Player Stats

Jordan Fuller 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
224
TFL
5.5
Passes defended
10

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesTacklesTFLSacksQB HurPDTDOverall
2016 PostseasonOhio State61-0--040.1
2016 Regular SeasonOhio State610-0--040.1
2017 PostseasonOhio State1310-0--056.5
2017 Regular SeasonOhio State136030-2056.5
2018 PostseasonOhio State139-0--057.6
2018 Regular SeasonOhio State13722.50-4057.6
2019 PostseasonOhio State145-0--036.5
2019 Regular SeasonOhio State1457-0-4036.5

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2018 Postseason

Ohio State paired 7.5 primary output with 31.7 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 compare the statistical profile without scrolling through the full player page.

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

Michigan

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.

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

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. 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

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

Wins0.5 · Games = 13 · +0.5 vs Losses
Losses0 · Games = 1 · -0.5 vs Wins