Usage Score
14.1
Player Dossier
2016-2018Houston
Ed Oliver
DT • 6'3" • 292 lbs • Houston, TX, USA
Ball-hunting defenderSplash play profile
Ed Oliver shows a ball-hunting defender profile with 49 disruption score.
Efficiency
45.1
Consistency
54
Season Value
37.2
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2016 Postseason · Houston
1616171718
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 1
- Seasons Tracked
- 5
- Program Path
- Houston
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: Navy
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.
Ed Oliver, DT. Best season Best season by value score: 2016 Postseason · Houston. Ed Oliver shows a ball-hunting defender profile with 49 disruption score.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2016 Postseason
Houston paired 32.5 primary output with 48 efficiency.
Supporting note
2017 Postseason role shape
impact-led usage with 45.1 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: Navy
Win 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 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.
2017 Postseason · Houston
Games
12
Havoc Plays / G
2.1
Efficiency
45.1
Usage
14.1
Consistency
54
Best Game by takeover score
Fresno State
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.
Chronological game order.
Game by game trend chart. Fresno State: 2. Arizona: 1.5. Rice: 1. Texas Tech: 1. Temple: 0. SMU: 1. Tulsa: 2.5. Memphis: 3.5. South Florida: 4. East Carolina: 1. Tulane: 2. Navy: 5.5
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. Fresno State: 4 by 36.7. Arizona: 11 by 60.8. Rice: 6 by 35. Texas Tech: 5 by 30.8. Temple: 1 by 4.2. SMU: 4 by 26.7. Tulsa: 9 by 62.5. Memphis: 6 by 60. South Florida: 7 by 69.2. East Carolina: 4 by 26.7. Tulane: 2 by 28.3. Navy: 14 by 100
Split Comparison
Compare how this player performed across different situations. "Games" shows how many matchups are included in each split.
Wins2 · Games = 7 · -0.2 vs Losses
Losses2.2 · Games = 5 · +0.2 vs Wins
First Half1.1 · Games = 6 · -2 vs Second Half
Second Half3.1 · Games = 6 · +2 vs First Half
Game Log
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
12 games
Featured metric
Havoc Plays
Top game by takeover score
Navy
Best efficiency game
100 vs Navy
| Result | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mon 12/25 | vs Fresno StateSplash game | L 27-33 | 4 | 3 | — | 2 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Fri 11/24 | vs Navy10+ tackles · 2+ sacks | W 24-14 | 14 | 9 | — | 3.50 | 2 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 11/18 | @ Tulane | L 17-20 | 2 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 11/4 | vs East Carolina | W 52-27 | 4 | 3 | — | 1 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 10/28 | @ South FloridaSplash game | W 28-24 | 7 | 5 | — | 2 | 1 | — | 1 | — | — |
| Fri 10/20 | vs MemphisSplash game | L 38-42 | 6 | 4 | — | 2.50 | 1 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 10/14 | @ Tulsa | L 17-45 | 9 | 1 | — | 1 | 0.50 | — | 1 | — | — |
| Sat 10/7 | vs SMU | W 35-22 | 4 | 4 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 1 | — | — |
| Sat 9/30 | @ Temple | W 20-13 | 1 | 1 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 9/23 | vs Texas Tech | L 24-27 | 5 | 2 | — | 1 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sun 9/17 | vs Rice | W 38-3 | 6 | 6 | — | 1 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sun 9/10 | @ Arizona10+ tackles | W 19-16 | 11 | 8 | — | 1.50 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
Houston
2016-2018
Opening stop
Season Progression
20162016201720172018
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2016 Postseason | Houston | 32.5 | 48 | 14.1 | — |
| 2016 Regular Season | Houston | 32.5 | 48 | 14.1 | 0 |
| 2017 Postseason | Houston | 25 | 45.1 | 14.1 | -7.5 |
| 2017 Regular Season | Houston | 25 | 45.1 | 14.1 | 0 |
| 2018 Regular Season | Houston | 19.5 | 49 | 13.4 | -5.5 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
Navy
Win with backfield disruption leading the way.
5.5
Primary metric
5.5 disruption/tackle impact with 76.7 takeover score.
#2
East Carolina
7
Primary metric
Win with backfield disruption leading the way.
7 disruption/tackle impact with 67.9 takeover score.
#3
Louisville
7
Primary metric
Win with backfield disruption leading the way.
7 disruption/tackle impact with 63.4 takeover score.
#4
Tulsa
4
Primary metric
Win with 4 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
4 disruption/tackle impact with 57.4 takeover score.
#5
South Florida
4
Primary metric
Win with 4 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
4 disruption/tackle impact with 51.8 takeover score.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2016 Postseason · Houston
32.5 primary output · 48 efficiency · 14.1 usage
42.5
#2
2016 Regular Season · Houston
42.5
32.5 primary · 48 efficiency · 14.1 usage
#3
2017 Postseason · Houston
37.2
25 primary · 45.1 efficiency · 14.1 usage
Milestones
3
Impact games
13
Splash games
6
10+ tackle games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Recruit Profile
5★
Class 2016 · Rating 0.9968
Westfield · Houston, TX
- Committed To
- Houston
- Commit Date
- Jan 1, 2016
Career Facts
1
Career teams
5
Seasons tracked
192
Career Tackles
Data Context
Coverage spans 5 tracked seasons, 32 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.