Player Stats

Mitch Mathews 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
2,083
Receptions
152
Touchdowns
24

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesRecRec YdsTDOverall
2009 Regular SeasonBYU0-00-
2010 Regular SeasonBYU0-00-
2011 Regular SeasonBYU0-00-
2012 Regular SeasonBYU2227035.3
2013 Regular SeasonBYU923397459.8
2014 PostseasonBYU13982178.5
2014 Regular SeasonBYU1364840878.5
2015 PostseasonBYU1328069.1
2015 Regular SeasonBYU13527291169.1

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2014 Postseason

BYU paired 922 primary output with 73.9 efficiency.

Supporting note

2015 Postseason role shape

target-driven usage with 73.4 efficiency.

Supporting note

Career value stayed steady

2015 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.

Supporting note

Peak game by takeover score: Utah State

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 compare the statistical profile without scrolling through the full player page.

Season Explorer

Understand the selected season before dropping into the full game log.

2015 Postseason · BYU

Games

13

Receiving Yards / G

56.7

Efficiency

73.4

Usage

18

Consistency

63

Best Game by takeover score

Utah State

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.

12345678910111213

Chronological game order.

Game by game trend chart. Utah: 8. Nebraska: 69. Boise State: 32. UCLA: 84. Michigan: 4. UConn: 78. East Carolina: 72. Cincinnati: 54. Wagner: 44. San José State: 62. Missouri: 20. Fresno State: 52. Utah State: 158

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. Utah: 2 by 26.7. Nebraska: 3 by 100. Boise State: 5 by 42.7. UCLA: 9 by 62.2. Michigan: 1 by 26.7. UConn: 8 by 65. East Carolina: 4 by 100. Cincinnati: 3 by 100. Wagner: 3 by 97.8. San José State: 4 by 100. Missouri: 4 by 33.3. Fresno State: 2 by 100. Utah State: 6 by 100

Split Comparison

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

Wins69 · Games = 9 · +40 vs Losses
Losses29 · Games = 4 · -40 vs Wins