Usage Score
4.8
Player Dossier
2019-2023Vanderbilt
Gabe Jeudy-Lally
DB • 6'2" • 190 lbs • Charlotte, NC, USA
Ball-hunting defenderSplash play profile
Gabe Jeudy-Lally shows a ball-hunting defender profile with 20.8 disruption score.
Efficiency
20.8
Consistency
51.3
Season Value
24.1
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2023 Postseason · Tennessee
192021222323
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 3
- Seasons Tracked
- 6
- Program Path
- Vanderbilt • BYU • Tennessee
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: Stanford
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.
Gabe Jeudy-Lally, DB. Best season Best season by value score: 2023 Postseason · Tennessee. Gabe Jeudy-Lally shows a ball-hunting defender profile with 20.8 disruption score.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2023 Postseason
Tennessee paired 10 primary output with 20.8 efficiency.
Supporting note
2023 Postseason role shape
impact-led usage with 20.8 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value stayed steady
2023 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Multi-stop career journey
Production spans 3 team stops, with role shifts visible across Vanderbilt, BYU, Tennessee.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: Texas A&M
Win with 3 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 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 Postseason · Tennessee
Games
13
Havoc Plays / G
0.8
Efficiency
20.8
Usage
4.8
Consistency
51.3
Best Game by takeover score
Iowa
Hover a point or expand a game row to keep the active game context visible here.
Game-by-Game Trend
12345678910111213
Chronological game order.
Game by game trend chart. Iowa: 1. Virginia: 0. Unknown: 1. Florida: 1. UTSA: 0. South Carolina: 0. Texas A&M: 3. Alabama: 2. Kentucky: 0. UConn: 1. Missouri: 1. Georgia: 0. Vanderbilt: 0
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. Iowa: 5 by 30.8. Virginia: 1 by 4.2. Unknown: 5 by 30.8. Florida: 4 by 26.7. UTSA: 1 by 4.2. South Carolina: 3 by 12.5. Texas A&M: 0 by 30. Alabama: 5 by 40.8. Kentucky: 7 by 29.2. UConn: 1 by 14.2. Missouri: 3 by 22.5. Georgia: 3 by 12.5. Vanderbilt: 3 by 12.5
Split Comparison
Wins0.6 · n=8 · -0.4 vs Losses
Losses1 · n=4 · +0.4 vs Wins
First Half0.9 · n=7 · +0.2 vs Second Half
Second Half0.7 · n=6 · -0.2 vs First Half
Game Log
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
13 games
Featured metric
Havoc Plays
Top game by takeover score
Texas A&M
Best efficiency game
40.8 vs Alabama
| Result | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mon 1/1 | vs Iowa | W 35-0 | 5 | 5 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 1 | — | — |
| Sat 11/25 | vs Vanderbilt | W 48-24 | 3 | 3 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 11/18 | vs Georgia | L 10-38 | 3 | 2 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 11/11 | @ Missouri | L 7-36 | 3 | 1 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 1 | — | — |
| Sat 11/4 | vs UConn | W 59-3 | 1 | 1 | — | 1 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 10/28 | @ Kentucky | W 33-27 | 7 | 5 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 10/21 | @ Alabama | L 20-34 | 5 | 4 | — | 1 | 1 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 10/14 | vs Texas A&M | W 20-13 | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | — | — |
| Sat 9/30 | vs South Carolina | W 41-20 | 3 | 3 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 9/23 | vs UTSA | W 45-14 | 1 | 1 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 9/16 | @ Florida | L 16-29 | 4 | 3 | — | 1 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 9/9 | vs Unknown | — | 5 | 2 | — | 1 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 9/2 | vs Virginia | W 49-13 | 1 | 0 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
Vanderbilt
2019-2021
Opening stop
- 2
BYU
2022
Peak year stop
- 3
Tennessee
2023
Final stop
Season Progression
201920202021202220232023
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 Regular Season | Vanderbilt | 0 | — | — | — |
| 2020 Regular Season | Vanderbilt | 3 | 25.3 | 7.2 | 3 |
| 2021 Regular Season | Vanderbilt | 3 | 19.9 | 4.7 | 0 |
| 2022 Regular Season | BYU | 7 | 20.4 | 3.1 | 4 |
| 2023 Postseason | Tennessee | 10 | 20.8 | 4.8 | 3 |
| 2023 Regular Season | Tennessee | 10 | 20.8 | 4.8 | 0 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
Stanford
Win with 3 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
3
Primary metric
3 disruption/tackle impact with 54.2 takeover score.
#2
Missouri
1
Primary metric
Loss with 1 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
1 disruption/tackle impact with 54 takeover score.
#3
Tennessee
3
Primary metric
Loss with 3 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
3 disruption/tackle impact with 53 takeover score.
#4
Texas A&M
3
Primary metric
Win with 3 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
3 disruption/tackle impact with 45.7 takeover score.
#5
UConn
1
Primary metric
Win with 1 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
1 disruption/tackle impact with 41.4 takeover score.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2023 Postseason · Tennessee
10 primary output · 20.8 efficiency · 4.8 usage
24.1
#2
2023 Regular Season · Tennessee
24.1
10 primary · 20.8 efficiency · 4.8 usage
#3
2020 Regular Season · Vanderbilt
12.4
3 primary · 25.3 efficiency · 7.2 usage
Milestones
0
Impact games
1
Splash games
1
10+ tackle games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Recruit Profile
3★
Class 2019 · Rating 0.8256
Ardrey Kell · Charlotte, NC
- Committed To
- Vanderbilt
- Commit Date
- Jan 1, 2019
Career Facts
3
Career teams
6
Seasons tracked
144
Career Tackles
Data Context
Coverage spans 6 tracked seasons, 40 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.