Usage Score
33.7
Player Dossier
2020-2024Oklahoma State
Brennan Presley
WR • 5'8" • 175 lbs • Tulsa, OK, USA
Alpha targetPossession profile
Brennan Presley reads as a alpha target based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Efficiency
58.3
Consistency
51.3
Season Value
57.3
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2022 Postseason · Oklahoma State
202021212222232324
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 1
- Seasons Tracked
- 9
- Program Path
- Oklahoma State
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: Houston
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.
Brennan Presley, WR. Best season Best season by value score: 2022 Postseason · Oklahoma State. Brennan Presley reads as a alpha target based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2022 Postseason
Oklahoma State paired 813 primary output with 77.9 efficiency.
Supporting note
2024 Regular Season role shape
target-driven usage with 58.3 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: Baylor
Loss 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.
2024 Regular Season · Oklahoma State
Games
12
Receiving Yards / G
63.7
Efficiency
58.3
Usage
33.7
Consistency
51.3
Best Game by takeover score
Colorado
Hover a point or expand a game row to keep the active game context visible here.
Game-by-Game Trend
123456789101112
Chronological game order.
Game by game trend chart. Unknown: 35. Arkansas: 91. Tulsa: 46. Utah: 47. Kansas State: 70. West Virginia: 48. BYU: 43. Baylor: 183. Arizona State: 29. TCU: 75. Texas Tech: 55. Colorado: 42
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. Unknown: 7 by 33.3. Arkansas: 9 by 67.4. Tulsa: 7 by 43.8. Utah: 4 by 78.3. Kansas State: 6 by 77.8. West Virginia: 3 by 100. BYU: 5 by 57.3. Baylor: 15 by 81.3. Arizona State: 5 by 38.7. TCU: 10 by 50. Texas Tech: 10 by 36.7. Colorado: 8 by 35
Split Comparison
Wins68.5 · n=2 · +2.7 vs Losses
Losses65.8 · n=9 · -2.7 vs Wins
First Half56.2 · n=6 · -15.0 vs Second Half
Second Half71.2 · n=6 · +15.0 vs First Half
Game Log
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
12 games
Featured metric
Receiving Yards
Top game by takeover score
Baylor
Best efficiency game
100 vs West Virginia
| Result | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fri 11/29 | @ ColoradoHigh volume | L 0-52 | — | 8 | 42 | 5.3 | 5.30 | 0 | 12 |
| Sat 11/23 | vs Texas TechHigh volume | L 48-56 | — | 10 | 55 | 5.5 | 5.50 | 0 | 20 |
| Sun 11/10 | @ TCUHigh volume | L 13-38 | — | 10 | 75 | 7.5 | 7.50 | 0 | 18 |
| Sat 11/2 | vs Arizona State | L 21-42 | — | 5 | 29 | 5.3 | 5.80 | 1 | 12 |
| Sat 10/26 | @ Baylor100 receiving yards · High volume | L 28-38 | — | 15 | 183 | 11.4 | 12.20 | 1 | 33 |
| Sat 10/19 | @ BYU | L 35-38 | — | 5 | 43 | 9 | 8.60 | 1 | 21 |
| Sat 10/5 | vs West Virginia | L 14-38 | — | 3 | 48 | 16 | 16 | 0 | 25 |
| Sat 9/28 | @ Kansas State | L 20-42 | — | 6 | 70 | 11.7 | 11.70 | 0 | 21 |
| Sat 9/21 | vs Utah | L 19-22 | — | 4 | 47 | 11.6 | 11.80 | 1 | 28 |
| Sat 9/14 | @ Tulsa | W 45-10 | — | 7 | 46 | 8.5 | 6.60 | 1 | 12 |
| Sat 9/7 | vs ArkansasHigh volume | W 39-31 | — | 9 | 91 | 9.4 | 10.10 | 1 | 36 |
| Sat 8/31 | vs Unknown | — | — | 7 | 35 | 4.9 | 5 | 1 | 10 |
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
Oklahoma State
2020-2024
Opening stop
Season Progression
202020202021202120222022202320232024
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 Postseason | Oklahoma State | 125 | 73.4 | 14.5 | — |
| 2020 Regular Season | Oklahoma State | 125 | 73.4 | 14.5 | 0 |
| 2021 Postseason | Oklahoma State | 619 | 75.3 | 20 | 494 |
| 2021 Regular Season | Oklahoma State | 619 | 75.3 | 20 | 0 |
| 2022 Postseason | Oklahoma State | 813 | 77.9 | 23.5 | 194 |
| 2022 Regular Season | Oklahoma State | 813 | 77.9 | 23.5 | 0 |
| 2023 Postseason | Oklahoma State | 988 | 61.1 | 27.5 | 175 |
| 2023 Regular Season | Oklahoma State | 988 | 61.1 | 27.5 | 0 |
| 2024 Regular Season | Oklahoma State | 764 | 58.3 | 33.7 | -224 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
Houston
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
189
Primary metric
189 receiving yards with a 84 efficiency score.
#2
Baylor
183
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
183 receiving yards with a 81.3 efficiency score.
#3
Miami
118
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
118 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#4
Notre Dame
137
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
137 receiving yards with a 91.3 efficiency score.
#5
Oklahoma
118
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
118 receiving yards with a 87.4 efficiency score.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2022 Postseason · Oklahoma State
813 primary output · 77.9 efficiency · 23.5 usage
66.9
#2
2022 Regular Season · Oklahoma State
66.9
813 primary · 77.9 efficiency · 23.5 usage
#3
2023 Postseason · Oklahoma State
60.6
988 primary · 61.1 efficiency · 27.5 usage
Milestones
6
100+ receiving yards
15
8+ catch outings
2
2+ TD games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Recruit Profile
4★
Class 2026 · Rating 0.9148
Rutherford B. Hayes · Delaware, OH
- Committed To
- Ohio State
- Commit Date
- Jan 1, 2026
Career Facts
1
Career teams
9
Seasons tracked
3,309
Career Receiving Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 9 tracked seasons, 58 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.