Usage Score
37.2
Player Dossier
2009-2013Michigan
Jeremy Gallon
WR • 5'8" • Apopka, FL, USA
Alpha targetExplosive finisher
Jeremy Gallon reads as a alpha target based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Efficiency
80.2
Consistency
41.6
Season Value
64.8
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2013 Postseason · Michigan
0910111112121313
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 1
- Seasons Tracked
- 8
- Program Path
- Michigan
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: Indiana
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.
Jeremy Gallon, WR. Best season Best season by value score: 2013 Postseason · Michigan. Jeremy Gallon reads as a alpha target based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2013 Postseason
Michigan paired 1,373 primary output with 80.2 efficiency.
Supporting note
2013 Postseason role shape
target-driven usage with 80.2 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value stayed steady
2013 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: Indiana
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.
2013 Postseason · Michigan
Games
13
Receiving Yards / G
105.6
Efficiency
80.2
Usage
37.2
Consistency
41.6
Best Game by takeover score
Kansas State
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. Kansas State: 89. Central Michigan: 47. Notre Dame: 184. Akron: 66. UConn: 31. Minnesota: 39. Penn State: 95. Indiana: 369. Michigan State: 67. Nebraska: 49. Northwestern: 115. Iowa: 47. Ohio State: 175
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. Kansas State: 9 by 65.9. Central Michigan: 4 by 78.3. Notre Dame: 8 by 100. Akron: 6 by 73.3. UConn: 4 by 51.7. Minnesota: 2 by 100. Penn State: 7 by 90.5. Indiana: 14 by 100. Michigan State: 5 by 89.3. Nebraska: 5 by 65.3. Northwestern: 10 by 76.7. Iowa: 6 by 52.2. Ohio State: 9 by 100
Split Comparison
Wins121.6 · n=7 · +34.6 vs Losses
Losses87 · n=6 · -34.6 vs Wins
First Half78.7 · n=7 · -58.3 vs Second Half
Second Half137 · n=6 · +58.3 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
Indiana
Best efficiency game
100 vs Ohio State
| Result | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sun 12/29 | @ Kansas StateHigh volume | L 14-31 | — | 9 | 89 | 8.4 | 9.90 | 0 | 22 |
| Sat 11/30 | vs Ohio State100 receiving yards · High volume | L 41-42 | — | 9 | 175 | 19.4 | 19.40 | 1 | 84 |
| Sat 11/23 | @ Iowa | L 21-24 | — | 6 | 47 | 7.8 | 7.80 | 1 | 14 |
| Sat 11/16 | @ Northwestern100 receiving yards · High volume | W 27-19 | — | 10 | 115 | 11.5 | 11.50 | 0 | 24 |
| Sat 11/9 | vs Nebraska | L 13-17 | — | 5 | 49 | 9.8 | 9.80 | 0 | 16 |
| Sat 11/2 | @ Michigan State | L 6-29 | — | 5 | 67 | 13.4 | 13.40 | 0 | 35 |
| Sat 10/19 | vs Indiana100 receiving yards · High volume | W 63-47 | — | 14 | 369 | 24.3 | 26.40 | 2 | 70 |
| Sat 10/12 | @ Penn State | L 40-43 | — | 7 | 95 | 13.6 | 13.60 | 1 | 25 |
| Sat 10/5 | vs Minnesota | W 42-13 | — | 2 | 39 | 19.5 | 19.50 | 0 | 30 |
| Sun 9/22 | @ UConn | W 24-21 | — | 4 | 31 | 7.8 | 7.80 | 0 | 12 |
| Sat 9/14 | vs Akron | W 28-24 | — | 6 | 66 | 11 | 11 | 0 | 20 |
| Sun 9/8 | vs Notre Dame100 receiving yards · High volume | W 41-30 | — | 8 | 184 | 22 | 23 | 3 | 61 |
| Sat 8/31 | vs Central Michigan | W 59-9 | — | 4 | 47 | 11.8 | 11.80 | 1 | 16 |
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
Michigan
2009-2013
Opening stop
Season Progression
20092010201120112012201220132013
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2009 Regular Season | Michigan | 0 | — | — | — |
| 2010 Regular Season | Michigan | 49 | 81.7 | 7.7 | 49 |
| 2011 Postseason | Michigan | 439 | 74.2 | 20.6 | 390 |
| 2011 Regular Season | Michigan | 439 | 74.2 | 20.6 | 0 |
| 2012 Postseason | Michigan | 829 | 82.1 | 28.7 | 390 |
| 2012 Regular Season | Michigan | 829 | 82.1 | 28.7 | 0 |
| 2013 Postseason | Michigan | 1,373 | 80.2 | 37.2 | 544 |
| 2013 Regular Season | Michigan | 1,373 | 80.2 | 37.2 | 0 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
Indiana
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
369
Primary metric
369 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#2
South Carolina
145
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
145 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#3
Purdue
79
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
79 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#4
Iowa
133
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
133 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#5
Notre Dame
78
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
78 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2013 Postseason · Michigan
1,373 primary output · 80.2 efficiency · 37.2 usage
64.8
#2
2013 Regular Season · Michigan
64.8
1,373 primary · 80.2 efficiency · 37.2 usage
#3
2012 Postseason · Michigan
59
829 primary · 82.1 efficiency · 28.7 usage
Milestones
7
100+ receiving yards
6
8+ catch outings
3
2+ TD games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Recruit Profile
4★
Class 2009 · Rating 0.9099
Apopka · Apopka, FL
- Committed To
- Michigan
- Commit Date
- Jan 1, 2009
Career Facts
1
Career teams
8
Seasons tracked
2,690
Career Receiving Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 8 tracked seasons, 49 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.