Usage Score
18.4
Player Dossier
2022-2025Florida
Caleb Douglas
WR • 6'4" • 210 lbs • Missouri City, TX, USA
Vertical playmakerExplosive finisher
Caleb Douglas reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Efficiency
78.2
Consistency
61.6
Season Value
64.6
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2025 Regular Season · Texas Tech
222223242425
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 2
- Seasons Tracked
- 6
- Program Path
- Florida • Texas Tech
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: TCU
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.
Caleb Douglas, WR. Best season Best season by value score: 2025 Regular Season · Texas Tech. Caleb Douglas reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2025 Regular Season
Texas Tech paired 830 primary output with 84.5 efficiency.
Supporting note
2024 Postseason role shape
target-driven usage with 78.2 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value stayed steady
2025 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Multi-stop career journey
Production spans 2 team stops, with role shifts visible across Florida, Texas Tech.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: TCU
Loss 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.
2024 Postseason · Texas Tech
Games
13
Receiving Yards / G
67.7
Efficiency
78.2
Usage
18.4
Consistency
61.6
Best Game by takeover score
Arkansas
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. Arkansas: 115. Unknown: 42. Washington State: 71. North Texas: 24. Arizona State: 63. Cincinnati: 4. Arizona: 116. Baylor: 99. TCU: 140. Iowa State: 35. Colorado: 16. Oklahoma State: 105. West Virginia: 50
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. Arkansas: 5 by 100. Unknown: 4 by 70. Washington State: 4 by 100. North Texas: 2 by 80. Arizona State: 5 by 84. Cincinnati: 1 by 26.7. Arizona: 5 by 100. Baylor: 9 by 73.3. TCU: 9 by 100. Iowa State: 5 by 46.7. Colorado: 3 by 35.6. Oklahoma State: 5 by 100. West Virginia: 3 by 100
Split Comparison
Wins56.7 · n=7 · -31.5 vs Losses
Losses88.2 · n=5 · +31.5 vs Wins
First Half62.1 · n=7 · -12.0 vs Second Half
Second Half74.2 · n=6 · +12.0 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
TCU
Best efficiency game
100 vs Arkansas
| Result | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 12/28 | @ Arkansas100 receiving yards | L 26-39 | — | 5 | 115 | 23 | 23 | 0 | 47 |
| Sat 11/30 | vs West Virginia | W 52-15 | — | 3 | 50 | 16.7 | 16.70 | 1 | 31 |
| Sat 11/23 | @ Oklahoma State100 receiving yards | W 56-48 | — | 5 | 105 | 21 | 21 | 1 | 34 |
| Sat 11/9 | vs Colorado | L 27-41 | — | 3 | 16 | 5.3 | 5.30 | 0 | 9 |
| Sat 11/2 | @ Iowa State | W 23-22 | — | 5 | 35 | 7 | 7 | 0 | 14 |
| Sat 10/26 | @ TCU100 receiving yards · High volume | L 34-35 | — | 9 | 140 | 15.6 | 15.60 | 0 | 44 |
| Sat 10/19 | vs BaylorHigh volume · 2+ TD | L 35-59 | — | 9 | 99 | 11 | 11 | 3 | 20 |
| Sun 10/6 | @ Arizona100 receiving yards | W 28-22 | — | 5 | 116 | 23.2 | 23.20 | 0 | 57 |
| Sun 9/29 | vs Cincinnati | W 44-41 | — | 1 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 0 | 4 |
| Sat 9/21 | vs Arizona State | W 30-22 | — | 5 | 63 | 12.6 | 12.60 | 0 | 21 |
| Sat 9/14 | vs North Texas | W 66-21 | — | 2 | 24 | 12 | 12 | 0 | 17 |
| Sun 9/8 | @ Washington State | L 16-37 | — | 4 | 71 | 17.8 | 17.80 | 0 | 42 |
| Sat 8/31 | vs Unknown | — | — | 4 | 42 | 10.5 | 10.50 | 1 | 14 |
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
Florida
2022-2023
Opening stop
- 2
Texas Tech
2024-2025
Final stop
Season Progression
202220222023202420242025
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 Postseason | Florida | 175 | 81.1 | 13.3 | — |
| 2022 Regular Season | Florida | 175 | 81.1 | 13.3 | 0 |
| 2023 Regular Season | Florida | 133 | 74.6 | 11.9 | -42 |
| 2024 Postseason | Texas Tech | 880 | 78.2 | 18.4 | 747 |
| 2024 Regular Season | Texas Tech | 880 | 78.2 | 18.4 | 0 |
| 2025 Regular Season | Texas Tech | 830 | 84.5 | 18.6 | -50 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
TCU
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
140
Primary metric
140 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#2
West Virginia
127
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
127 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#3
Houston
114
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
114 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#4
Arizona
116
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
116 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#5
South Carolina
53
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
53 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2025 Regular Season · Texas Tech
830 primary output · 84.5 efficiency · 18.6 usage
67.4
#2
2024 Postseason · Texas Tech
64.6
880 primary · 78.2 efficiency · 18.4 usage
#3
2024 Regular Season · Texas Tech
64.6
880 primary · 78.2 efficiency · 18.4 usage
Milestones
6
100+ receiving yards
3
8+ catch outings
3
2+ TD games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Recruit Profile
3★
Class 2022 · Rating 0.8859
Hightower · Missouri City, TX
- Committed To
- Florida
- Commit Date
- Jan 1, 2022
Career Facts
2
Career teams
6
Seasons tracked
2,018
Career Receiving Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 6 tracked seasons, 35 games, and SP opponent-strength context when available. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.