Player Stats

Caleb McCullough 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

Tackles
136
TFL
12.5
Sacks
2
QB hurries
2
Passes defended
3

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesTacklesTFLSacksQB HurPDTDOverall
2020 Regular SeasonArizona State23-0--029.7
2021 Regular SeasonArizona State12-0--040
2022 Regular SeasonArizona State33-0--036.8
2023 Regular SeasonArizona State11524.5112041.1
2024 PostseasonArizona State13311--069.2
2024 Regular SeasonArizona State13737011069.2

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2024 Postseason

Arizona State paired 13 primary output with 34.4 efficiency.

Supporting note

2024 Postseason role shape

impact-led usage with 34.4 efficiency.

Supporting note

Career value stayed steady

2024 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.

Supporting note

Peak game by takeover score: Utah

Win with 3.5 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet. 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.

2024 Postseason · Arizona State

Games

13

Havoc Plays / G

1

Efficiency

34.4

Usage

10.5

Consistency

54.5

Best Game by takeover score

Utah

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. Texas: 2. Mississippi State: 0. Texas State: 0.5. Texas Tech: 0. Kansas: 0. Utah: 3.5. Cincinnati: 1. Oklahoma State: 1. UCF: 1. Kansas State: 1. BYU: 1. Arizona: 0. Iowa State: 2

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. Texas: 3 by 32.5. Mississippi State: 4 by 16.7. Texas State: 5 by 25.8. Texas Tech: 4 by 16.7. Kansas: 6 by 25. Utah: 12 by 85. Cincinnati: 5 by 30.8. Oklahoma State: 9 by 47.5. UCF: 8 by 43.3. Kansas State: 6 by 35. BYU: 6 by 35. Arizona: 3 by 12.5. Iowa State: 5 by 40.8

Split Comparison

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

Wins1 · Games = 10 · +0 vs Losses
Losses1 · Games = 3 · +0 vs Wins