Usage Score
13.4
Player Dossier
2023-2025South Alabama
PJ Martin
RB • 5'10" • 202 lbs • New Orleans, LA, USA
Balanced backfield optionSteady chain mover
PJ Martin leans balanced backfield option traits and 55.3 efficiency.
Efficiency
55.3
Consistency
65.8
Season Value
58.4
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2025 Regular Season · South Alabama
2323242425
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 1
- Seasons Tracked
- 5
- Program Path
- South Alabama
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: Unknown
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.
PJ Martin, RB. Best season Best season by value score: 2025 Regular Season · South Alabama. PJ Martin leans balanced backfield option traits and 55.3 efficiency.
PJ Martin played RB for South Alabama. Across 3 tracked seasons, PJ Martin recorded 499 rushing yards, 106 receiving yards, and 2 tackles. His top tracked season came in 2025 with South Alabama.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2025 Regular Season
South Alabama paired 375 primary output with 55.3 efficiency.
Supporting note
2025 Regular Season role shape
backfield-heavy usage with 55.3 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value is trending up
2025 Regular Season improved on the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: North Texas
Loss with 102 yards from scrimmage and efficient touch value. 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.
2025 Regular Season · South Alabama
Games
8
Scrimmage Yards / G
46.9
Efficiency
55.3
Usage
13.4
Consistency
65.8
Best Game by takeover score
Georgia 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.
Chronological game order.
Game by game trend chart. Unknown: 40. Tulane: 18. Auburn: 30. Coastal Carolina: 72. North Texas: 102. Troy: 51. Arkansas State: 58. Georgia State: 4
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. Unknown: 8 by 52.1. Tulane: 3 by 62.5. Auburn: 11 by 28.4. Coastal Carolina: 10 by 77.9. North Texas: 13 by 70.2. Troy: 9 by 59. Arkansas State: 8 by 78.4. Georgia State: 3 by 13.9
Split Comparison
Compare how this player performed across different situations. "Games" shows how many matchups are included in each split.
Losses55.2 · Games = 6
First Half40 · Games = 4 · -13.8 vs Second Half
Second Half53.8 · Games = 4 · +13.8 vs First Half
All Games46.9 · Games = 8
Game Log
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
8 games
Featured metric
Scrimmage Yards
Top game by takeover score
North Texas
Best efficiency game
78.4 vs Arkansas State
| Result | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thu 10/23 | @ Georgia State | W 38-31 | 3 | 4 | 1.30 | 0 | — | — | 1.3 |
| Tue 10/14 | vs Arkansas State | L 14-15 | 7 | 54 | 7.70 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 7.3 |
| Sat 10/4 | @ Troy | L 24-31 | 9 | 51 | 5.70 | 0 | — | — | 5.7 |
| Sat 9/27 | @ North Texas | L 22-36 | 10 | 60 | 6 | 0 | 3 | 42 | 7.8 |
| Sat 9/20 | vs Coastal Carolina | L 20-38 | 9 | 69 | 7.70 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 7.2 |
| Sat 9/13 | @ Auburn | L 15-31 | 11 | 30 | 2.70 | 0 | — | — | 2.7 |
| Sat 9/6 | vs Tulane | L 31-33 | 3 | 18 | 6 | 0 | — | — | 6 |
| Sat 8/30 | vs Unknown | — | 8 | 40 | 5 | 1 | — | — | 5 |
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
South Alabama
2023-2025
Opening stop
Season Progression
20232023202420242025
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 Postseason | South Alabama | 99 | 51.4 | 4.7 | — |
| 2023 Regular Season | South Alabama | 99 | 51.4 | 4.7 | 0 |
| 2024 Postseason | South Alabama | 131 | 62.4 | 5.3 | 32 |
| 2024 Regular Season | South Alabama | 131 | 62.4 | 5.3 | 0 |
| 2025 Regular Season | South Alabama | 375 | 55.3 | 13.4 | 244 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
Unknown
Game with 72 yards from scrimmage and efficient touch value.
72
Primary metric
72 scrimmage yards and 12.8 usage.
#2
Eastern Michigan
53
Primary metric
Win with 53 yards from scrimmage and efficient touch value.
53 scrimmage yards and 6.7 usage.
#3
North Texas
102
Primary metric
Loss with 102 yards from scrimmage and efficient touch value.
102 scrimmage yards and 20.6 usage.
#4
Coastal Carolina
72
Primary metric
Loss with 72 yards from scrimmage and efficient touch value.
72 scrimmage yards and 15.2 usage.
#5
Arkansas State
58
Primary metric
Loss with 58 yards from scrimmage and efficient touch value.
58 scrimmage yards and 14.8 usage.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2025 Regular Season · South Alabama
375 primary output · 55.3 efficiency · 13.4 usage
58.4
#2
2023 Postseason · South Alabama
33.7
99 primary · 51.4 efficiency · 4.7 usage
#3
2023 Regular Season · South Alabama
33.7
99 primary · 51.4 efficiency · 4.7 usage
Milestones
1
100+ rush yards
0
150+ scrimmage yards
0
2+ TD games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Recruit Profile
3★
Class 2023 · Rating 0.8304
De La Salle · New Orleans, LA
- Committed To
- South Alabama
- Commit Date
- Jan 1, 2023
Career Facts
1
Career teams
5
Seasons tracked
605
Career Scrimmage Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 5 tracked seasons, 19 games, and SP opponent-strength context when available. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.