Usage Score
0
Player Dossier
2009-2013Colorado State
Joe Brown
TE • 6'3" • Wichita, KS, USA
Reliable chain-moverPossession profile
Joe Brown reads as a reliable chain-mover based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Efficiency
—
Consistency
100
Season Value
50
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2011 Regular Season · Colorado State
0910111213
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 1
- Seasons Tracked
- 5
- Program Path
- Colorado State
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: New Mexico
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.
Joe Brown, TE. Best season Best season by value score: 2011 Regular Season · Colorado State. Joe Brown reads as a reliable chain-mover based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2011 Regular Season
Colorado State paired 197 primary output with 50.3 efficiency.
Supporting note
2013 Regular Season role shape
target-driven usage with — efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value is trending up
2013 Regular Season improved on the prior stop by season value score.
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 Regular Season · Colorado State
Games
2
Receiving Yards / G
0
Efficiency
—
Usage
0
Consistency
100
Best Game by takeover score
Air Force
Not enough games exist for the full explorer. The summary cards stay available so the season still reads clearly.
Game-by-Game Trend
12
Chronological game order.
Game by game trend chart. New Mexico: 0. Air Force: 0
Volume vs Efficiency
Scatter view is hidden because this season does not have enough game-to-game variety yet.
Split Comparison
Wins0 · n=2
All Games0 · n=2
Game Log
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
2 games
Featured metric
Receiving Yards
Top game by takeover score
Air Force
Best efficiency game
— vs Air Force
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
Colorado State
2009-2013
Opening stop
Season Progression
20092010201120122013
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2009 Regular Season | Colorado State | 0 | — | — | — |
| 2010 Regular Season | Colorado State | 2 | 13.3 | 3.6 | 2 |
| 2011 Regular Season | Colorado State | 197 | 50.3 | 12.1 | 195 |
| 2012 Regular Season | Colorado State | 9 | 60 | 7.7 | -188 |
| 2013 Regular Season | Colorado State | 0 | — | 0 | -9 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
New Mexico
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
45
Primary metric
45 receiving yards with a 42.9 efficiency score.
#2
UTEP
39
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
39 receiving yards with a 65 efficiency score.
#3
Boise State
27
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
27 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#4
Unknown
9
Primary metric
Game with an explosive receiving profile.
9 receiving yards with a 60 efficiency score.
#5
Wyoming
23
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
23 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2011 Regular Season · Colorado State
197 primary output · 50.3 efficiency · 12.1 usage
51.5
#2
2013 Regular Season · Colorado State
50
0 primary · — efficiency · 0 usage
#3
2010 Regular Season · Colorado State
29.5
2 primary · 13.3 efficiency · 3.6 usage
Milestones
0
100+ receiving yards
0
8+ catch outings
0
2+ TD games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Recruit Profile
2★
Class 2009 · Rating 0.7889
Bishop Carroll · Wichita, KS
- Committed To
- Colorado State
- Commit Date
- Jan 1, 2009
Career Facts
1
Career teams
5
Seasons tracked
208
Career Receiving Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 5 tracked seasons, 23 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.