Usage Score
21
Player Dossier
2019-2023Michigan
Cornelius Johnson
WR • 6'3" • 208 lbs • Greenwich, CT, USA
Vertical playmakerExplosive finisher
Cornelius Johnson reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Efficiency
77.4
Consistency
53.5
Season Value
61.5
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2021 Postseason · Michigan
1920212122222323
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 1
- Seasons Tracked
- 8
- Program Path
- Michigan
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: Ohio State
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.
Cornelius Johnson, WR. Best season Best season by value score: 2021 Postseason · Michigan. Cornelius Johnson reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2021 Postseason
Michigan paired 627 primary output with 81.7 efficiency.
Supporting note
2023 Postseason role shape
target-driven usage with 77.4 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value stayed steady
2023 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: Bowling Green
Win with an explosive receiving profile. It landed in the 85.7th 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.
2023 Postseason · Michigan
Games
14
Receiving Yards / G
43.1
Efficiency
77.4
Usage
21
Consistency
53.5
Best Game by takeover score
Washington
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. Washington: 25. Alabama: 12. East Carolina: 71. UNLV: 82. Bowling Green: 71. Nebraska: 32. Minnesota: 86. Indiana: 15. Michigan State: 26. Purdue: 39. Penn State: 24. Maryland: 24. Ohio State: 33. Iowa: 64
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. Washington: 3 by 55.6. Alabama: 2 by 40. East Carolina: 5 by 94.7. UNLV: 5 by 100. Bowling Green: 3 by 100. Nebraska: 2 by 100. Minnesota: 3 by 100. Indiana: 1 by 100. Michigan State: 3 by 57.8. Purdue: 2 by 100. Penn State: 2 by 80. Maryland: 3 by 53.3. Ohio State: 4 by 55. Iowa: 9 by 47.4
Split Comparison
Wins43.1 · n=14
First Half54.1 · n=7 · +22 vs Second Half
Second Half32.1 · n=7 · -22 vs First Half
All Games43.1 · n=14
Game Log
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
14 games
Featured metric
Receiving Yards
Top game by takeover score
Bowling Green
Best efficiency game
100 vs Purdue
| Result | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tue 1/9 | vs Washington | W 34-13 | — | 3 | 25 | 8.3 | 8.30 | 0 | 10 |
| Mon 1/1 | vs Alabama | W 27-20 | — | 2 | 12 | 6 | 6 | 0 | 12 |
| Sun 12/3 | @ IowaHigh volume | W 26-0 | — | 9 | 64 | 6.4 | 7.10 | 0 | 14 |
| Sat 11/25 | vs Ohio State | W 30-24 | — | 4 | 33 | 8.3 | 8.30 | 0 | 19 |
| Sat 11/18 | @ Maryland | W 31-24 | — | 3 | 24 | 8 | 8 | 0 | 10 |
| Sat 11/11 | @ Penn State | W 24-15 | — | 2 | 24 | 12 | 12 | 0 | 13 |
| Sat 11/4 | vs Purdue | W 41-13 | — | 2 | 39 | 17.7 | 19.50 | 0 | 23 |
| Sat 10/21 | @ Michigan State | W 49-0 | — | 3 | 26 | 8.7 | 8.70 | 0 | 11 |
| Sat 10/14 | vs Indiana | W 52-7 | — | 1 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 0 | 15 |
| Sat 10/7 | @ Minnesota | W 52-10 | — | 3 | 86 | 28.7 | 28.70 | 0 | 49 |
| Sat 9/30 | @ Nebraska | W 45-7 | — | 2 | 32 | 16 | 16 | 0 | 20 |
| Sat 9/16 | vs Bowling Green | W 31-6 | — | 3 | 71 | 23.7 | 23.70 | 1 | 50 |
| Sat 9/9 | vs UNLV | W 35-7 | — | 5 | 82 | 18 | 16.40 | 0 | 26 |
| Sat 9/2 | vs East Carolina | W 30-3 | — | 5 | 71 | 14.2 | 14.20 | 0 | 20 |
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
Michigan
2019-2023
Opening stop
Season Progression
20192020202120212022202220232023
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 Regular Season | Michigan | 61 | 61.1 | 6.9 | — |
| 2020 Regular Season | Michigan | 254 | 79.8 | 17.2 | 193 |
| 2021 Postseason | Michigan | 627 | 81.7 | 16.6 | 373 |
| 2021 Regular Season | Michigan | 627 | 81.7 | 16.6 | 0 |
| 2022 Postseason | Michigan | 499 | 72.3 | 14.9 | -128 |
| 2022 Regular Season | Michigan | 499 | 72.3 | 14.9 | 0 |
| 2023 Postseason | Michigan | 604 | 77.4 | 21 | 105 |
| 2023 Regular Season | Michigan | 604 | 77.4 | 21 | 0 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
Ohio State
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
160
Primary metric
160 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#2
Indiana
108
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
108 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#3
Northern Illinois
117
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
117 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#4
Bowling Green
71
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
71 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#5
Minnesota
86
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
86 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2021 Postseason · Michigan
627 primary output · 81.7 efficiency · 16.6 usage
63.3
#2
2021 Regular Season · Michigan
63.3
627 primary · 81.7 efficiency · 16.6 usage
#3
2023 Postseason · Michigan
61.5
604 primary · 77.4 efficiency · 21 usage
Milestones
4
100+ receiving yards
1
8+ catch outings
4
2+ TD games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Recruit Profile
4★
Class 2019 · Rating 0.9294
Brunswick School · Greenwich, CT
- Committed To
- Michigan
- Commit Date
- Jan 1, 2019
Career Facts
1
Career teams
8
Seasons tracked
2,045
Career Receiving Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 8 tracked seasons, 48 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.