Player Stats

Eric Ward 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
2,863
Receptions
255
Touchdowns
31

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesRecRec YdsTDOverall
2009 Regular SeasonTexas Tech0-00-
2010 PostseasonTexas Tech417036.6
2010 Regular SeasonTexas Tech4556036.6
2011 Regular SeasonTexas Tech12848001169.5
2012 PostseasonTexas Tech12779178.3
2012 Regular SeasonTexas Tech12759741178.3
2013 PostseasonTexas Tech12343074.8
2013 Regular SeasonTexas Tech1280904874.8

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2012 Postseason

Texas Tech paired 1,053 primary output with 77.4 efficiency.

Supporting note

2013 Postseason role shape

target-driven usage with 75.4 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: SMU

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.

2013 Postseason · Texas Tech

Games

12

Receiving Yards / G

78.9

Efficiency

75.4

Usage

19

Consistency

70.6

Best Game by takeover score

SMU

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.

123456789101112

Chronological game order.

Game by game trend chart. Arizona State: 43. SMU: 150. Stephen F. Austin: 36. Texas State: 35. Kansas: 122. Iowa State: 61. West Virginia: 31. Oklahoma: 106. Oklahoma State: 86. Kansas State: 107. Baylor: 82. Texas: 88

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. Arizona State: 3 by 95.6. SMU: 13 by 76.9. Stephen F. Austin: 3 by 80. Texas State: 4 by 58.3. Kansas: 7 by 100. Iowa State: 7 by 58.1. West Virginia: 3 by 68.9. Oklahoma: 9 by 78.5. Oklahoma State: 8 by 71.7. Kansas State: 11 by 64.8. Baylor: 7 by 78.1. Texas: 8 by 73.3

Split Comparison

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

Wins68.3 · Games = 7 · -25.5 vs Losses
Losses93.8 · Games = 5 · +25.5 vs Wins