Player Stats

Jordan Hudson 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
1,787
Receptions
144
Touchdowns
21

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesRecRec YdsTDOverall
2022 PostseasonTCU8234038.3
2022 Regular SeasonTCU812140338.3
2023 PostseasonSMU13213056.6
2023 Regular SeasonSMU1328412756.6
2024 PostseasonSMU13440055.8
2024 Regular SeasonSMU1335382555.8
2025 PostseasonSMU11517077.6
2025 Regular SeasonSMU1156749677.6

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2025 Postseason

SMU paired 766 primary output with 71.2 efficiency.

Supporting note

2025 Postseason role shape

target-driven usage with 71.2 efficiency.

Supporting note

Career value stayed steady

2025 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.

Supporting note

Multi-stop career journey

Production spans 2 team stops, with role shifts visible across TCU, SMU.

Supporting note

Peak game by takeover score: Clemson

Win with an explosive receiving profile. It landed in the 90.9th 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.

2025 Postseason · SMU

Games

11

Receiving Yards / G

69.6

Efficiency

71.2

Usage

22.6

Consistency

63.8

Best Game by takeover score

Clemson

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.

1234567891011

Chronological game order.

Game by game trend chart. Arizona: 17. East Texas A&M: 7. TCU: 62. Syracuse: 47. Stanford: 87. Clemson: 131. Wake Forest: 21. Miami: 136. Boston College: 104. Louisville: 96. California: 58

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. Arizona: 5 by 22.7. East Texas A&M: 1 by 46.7. TCU: 3 by 100. Syracuse: 6 by 52.2. Stanford: 5 by 100. Clemson: 7 by 100. Wake Forest: 4 by 35. Miami: 11 by 82.4. Boston College: 5 by 100. Louisville: 8 by 80. California: 6 by 64.4

Split Comparison

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

Wins78.1 · Games = 8 · +31.1 vs Losses
Losses47 · Games = 3 · -31.1 vs Wins