Player Stats

Andre Fuller 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
77
TFL
2.5
Sacks
1
Passes defended
15

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesTacklesTFLSacksQB HurPDTDOverall
2022 Regular SeasonToledo1117-1-3017
2023 PostseasonToledo81-0--08.9
2023 Regular SeasonToledo810-0-208.9
2024 Regular SeasonToledo00-0--0-
2025 PostseasonToledo13510-1056.3
2025 Regular SeasonToledo13441.50-9056.3

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2025 Postseason

Toledo paired 13.5 primary output with 26.1 efficiency.

Supporting note

2025 Postseason role shape

impact-led usage with 26.1 efficiency.

Supporting note

Career value stayed steady

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

Supporting note

Peak game by takeover score: Western Michigan

Loss with 2 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.

2025 Postseason · Toledo

Games

13

Havoc Plays / G

1.0

Efficiency

26.1

Usage

4.4

Consistency

63

Best Game by takeover score

Western Michigan

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. Louisville: 2. Kentucky: 0. Western Kentucky: 2. Morgan State: 0. Western Michigan: 2. Akron: 0. Bowling Green: 1.5. Kent State: 0. Washington State: 2. Northern Illinois: 1. Miami (OH): 1. Ball State: 1. Central Michigan: 1

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. Louisville: 5 by 40.8. Kentucky: 3 by 12.5. Western Kentucky: 3 by 32.5. Morgan State: 1 by 4.2. Western Michigan: 6 by 45. Akron: 7 by 29.2. Bowling Green: 5 by 35.8. Kent State: 2 by 8.3. Washington State: 1 by 24.2. Northern Illinois: 2 by 18.3. Miami (OH): 2 by 18.3. Ball State: 3 by 22.5. Central Michigan: 9 by 47.5

Split Comparison

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

Wins0.8 · Games = 8 · -0.8 vs Losses
Losses1.5 · Games = 5 · +0.8 vs Wins