Player Dossier

2022-2024

Texas

Isaiah Bond

WR • 5'11" • 180 lbs • Buford, GA, USA

Vertical playmakerExplosive finisher

Isaiah Bond reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.

Usage Score

12.4

Efficiency

81.1

Consistency

59.9

Season Value

59.5

Career Arc

Value trend by season

Best season by value score: 2023 Postseason · Alabama

222223232424

Snapshot

Career Teams
2
Seasons Tracked
6
Program Path
Alabama • Texas
Peak Game
Peak game by takeover score: Texas A&M

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.

Isaiah Bond, WR. Best season Best season by value score: 2023 Postseason · Alabama. Isaiah Bond reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.

Isaiah Bond played WR for Alabama and Texas. Across 3 tracked seasons, Isaiah Bond recorded 101 rushing yards, 1,428 receiving yards, and 1 tackles. His top tracked season came in 2024 with Texas.

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2023 Postseason

Alabama paired 668 primary output with 82.7 efficiency.

Supporting note

2024 Postseason role shape

target-driven usage with 81.1 efficiency.

Supporting note

Career value stayed steady

2024 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 Alabama, Texas.

Supporting note

Peak game by takeover score: UTSA

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.

2024 Postseason · Texas

Games

13

Receiving Yards / G

41.5

Efficiency

81.1

Usage

12.4

Consistency

59.9

Best Game by takeover score

Ohio State

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. Ohio State: 8. Colorado State: 61. Michigan: 51. UTSA: 103. UL Monroe: 75. Mississippi State: 74. Oklahoma: 5. Georgia: 11. Florida: 55. Arkansas: 48. Kentucky: 27. Texas A&M: 0. Georgia: 22

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. Ohio State: 1 by 53.3. Colorado State: 5 by 81.3. Michigan: 3 by 100. UTSA: 5 by 100. UL Monroe: 2 by 100. Mississippi State: 5 by 98.7. Oklahoma: 1 by 33.3. Georgia: 2 by 36.7. Florida: 3 by 100. Arkansas: 4 by 80. Kentucky: 2 by 90. Georgia: 1 by 100

Split Comparison

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

Wins49.9 · Games = 10 · +36.2 vs Losses
Losses13.7 · Games = 3 · -36.2 vs Wins
First Half53.9 · Games = 7 · +26.7 vs Second Half
Second Half27.2 · Games = 6 · -26.7 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

UTSA

Best efficiency game

100 vs Georgia

Result
Sat 1/11vs Ohio StateL 14-28188808
Sat 12/7vs GeorgiaL 19-221222222022
Sun 12/1@ Texas A&MW 17-73
Sat 11/23vs KentuckyW 31-1422713.513.50017
Sat 11/16@ ArkansasW 20-104481212020
Sat 11/9vs FloridaW 49-1735524.818.30134
Sat 10/19vs GeorgiaL 15-302115.55.5019
Sat 10/12@ OklahomaW 34-3155505
Sat 9/28vs Mississippi StateW 35-1357416.714.80027
Sun 9/22vs UL MonroeW 51-327537.537.50056
Sat 9/14vs UTSA100 receiving yards · 2+ TDW 56-7510320.620.60251
Sat 9/7@ MichiganW 31-123511717033
Sat 8/31vs Colorado StateW 52-056114.312.20123

Career Arc

Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.

  1. 1

    Alabama

    2022-2023

    Opening stop

  2. 2

    Texas

    2024

    Final stop

Season Progression

202220222023202320242024
SeasonTeamPrimaryEfficiencyUsageDelta
2022 PostseasonAlabama22064.410.4
2022 Regular SeasonAlabama22064.410.40
2023 PostseasonAlabama66882.722.8448
2023 Regular SeasonAlabama66882.722.80
2024 PostseasonTexas54081.112.4-128
2024 Regular SeasonTexas54081.112.40

Signature Performances

Top Games

#1 Featured game

Texas A&M

Win with an explosive receiving profile.

96

Primary metric

96 receiving yards with a 91.4 efficiency score.

#2

Georgia

79

Primary metric

Win with an explosive receiving profile.

79 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.

#3

UTSA

103

Primary metric

Win with an explosive receiving profile.

103 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.

#4

Arkansas

76

Primary metric

Win with an explosive receiving profile.

76 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.

#5

Auburn

75

Primary metric

Win with an explosive receiving profile.

75 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.

Top Seasons

#1 Season by value score

2023 Postseason · Alabama

668 primary output · 82.7 efficiency · 22.8 usage

67.3

#2

2023 Regular Season · Alabama

67.3

668 primary · 82.7 efficiency · 22.8 usage

#3

2024 Postseason · Texas

59.5

540 primary · 81.1 efficiency · 12.4 usage

Milestones

1

100+ receiving yards

0

8+ catch outings

1

2+ TD games

Bio, Recruit, and Data Context

Recruit Profile

4★

Class 2022 · Rating 0.9773

Buford · Buford, GA

Committed To
Alabama
Commit Date
Jan 1, 2022

Career Facts

2

Career teams

6

Seasons tracked

1,428

Career Receiving Yards

Data Context

Coverage spans 6 tracked seasons, 36 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.