Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2025 Regular Season
Arkansas paired 1,294 primary output with 65.6 efficiency.
Player Stats
Career production, season-by-season totals, and the selected-season workbench are grouped here for stat-first searches.
Stat Footprint
Season Ledger
| Season | Team | Games | Scrimmage | Rush Yds | Rec Yds | TD | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 Regular Season | Buffalo | 3 | 132 | 132 | 0 | 1 | 46.3 |
| 2022 Postseason | Buffalo | 13 | 19 | 19 | 0 | 0 | 53.4 |
| 2022 Regular Season | Buffalo | 13 | 664 | 587 | 77 | 8 | 53.4 |
| 2023 Regular Season | Buffalo | 11 | 397 | 362 | 35 | 2 | 43.5 |
| 2024 Regular Season | New Mexico State | 12 | 787 | 713 | 74 | 9 | 60.4 |
| 2025 Regular Season | Arkansas | 12 | 1,294 | 1,068 | 226 | 9 | 83.5 |
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2025 Regular Season
Arkansas paired 1,294 primary output with 65.6 efficiency.
Supporting note
2025 Regular Season role shape
backfield-heavy usage with 65.6 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value is trending up
2025 Regular Season improved on the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Multi-stop career journey
Production spans 3 team stops, with role shifts visible across Buffalo, New Mexico State, Arkansas.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: Texas A&M
Loss with 163 yards from scrimmage and efficient touch value. It landed in the 100th percentile of the selected season.
Analysis workspace
Filter the strongest season sample, inspect game-level shape, and compare the statistical profile without scrolling through the full player page.
Understand the selected season before dropping into the full game log.
Games
12
Scrimmage Yards / G
107.8
Efficiency
65.6
Usage
31.3
Consistency
78.7
Best Game by takeover score
Texas A&M
Active game
Hover over a point
Hover or select a game to keep its context visible here without the page shifting around.
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. Alabama A&M: 105. Arkansas State: 116. Ole Miss: 118. Memphis: 84. Notre Dame: 69. Tennessee: 137. Texas A&M: 163. Auburn: 52. Mississippi State: 135. LSU: 91. Texas: 148. Missouri: 76
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. Alabama A&M: 11 by 89.8. Arkansas State: 9 by 100. Ole Miss: 15 by 64. Memphis: 17 by 49.8. Notre Dame: 16 by 44.2. Tennessee: 20 by 71.6. Texas A&M: 19 by 85.7. Auburn: 13 by 38. Mississippi State: 23 by 62.6. LSU: 14 by 67.9. Texas: 23 by 65.4. Missouri: 16 by 48.2
Compare how this player performed across different situations. "Games" shows how many matchups are included in each split.
Next best actions
Move from the player story into the game log, career arc, team context, and video shelf.