Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2023 Postseason
Alabama paired 668 primary output with 82.7 efficiency.
Player Stats
Isaiah Bond 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
- 1,428
- Receptions
- 99
- Touchdowns
- 11
Season Ledger
Crawlable season-by-season stats
| Season | Team | Games | Rec | Rec Yds | TD | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 Postseason | Alabama | 9 | 1 | 6 | 1 | 44 |
| 2022 Regular Season | Alabama | 9 | 16 | 214 | 0 | 44 |
| 2023 Postseason | Alabama | 14 | 4 | 47 | 0 | 80.6 |
| 2023 Regular Season | Alabama | 14 | 44 | 621 | 4 | 80.6 |
| 2024 Postseason | Texas | 13 | 1 | 8 | 0 | 65.8 |
| 2024 Regular Season | Texas | 13 | 33 | 532 | 6 | 65.8 |
Player insights
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 compare the statistical profile without scrolling through the full player page.
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
UTSA
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.
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
Next best actions
Keep exploring Isaiah Bond
Move from the player story into the game log, career arc, team context, and video shelf.