Player Stats

Brenden Brady 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

Scrimmage yards
2,172
Rushing yards
1,738
Receiving yards
434
Touchdowns
18

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesScrimmageRush YdsRec YdsTDOverall
2018 Regular SeasonUTSA826522144142.7
2019 Regular SeasonUTSA12386271115239.9
2020 Regular SeasonUTSA628723948137.8
2021 PostseasonUTSA884768146.1
2021 Regular SeasonUTSA826123229346.1
2022 Regular SeasonUTSA128896991901070.6

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2022 Regular Season

UTSA paired 889 primary output with 48.7 efficiency.

Supporting note

2022 Regular Season role shape

backfield-heavy usage with 48.7 efficiency.

Supporting note

Career value is trending up

2022 Regular Season improved on the prior stop by season value score.

Supporting note

Peak game by takeover score: Western Kentucky

Win with 133 yards from scrimmage and efficient touch value. 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.

2022 Regular Season · UTSA

Games

12

Scrimmage Yards / G

74.1

Efficiency

48.7

Usage

22.5

Consistency

69.4

Best Game by takeover score

Western Kentucky

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. Houston: 27. Army: 78. Texas: 85. Texas Southern: 64. Middle Tennessee: 135. Western Kentucky: 133. Florida International: 58. North Texas: 112. UAB: 53. Louisiana Tech: 68. Rice: 67. UTEP: 9

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. Houston: 8 by 25.5. Army: 20 by 41.3. Texas: 23 by 36.2. Texas Southern: 16 by 38.5. Middle Tennessee: 22 by 57.8. Western Kentucky: 23 by 51.1. Florida International: 9 by 43.8. North Texas: 19 by 61.4. UAB: 14 by 39.4. Louisiana Tech: 10 by 69.7. Rice: 6 by 96.5. UTEP: 4 by 23.4

Split Comparison

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

Wins77.7 · Games = 10 · +21.7 vs Losses
Losses56 · Games = 2 · -21.7 vs Wins