Usage Score
23.6
Player Dossier
2018-2023Northwestern
WR • 6'0" • 205 lbs • Brentwood, TN, USA
Cam Johnson reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Usage Score
23.6
Efficiency
78.2
Consistency
68.2
Season Value
67.5
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2023 Postseason · Northwestern
Snapshot
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.
Cam Johnson, WR. Best season Best season by value score: 2023 Postseason · Northwestern. Cam Johnson reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Cam Johnson played WR for Vanderbilt, Arizona State, and Northwestern. Across 6 tracked seasons, Cam Johnson recorded 41 passing yards, 8 rushing yards, and 2,015 receiving yards. His top tracked season came in 2023 with Northwestern.
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2023 Postseason
Northwestern paired 715 primary output with 78.2 efficiency.
Supporting note
2023 Postseason role shape
target-driven usage with 78.2 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value stayed steady
2023 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Multi-stop career journey
Production spans 3 team stops, with role shifts visible across Vanderbilt, Arizona State, Northwestern.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: Illinois
Win with an explosive receiving profile. It landed in the 100th percentile of the selected season.
Analysis workspace
Filter the strongest season sample, inspect game-level shape, and then drop into the full log without losing the story of the year.
Understand the selected season before dropping into the full game log.
Games
13
Receiving Yards / G
55
Efficiency
78.2
Usage
23.6
Consistency
68.2
Best Game by takeover score
Utah
Active game
Hover over a point
Hover or select a game to keep its context visible here without the page shifting around.
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. Utah: 31. Rutgers: 45. UTEP: 51. Duke: 45. Minnesota: 35. Penn State: 81. Unknown: 55. Nebraska: 27. Maryland: 46. Iowa: 30. Wisconsin: 57. Purdue: 88. Illinois: 124
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. Utah: 4 by 51.7. Rutgers: 4 by 75. UTEP: 3 by 100. Duke: 5 by 60. Minnesota: 4 by 58.3. Penn State: 6 by 90. Unknown: 4 by 91.7. Nebraska: 3 by 60. Maryland: 2 by 100. Iowa: 3 by 66.7. Wisconsin: 6 by 63.3. Purdue: 3 by 100. Illinois: 7 by 100
Compare how this player performed across different situations. "Games" shows how many matchups are included in each split.
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
13 games
Featured metric
Receiving Yards
Top game by takeover score
Illinois
Best efficiency game
100 vs Illinois
| Result | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sun 12/24 | vs Utah | W 14-7 | — | 4 | 31 | 7.8 | 7.80 | 1 | 12 |
| Sat 11/25 | @ Illinois100 receiving yards | W 45-43 | — | 7 | 124 | 17.7 | 17.70 | 1 | 42 |
| Sat 11/18 | vs Purdue | W 23-15 | — | 3 | 88 | 29.3 | 29.30 | 1 | 52 |
| Sat 11/11 | @ Wisconsin | W 24-10 | — | 6 | 57 | 9.5 | 9.50 | 1 | 24 |
| Sat 11/4 | vs Iowa | L 7-10 | — | 3 | 30 | 10 | 10 | 1 | 14 |
| Sat 10/28 | vs Maryland | W 33-27 | — | 2 | 46 | 23 | 23 | 0 | 34 |
| Sat 10/21 | @ Nebraska | L 9-17 | — | 3 | 27 | 9 | 9 | 0 | 14 |
| Sat 10/7 | vs Unknown | — | — | 4 | 55 | 12.6 | 13.80 | 1 | 35 |
| Sat 9/30 | vs Penn State | L 13-41 | — | 6 | 81 | 13.5 | 13.50 | 0 | 22 |
| Sat 9/23 | vs Minnesota | W 37-34 | — | 4 | 35 | 8.8 | 8.80 | 0 | 13 |
| Sat 9/16 | @ Duke | L 14-38 | — | 5 | 45 | 9 | 9 | 0 | 13 |
| Sat 9/9 | vs UTEP | W 38-7 | — | 3 | 51 | 17 | 17 | 0 | 43 |
| Sun 9/3 | @ Rutgers | L 7-24 | — | 4 | 45 | 11.3 | 11.30 | 0 | 17 |
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
Vanderbilt
2018-2021
Opening stop
Arizona State
2022
Peak year stop
Northwestern
2023
Final stop
Season Progression
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 Regular Season | Vanderbilt | 45 | 71.1 | 5.8 | — |
| 2019 Regular Season | Vanderbilt | 316 | 63.9 | 15.3 | 271 |
| 2020 Regular Season | Vanderbilt | 528 | 65.1 | 28.3 | 212 |
| 2021 Regular Season | Vanderbilt | 327 | 63 | 16.7 | -201 |
| 2022 Regular Season | Arizona State | 84 | 55.1 | 10.5 | -243 |
| 2023 Postseason | Northwestern | 715 | 78.2 | 23.6 | 631 |
| 2023 Regular Season | Northwestern | 715 | 78.2 | 23.6 | 0 |
#1 Featured game
Illinois
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
124
Primary metric
124 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#2
Mississippi State
114
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
114 receiving yards with a 76 efficiency score.
#3
Florida
93
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
93 receiving yards with a 88.6 efficiency score.
#4
Northern Illinois
64
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
64 receiving yards with a 71.1 efficiency score.
#5
Nevada
26
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
26 receiving yards with a 86.7 efficiency score.
#1 Season by value score
2023 Postseason · Northwestern
715 primary output · 78.2 efficiency · 23.6 usage
67.5
#2
2023 Regular Season · Northwestern
67.5
715 primary · 78.2 efficiency · 23.6 usage
#3
2020 Regular Season · Vanderbilt
56.1
528 primary · 65.1 efficiency · 28.3 usage
2
100+ receiving yards
3
8+ catch outings
1
2+ TD games
Recruit Profile
Class 2021 · Rating 0.9381
St. Bernard · Playa Del Rey, CA
Career Facts
3
Career teams
7
Seasons tracked
2,015
Career Receiving Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 7 tracked seasons, 55 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.