Player Stats

Evans Okotcha 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

Scrimmage yards
1,333
Rushing yards
836
Receiving yards
497
Touchdowns
14

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesScrimmageRush YdsRec YdsTDOverall
2012 Regular SeasonUTSA127994503491169.2
2013 Regular SeasonUTSA11534386148347.9

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2012 Regular Season

UTSA paired 799 primary output with 52.6 efficiency.

Supporting note

2013 Regular Season role shape

backfield-heavy usage with 41.7 efficiency.

Supporting note

Career value cooled off

2013 Regular Season fell back from the prior stop by season value score.

Supporting note

Peak game by takeover score: Louisiana Tech

Win driven by a workhorse rushing load. 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 Regular Season · UTSA

Games

11

Scrimmage Yards / G

48.5

Efficiency

41.7

Usage

16.7

Consistency

35.3

Best Game by takeover score

Louisiana Tech

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.

1234567891011

Chronological game order.

Game by game trend chart. New Mexico: 37. Oklahoma State: 36. Arizona: 22. UTEP: 49. Houston: 36. Marshall: 24. Rice: 12. UAB: 34. Tulsa: 7. North Texas: 104. Louisiana Tech: 173

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. New Mexico: 8 by 37. Oklahoma State: 13 by 31.4. Arizona: 3 by 36.8. UTEP: 8 by 56.8. Houston: 6 by 58.8. Marshall: 9 by 26. Rice: 4 by 31.3. UAB: 7 by 50.6. Tulsa: 4 by 11.5. North Texas: 16 by 67.7. Louisiana Tech: 28 by 51

Split Comparison

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

Wins67.3 · Games = 6 · +41.3 vs Losses
Losses26 · Games = 5 · -41.3 vs Wins