Usage Score
10.7
Player Dossier
2019-2023SMU
Jordan Kerley
WR • 6'2" • 196 lbs • Austin, TX, USA
Vertical playmakerExplosive finisher
Jordan Kerley reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Efficiency
69
Consistency
63.9
Season Value
50.6
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2022 Postseason · SMU
192021222223
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 2
- Seasons Tracked
- 6
- Program Path
- Arizona State • SMU
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: South Florida
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.
Jordan Kerley, WR. Best season Best season by value score: 2022 Postseason · SMU. Jordan Kerley reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Jordan Kerley played WR for Arizona State and SMU. Across 5 tracked seasons, Jordan Kerley recorded 1,185 receiving yards, 1 tackles, and 12 touchdowns. His top tracked season came in 2022 with SMU.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2022 Postseason
SMU paired 588 primary output with 82.2 efficiency.
Supporting note
2023 Regular Season role shape
target-driven usage with 69 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value cooled off
2023 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 Arizona State, SMU.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: Unknown
Game 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 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 Regular Season · SMU
Games
8
Receiving Yards / G
39.9
Efficiency
69
Usage
10.7
Consistency
63.9
Best Game by takeover score
Tulsa
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. Louisiana Tech: 5. Oklahoma: 14. Unknown: 83. TCU: 51. Charlotte: 1. East Carolina: 69. Temple: 47. Tulsa: 49
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. Louisiana Tech: 2 by 16.7. Oklahoma: 2 by 46.7. Unknown: 3 by 100. TCU: 1 by 100. Charlotte: 1 by 6.7. East Carolina: 3 by 100. Temple: 2 by 100. Tulsa: 4 by 81.7
Split Comparison
Compare how this player performed across different situations. "Games" shows how many matchups are included in each split.
Wins34.2 · Games = 5 · +1.7 vs Losses
Losses32.5 · Games = 2 · -1.7 vs Wins
First Half38.3 · Games = 4 · -3.3 vs Second Half
Second Half41.5 · Games = 4 · +3.3 vs First Half
Game Log
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
8 games
Featured metric
Receiving Yards
Top game by takeover score
Unknown
Best efficiency game
100 vs Temple
| Result | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 10/28 | vs Tulsa | W 69-10 | — | 4 | 49 | 12.3 | 12.30 | 0 | 20 |
| Fri 10/20 | @ Temple | W 55-0 | — | 2 | 47 | 23.5 | 23.50 | 0 | 43 |
| Thu 10/12 | @ East Carolina | W 31-10 | — | 3 | 69 | 23 | 23 | 0 | 48 |
| Sat 9/30 | vs Charlotte | W 34-16 | — | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Sat 9/23 | @ TCU | L 17-34 | — | 1 | 51 | 51 | 51 | 0 | 51 |
| Sat 9/16 | vs Unknown2+ TD | — | — | 3 | 83 | 27.7 | 27.70 | 2 | 59 |
| Sat 9/9 | @ Oklahoma | L 11-28 | — | 2 | 14 | 7 | 7 | 0 | 13 |
| Sat 9/2 | vs Louisiana Tech | W 38-14 | — | 2 | 5 | 2.5 | 2.50 | 0 | 5 |
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
Arizona State
2019-2020
Opening stop
- 2
SMU
2021-2023
Final stop
Season Progression
201920202021202220222023
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 Regular Season | Arizona State | 81 | 53.3 | 6.8 | — |
| 2020 Regular Season | Arizona State | 0 | — | — | -81 |
| 2021 Regular Season | SMU | 197 | 81.7 | 6 | 197 |
| 2022 Postseason | SMU | 588 | 82.2 | 15.3 | 391 |
| 2022 Regular Season | SMU | 588 | 82.2 | 15.3 | 0 |
| 2023 Regular Season | SMU | 319 | 69 | 10.7 | -269 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
South Florida
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
156
Primary metric
156 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#2
Unknown
83
Primary metric
Game with an explosive receiving profile.
83 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#3
Colorado
59
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
59 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#4
Houston
43
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
43 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#5
East Carolina
69
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
69 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2022 Postseason · SMU
588 primary output · 82.2 efficiency · 15.3 usage
64
#2
2022 Regular Season · SMU
64
588 primary · 82.2 efficiency · 15.3 usage
#3
2023 Regular Season · SMU
50.6
319 primary · 69 efficiency · 10.7 usage
Milestones
2
100+ receiving yards
0
8+ catch outings
1
2+ TD games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Recruit Profile
3★
Class 2025 · Rating 0.8667
East Paulding · Dallas, GA
- Committed To
- Cincinnati
- Commit Date
- Jan 1, 2025
Career Facts
2
Career teams
6
Seasons tracked
1,185
Career Receiving Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 6 tracked seasons, 32 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.