Usage Score
4.4
Player Dossier
2016-2019Ohio State
Jordan Fuller
S • 6'2" • 205 lbs • Old Tappan, NJ, USA
Ball-hunting defenderSplash play profile
Jordan Fuller shows a ball-hunting defender profile with 22.7 disruption score.
Efficiency
22.7
Consistency
11.9
Season Value
11.8
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2016 Postseason · Ohio State
1616171718181919
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 1
- Seasons Tracked
- 8
- Program Path
- Ohio State
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: TCU
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.
Jordan Fuller, S. Best season Best season by value score: 2016 Postseason · Ohio State. Jordan Fuller shows a ball-hunting defender profile with 22.7 disruption score.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2016 Postseason
Ohio State paired 0 primary output with 7.7 efficiency.
Supporting note
2019 Postseason role shape
impact-led usage with 22.7 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: Michigan
Win with 2 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.
2019 Postseason · Ohio State
Games
14
Havoc Plays / G
0.4
Efficiency
22.7
Usage
4.4
Consistency
11.9
Best Game by takeover score
Clemson
Hover a point or expand a game row to keep the active game context visible here.
Game-by-Game Trend
1234567891011121314
Chronological game order.
Game by game trend chart. Clemson: 0. Florida Atlantic: 0. Cincinnati: 0. Indiana: 1. Miami (OH): 0. Nebraska: 1. Michigan State: 1. Northwestern: 0. Wisconsin: 0. Maryland: 0. Rutgers: 0. Penn State: 1. Michigan: 2. Wisconsin: 0
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. Clemson: 5 by 20.8. Florida Atlantic: 7 by 29.2. Cincinnati: 5 by 20.8. Indiana: 5 by 30.8. Miami (OH): 2 by 8.3. Nebraska: 6 by 35. Michigan State: 7 by 39.2. Northwestern: 5 by 20.8. Wisconsin: 4 by 16.7. Maryland: 2 by 8.3. Rutgers: 2 by 8.3. Penn State: 3 by 22.5. Michigan: 5 by 40.8. Wisconsin: 4 by 16.7
Split Comparison
Wins0.5 · n=13
First Half0.4 · n=7 · +0 vs Second Half
Second Half0.4 · n=7 · +0 vs First Half
All Games0.4 · n=14
Game Log
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
14 games
Featured metric
Havoc Plays
Top game by takeover score
Michigan
Best efficiency game
40.8 vs Michigan
| Result | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sun 12/29 | vs Clemson | L 23-29 | 5 | 3 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sun 12/8 | @ Wisconsin | W 34-21 | 4 | 2 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 11/30 | @ Michigan | W 56-27 | 5 | 3 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 2 | — | — |
| Sat 11/23 | vs Penn State | W 28-17 | 3 | 2 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 1 | — | — |
| Sat 11/16 | @ Rutgers | W 56-21 | 2 | 0 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 11/9 | vs Maryland | W 73-14 | 2 | 2 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 10/26 | vs Wisconsin | W 38-7 | 4 | 2 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 10/19 | @ Northwestern | W 52-3 | 5 | 5 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 10/5 | vs Michigan State | W 34-10 | 7 | 5 | — | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 9/28 | @ Nebraska | W 48-7 | 6 | 4 | — | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 9/21 | vs Miami (OH) | W 76-5 | 2 | 1 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 9/14 | @ Indiana | W 51-10 | 5 | 5 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 1 | — | — |
| Sat 9/7 | vs Cincinnati | W 42-0 | 5 | 4 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 8/31 | vs Florida Atlantic | W 45-21 | 7 | 4 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
Ohio State
2016-2019
Opening stop
Season Progression
20162016201720172018201820192019
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2016 Postseason | Ohio State | 0 | 7.7 | 1.5 | — |
| 2016 Regular Season | Ohio State | 0 | 7.7 | 1.5 | 0 |
| 2017 Postseason | Ohio State | 8 | 28.6 | 6.2 | 8 |
| 2017 Regular Season | Ohio State | 8 | 28.6 | 6.2 | 0 |
| 2018 Postseason | Ohio State | 7.5 | 31.7 | 6.5 | -0.5 |
| 2018 Regular Season | Ohio State | 7.5 | 31.7 | 6.5 | 0 |
| 2019 Postseason | Ohio State | 6 | 22.7 | 4.4 | -1.5 |
| 2019 Regular Season | Ohio State | 6 | 22.7 | 4.4 | 0 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
TCU
Win with 1.5 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
1.5
Primary metric
1.5 disruption/tackle impact with 52.2 takeover score.
#2
Michigan
2
Primary metric
Win with 2 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
2 disruption/tackle impact with 48.6 takeover score.
#3
Michigan
2
Primary metric
Win with 2 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
2 disruption/tackle impact with 47.8 takeover score.
#4
Northwestern
1
Primary metric
Win with 1 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
1 disruption/tackle impact with 42.1 takeover score.
#5
Michigan
1
Primary metric
Win with 1 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
1 disruption/tackle impact with 40.6 takeover score.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2016 Postseason · Ohio State
0 primary output · 7.7 efficiency · 1.5 usage
36.4
#2
2016 Regular Season · Ohio State
36.4
0 primary · 7.7 efficiency · 1.5 usage
#3
2018 Postseason · Ohio State
25.3
7.5 primary · 31.7 efficiency · 6.5 usage
Milestones
0
Impact games
1
Splash games
3
10+ tackle games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Recruit Profile
4★
Class 2016 · Rating 0.9402
Northern Valley Regional - Old Tappan · Westwood, NJ
- Committed To
- Ohio State
- Commit Date
- Jan 1, 2016
Career Facts
1
Career teams
8
Seasons tracked
224
Career Tackles
Data Context
Coverage spans 8 tracked seasons, 46 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.