Usage Score
13.8
Player Dossier
2009-2013Bowling Green
Alex Bayer
TE • 6'4" • Pickerington, OH, USA
Vertical playmakerExplosive finisher
Alex Bayer reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Efficiency
84.7
Consistency
58.6
Season Value
64.3
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2013 Postseason · Bowling Green
09101112121313
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 1
- Seasons Tracked
- 7
- Program Path
- Bowling Green
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: Akron
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.
Alex Bayer, TE. Best season Best season by value score: 2013 Postseason · Bowling Green. Alex Bayer reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2013 Postseason
Bowling Green paired 593 primary output with 84.7 efficiency.
Supporting note
2013 Postseason role shape
target-driven usage with 84.7 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: Northern Illinois
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 · Bowling Green
Games
14
Receiving Yards / G
42.4
Efficiency
84.7
Usage
13.8
Consistency
58.6
Best Game by takeover score
Pittsburgh
Hover a point or expand a game row to keep the active game context visible here.
Game-by-Game Trend
1234567891011121314
Chronological game order.
Game by game trend chart. Pittsburgh: 57. Tulsa: 12. Kent State: 52. Indiana: 25. Unknown: 65. Akron: 25. Massachusetts: 20. Mississippi State: 5. Toledo: 35. Miami (OH): 40. Ohio: 68. Eastern Michigan: 17. Buffalo: 48. Northern Illinois: 124
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. Pittsburgh: 3 by 100. Tulsa: 1 by 80. Kent State: 4 by 86.7. Indiana: 4 by 41.7. Unknown: 4 by 100. Akron: 3 by 55.6. Massachusetts: 1 by 100. Mississippi State: 1 by 33.3. Toledo: 2 by 100. Miami (OH): 3 by 88.9. Ohio: 2 by 100. Eastern Michigan: 1 by 100. Buffalo: 1 by 100. Northern Illinois: 7 by 100
Split Comparison
Wins45.1 · n=9 · +14.6 vs Losses
Losses30.5 · n=4 · -14.6 vs Wins
First Half36.6 · n=7 · -11.6 vs Second Half
Second Half48.1 · n=7 · +11.6 vs First Half
Game Log
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
14 games
Featured metric
Receiving Yards
Top game by takeover score
Northern Illinois
Best efficiency game
100 vs Pittsburgh
| Result | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thu 12/26 | vs Pittsburgh | L 27-30 | — | 3 | 57 | 19 | 19 | 1 | 29 |
| Sat 12/7 | @ Northern Illinois100 receiving yards | W 47-27 | — | 7 | 124 | 17.7 | 17.70 | 1 | 44 |
| Fri 11/29 | @ Buffalo | W 24-7 | — | 1 | 48 | 48 | 48 | 0 | 48 |
| Sat 11/23 | @ Eastern Michigan | W 58-7 | — | 1 | 17 | 17 | 17 | 0 | 17 |
| Wed 11/13 | vs Ohio | W 49-0 | — | 2 | 68 | 34 | 34 | 1 | 57 |
| Wed 11/6 | @ Miami (OH) | W 45-3 | — | 3 | 40 | 13.3 | 13.30 | 1 | 18 |
| Sat 10/26 | vs Toledo | L 25-28 | — | 2 | 35 | 17.5 | 17.50 | 0 | 25 |
| Sat 10/12 | @ Mississippi State | L 20-21 | — | 1 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 5 |
| Sat 10/5 | vs Massachusetts | W 28-7 | — | 1 | 20 | 20 | 20 | 0 | 20 |
| Sat 9/28 | vs Akron | W 31-14 | — | 3 | 25 | 8.3 | 8.30 | 0 | 11 |
| Sat 9/21 | vs Unknown | — | — | 4 | 65 | 16.3 | 16.30 | 0 | 37 |
| Sat 9/14 | @ Indiana | L 10-42 | — | 4 | 25 | 6.3 | 6.30 | 0 | 8 |
| Sat 9/7 | @ Kent State | W 41-22 | — | 4 | 52 | 13 | 13 | 0 | 19 |
| Thu 8/29 | vs Tulsa | W 34-7 | — | 1 | 12 | 12 | 12 | 0 | 12 |
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
Bowling Green
2009-2013
Opening stop
Season Progression
2009201020112012201220132013
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2009 Regular Season | Bowling Green | 0 | — | — | — |
| 2010 Regular Season | Bowling Green | 298 | 66.1 | 10.6 | 298 |
| 2011 Regular Season | Bowling Green | 242 | 64.8 | 8.6 | -56 |
| 2012 Postseason | Bowling Green | 410 | 67.4 | 16.4 | 168 |
| 2012 Regular Season | Bowling Green | 410 | 67.4 | 16.4 | 0 |
| 2013 Postseason | Bowling Green | 593 | 84.7 | 13.8 | 183 |
| 2013 Regular Season | Bowling Green | 593 | 84.7 | 13.8 | 0 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
Akron
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
94
Primary metric
94 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#2
Northern Illinois
124
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
124 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#3
Western Michigan
88
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
88 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#4
Wyoming
62
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
62 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#5
Temple
77
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
77 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2013 Postseason · Bowling Green
593 primary output · 84.7 efficiency · 13.8 usage
64.3
#2
2013 Regular Season · Bowling Green
64.3
593 primary · 84.7 efficiency · 13.8 usage
#3
2012 Postseason · Bowling Green
56
410 primary · 67.4 efficiency · 16.4 usage
Milestones
1
100+ receiving yards
0
8+ catch outings
1
2+ TD games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Recruit Profile
3★
Class 2009 · Rating 0.8144
Pickerington North · Pickerington, OH
- Committed To
- Bowling Green
- Commit Date
- Jan 1, 2009
Career Facts
1
Career teams
7
Seasons tracked
1,543
Career Receiving Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 7 tracked seasons, 47 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.