Player Stats

Joshua Cephus 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

Receiving yards
3,639
Receptions
313
Touchdowns
30

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesRecRec YdsTDOverall
2019 Regular SeasonUTSA48153140.1
2020 PostseasonUTSA12326168.9
2020 Regular SeasonUTSA1255521468.9
2021 PostseasonUTSA14210073.7
2021 Regular SeasonUTSA1469793773.7
2022 Regular SeasonUTSA1387985780.4
2023 PostseasonUTSA137102185.2
2023 Regular SeasonUTSA13821,049985.2

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2023 Postseason

UTSA paired 1,151 primary output with 75 efficiency.

Supporting note

2023 Postseason role shape

target-driven usage with 75 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: South Florida

Win with an explosive receiving profile. It landed in the 92.3th 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.

2023 Postseason · UTSA

Games

13

Receiving Yards / G

88.5

Efficiency

75

Usage

32.2

Consistency

65.9

Best Game by takeover score

South Florida

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.

12345678910111213

Chronological game order.

Game by game trend chart. Marshall: 102. Houston: 123. Texas State: 40. Army: 84. Tennessee: 58. Temple: 81. UAB: 55. Florida Atlantic: 57. East Carolina: 183. North Texas: 69. Rice: 53. South Florida: 163. Tulane: 83

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. Marshall: 7 by 97.1. Houston: 9 by 91.1. Texas State: 7 by 38.1. Army: 8 by 70. Tennessee: 7 by 55.2. Temple: 7 by 77.1. UAB: 7 by 52.4. Florida Atlantic: 7 by 54.3. East Carolina: 4 by 100. North Texas: 6 by 76.7. Rice: 5 by 70.7. South Florida: 9 by 100. Tulane: 6 by 92.2

Split Comparison

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

Wins89.2 · Games = 9 · +2.2 vs Losses
Losses87 · Games = 4 · -2.2 vs Wins