Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2021 Postseason
Pittsburgh paired 1,593 primary output with 89 efficiency.
Player Stats
Jordan Addison 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
- 3,134
- Receptions
- 219
- Touchdowns
- 30
Season Ledger
Crawlable season-by-season stats
| Season | Team | Games | Rec | Rec Yds | TD | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 Regular Season | Pittsburgh | 10 | 60 | 666 | 4 | 64.8 |
| 2021 Postseason | Pittsburgh | 14 | 7 | 114 | 0 | 88.8 |
| 2021 Regular Season | Pittsburgh | 14 | 93 | 1,479 | 18 | 88.8 |
| 2022 Regular Season | USC | 11 | 59 | 875 | 8 | 67.5 |
Player insights
Supporting note
2022 Regular Season role shape
target-driven usage with 82.9 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value cooled off
2022 Regular Season fell back from the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Multi-stop career journey
Production spans 2 team stops, with role shifts visible across Pittsburgh, USC.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: UCLA
Win with an explosive receiving profile. 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.
2022 Regular Season · USC
Games
11
Receiving Yards / G
79.5
Efficiency
82.9
Usage
22.7
Consistency
56.5
Best Game by takeover score
UCLA
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.
Chronological game order.
Game by game trend chart. Rice: 54. Stanford: 172. Fresno State: 69. Oregon State: 42. Arizona State: 105. Washington State: 37. Utah: 106. Colorado: 2. UCLA: 178. Notre Dame: 45. Utah: 65
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. Rice: 5 by 72. Stanford: 7 by 100. Fresno State: 6 by 76.7. Oregon State: 3 by 93.3. Arizona State: 8 by 87.5. Washington State: 3 by 82.2. Utah: 7 by 100. Colorado: 1 by 13.3. UCLA: 11 by 100. Notre Dame: 3 by 100. Utah: 5 by 86.7
Split Comparison
Compare how this player performed across different situations. "Games" shows how many matchups are included in each split.
Wins78.2 · Games = 9 · -7.3 vs Losses
Losses85.5 · Games = 2 · +7.3 vs Wins
Next best actions
Keep exploring Jordan Addison
Move from the player story into the game log, career arc, team context, and video shelf.