 by 55. Alabama: 9 by 37.5. Missouri: 7 by 59.2. South Carolina: 3 by 12.5. Auburn: 9 by 37.5. Ole Miss: 9 by 52.5. Prairie View A&M: 8 by 43.3. LSU: 8 by 33.3

Split Comparison

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

Wins1.4 · Games = 8 · +0 vs Losses
Losses1.4 · Games = 4 · +0 vs Wins