Usage Score
23.4
Player Dossier
2009-2012Mississippi State
Chad Bumphis
WR • 5'11" • Tupelo, MS, USA
Vertical playmakerExplosive finisher
Chad Bumphis reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Efficiency
81.5
Consistency
45.9
Season Value
62.7
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2012 Postseason · Mississippi State
091011111212
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 1
- Seasons Tracked
- 6
- Program Path
- Mississippi State
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: Troy
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.
Chad Bumphis, WR. Best season Best season by value score: 2012 Postseason · Mississippi State. Chad Bumphis reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2012 Postseason
Mississippi State paired 922 primary output with 81.5 efficiency.
Supporting note
2012 Postseason role shape
target-driven usage with 81.5 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value stayed steady
2012 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: Troy
Win 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.
2012 Postseason · Mississippi State
Games
13
Receiving Yards / G
70.9
Efficiency
81.5
Usage
23.4
Consistency
45.9
Best Game by takeover score
Northwestern
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. Northwestern: 18. Unknown: 9. Auburn: 47. Troy: 180. South Alabama: 35. Kentucky: 104. Tennessee: 93. Middle Tennessee: 11. Alabama: 7. Texas A&M: 50. LSU: 140. Arkansas: 82. Ole Miss: 146
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. Northwestern: 3 by 40. Unknown: 1 by 60. Auburn: 3 by 100. Troy: 6 by 100. South Alabama: 2 by 100. Kentucky: 9 by 77. Tennessee: 7 by 88.6. Middle Tennessee: 1 by 73.3. Alabama: 1 by 46.7. Texas A&M: 4 by 83.3. LSU: 9 by 100. Arkansas: 6 by 91.1. Ole Miss: 6 by 100
Split Comparison
Wins78.9 · n=7 · +6.7 vs Losses
Losses72.2 · n=5 · -6.7 vs Wins
First Half69.4 · n=7 · -3.2 vs Second Half
Second Half72.7 · n=6 · +3.2 vs First Half
Game Log
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
13 games
Featured metric
Receiving Yards
Top game by takeover score
Troy
Best efficiency game
100 vs Ole Miss
| Result | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tue 1/1 | @ Northwestern | L 20-34 | — | 3 | 18 | 5.3 | 6 | 0 | 9 |
| Sun 11/25 | @ Ole Miss100 receiving yards · 2+ TD | L 24-41 | — | 6 | 146 | 24.3 | 24.30 | 2 | 68 |
| Sat 11/17 | vs Arkansas2+ TD | W 45-14 | — | 6 | 82 | 13.7 | 13.70 | 2 | 22 |
| Sun 11/11 | @ LSU100 receiving yards · High volume | L 17-37 | — | 9 | 140 | 15.6 | 15.60 | 1 | 40 |
| Sat 11/3 | vs Texas A&M | L 13-38 | — | 4 | 50 | 12.5 | 12.50 | 1 | 28 |
| Sun 10/28 | @ Alabama | L 7-38 | — | 1 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 0 | 7 |
| Sat 10/20 | vs Middle Tennessee | W 45-3 | — | 1 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 0 | 11 |
| Sun 10/14 | vs Tennessee | W 41-31 | — | 7 | 93 | 13.3 | 13.30 | 0 | 25 |
| Sat 10/6 | @ Kentucky100 receiving yards · High volume | W 27-14 | — | 9 | 104 | 11.6 | 11.60 | 1 | 27 |
| Sat 9/22 | vs South Alabama | W 30-10 | — | 2 | 35 | 10.7 | 17.50 | 0 | 21 |
| Sat 9/15 | @ Troy100 receiving yards · 2+ TD | W 30-24 | — | 6 | 180 | 30 | 30 | 3 | 72 |
| Sat 9/8 | vs Auburn | W 28-10 | — | 3 | 47 | 11.8 | 15.70 | 1 | 17 |
| Sat 9/1 | vs Unknown | — | — | 1 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 1 | 9 |
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
Mississippi State
2009-2012
Opening stop
Season Progression
200920102011201120122012
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2009 Regular Season | Mississippi State | 375 | 63.5 | 21.4 | — |
| 2010 Regular Season | Mississippi State | 634 | 83.8 | 31.2 | 259 |
| 2011 Postseason | Mississippi State | 339 | 61.8 | 12.7 | -295 |
| 2011 Regular Season | Mississippi State | 339 | 61.8 | 12.7 | 0 |
| 2012 Postseason | Mississippi State | 922 | 81.5 | 23.4 | 583 |
| 2012 Regular Season | Mississippi State | 922 | 81.5 | 23.4 | 0 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
Troy
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
180
Primary metric
180 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#2
Unknown
133
Primary metric
Game with an explosive receiving profile.
133 receiving yards with a 98.5 efficiency score.
#3
Georgia Tech
123
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
123 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#4
Unknown
89
Primary metric
Game with an explosive receiving profile.
89 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#5
LSU
140
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
140 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2012 Postseason · Mississippi State
922 primary output · 81.5 efficiency · 23.4 usage
62.7
#2
2012 Regular Season · Mississippi State
62.7
922 primary · 81.5 efficiency · 23.4 usage
#3
2010 Regular Season · Mississippi State
60.6
634 primary · 83.8 efficiency · 31.2 usage
Milestones
7
100+ receiving yards
3
8+ catch outings
6
2+ TD games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Recruit Profile
4★
Class 2009 · Rating 0.9391
Tupelo · Tupelo, MS
- Committed To
- Mississippi State
- Commit Date
- Jan 1, 2009
Career Facts
1
Career teams
6
Seasons tracked
2,270
Career Receiving Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 6 tracked seasons, 50 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.