Player Stats

Cody Hoffman 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
3,612
Receptions
260
Touchdowns
34

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesRecRec YdsTDOverall
2009 Regular SeasonBYU0-00-
2010 PostseasonBYU128137357.5
2010 Regular SeasonBYU1234390457.5
2011 PostseasonBYU138122374.3
2011 Regular SeasonBYU1353821874.3
2012 PostseasonBYU1310114088.3
2012 Regular SeasonBYU13901,1341188.3
2013 PostseasonBYU1112167075.5
2013 Regular SeasonBYU1145727575.5

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2012 Postseason

BYU paired 1,248 primary output with 79.7 efficiency.

Supporting note

2013 Postseason role shape

target-driven usage with 88.3 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: Washington

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 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 · BYU

Games

11

Receiving Yards / G

81.3

Efficiency

88.3

Usage

26.3

Consistency

54.4

Best Game by takeover score

Washington

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. Washington: 167. Texas: 63. Utah: 108. Utah State: 41. Georgia Tech: 99. Houston: 156. Boise State: 57. Wisconsin: 113. Idaho State: 27. Notre Dame: 49. Nevada: 14

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. Washington: 12 by 92.8. Texas: 2 by 100. Utah: 8 by 90. Utah State: 3 by 91.1. Georgia Tech: 5 by 100. Houston: 7 by 100. Boise State: 4 by 95. Wisconsin: 7 by 100. Idaho State: 2 by 90. Notre Dame: 5 by 65.3. Nevada: 2 by 46.7

Split Comparison

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

Wins65.3 · Games = 7 · -44.0 vs Losses
Losses109.3 · Games = 4 · +44.0 vs Wins