Usage Score
11.3
Player Dossier
2011-2015Central Michigan
Ben McCord
TE • 6'4" • Warren, MI, USA
Vertical playmakerExplosive finisher
Ben McCord reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Efficiency
77.1
Consistency
50
Season Value
59.6
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2015 Postseason · Central Michigan
11121213141515
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 1
- Seasons Tracked
- 7
- Program Path
- Central Michigan
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: Syracuse
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.
Ben McCord, TE. Best season Best season by value score: 2015 Postseason · Central Michigan. Ben McCord reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2015 Postseason
Central Michigan paired 612 primary output with 77.1 efficiency.
Supporting note
2015 Postseason role shape
target-driven usage with 77.1 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: Syracuse
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.
2015 Postseason · Central Michigan
Games
13
Receiving Yards / G
47.1
Efficiency
77.1
Usage
11.3
Consistency
50
Best Game by takeover score
Minnesota
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. Minnesota: 42. Oklahoma State: 59. Unknown: 100. Syracuse: 147. Michigan State: 7. Northern Illinois: 19. Western Michigan: 41. Buffalo: 19. Ball State: 23. Akron: 40. Toledo: 4. Kent State: 11. Eastern Michigan: 100
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. Minnesota: 2 by 100. Oklahoma State: 4 by 98.3. Unknown: 2 by 100. Syracuse: 10 by 98. Michigan State: 1 by 46.7. Northern Illinois: 1 by 100. Western Michigan: 4 by 68.3. Buffalo: 2 by 63.3. Ball State: 4 by 38.3. Akron: 3 by 88.9. Toledo: 1 by 26.7. Kent State: 1 by 73.3. Eastern Michigan: 4 by 100
Split Comparison
Wins35.3 · n=6 · -14.7 vs Losses
Losses50 · n=6 · +14.7 vs Wins
First Half59.3 · n=7 · +26.5 vs Second Half
Second Half32.8 · n=6 · -26.5 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
Syracuse
Best efficiency game
100 vs Minnesota
| Result | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mon 12/28 | @ Minnesota | L 14-21 | — | 2 | 42 | 21 | 21 | 0 | 26 |
| Fri 11/27 | vs Eastern Michigan100 receiving yards | W 35-28 | — | 4 | 100 | 25 | 25 | 0 | 38 |
| Thu 11/19 | @ Kent State | W 27-14 | — | 1 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 1 | 11 |
| Wed 11/11 | vs Toledo | L 23-28 | — | 1 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 0 | 4 |
| Sat 10/31 | @ Akron | W 14-6 | — | 3 | 40 | 13.3 | 13.30 | 0 | 27 |
| Sat 10/24 | @ Ball State | W 23-21 | — | 4 | 23 | 5.8 | 5.80 | 0 | 9 |
| Sat 10/17 | vs Buffalo | W 51-14 | — | 2 | 19 | 9.5 | 9.50 | 0 | 16 |
| Sat 10/10 | @ Western Michigan2+ TD | L 39-41 | — | 4 | 41 | 10.3 | 10.30 | 2 | 17 |
| Sat 10/3 | vs Northern Illinois | W 29-19 | — | 1 | 19 | 19 | 19 | 0 | 19 |
| Sat 9/26 | @ Michigan State | L 10-30 | — | 1 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 0 | 7 |
| Sat 9/19 | @ Syracuse100 receiving yards · High volume | L 27-30 | — | 10 | 147 | 14.7 | 14.70 | 1 | 27 |
| Sat 9/12 | vs Unknown100 receiving yards | — | — | 2 | 100 | 50 | 50 | 1 | 83 |
| Thu 9/3 | vs Oklahoma State | L 13-24 | — | 4 | 59 | 14.8 | 14.80 | 0 | 20 |
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
Central Michigan
2011-2015
Opening stop
Season Progression
2011201220122013201420152015
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 Regular Season | Central Michigan | 0 | — | — | — |
| 2012 Postseason | Central Michigan | 81 | 49.7 | 8.4 | 81 |
| 2012 Regular Season | Central Michigan | 81 | 49.7 | 8.4 | 0 |
| 2013 Regular Season | Central Michigan | 62 | 45 | 9.1 | -19 |
| 2014 Regular Season | Central Michigan | 124 | 62.1 | 7.2 | 62 |
| 2015 Postseason | Central Michigan | 612 | 77.1 | 11.3 | 488 |
| 2015 Regular Season | Central Michigan | 612 | 77.1 | 11.3 | 0 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
Syracuse
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
147
Primary metric
147 receiving yards with a 98 efficiency score.
#2
Buffalo
46
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
46 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#3
Ohio
42
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
42 receiving yards with a 93.3 efficiency score.
#4
Ball State
47
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
47 receiving yards with a 78.3 efficiency score.
#5
Eastern Michigan
100
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
100 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2015 Postseason · Central Michigan
612 primary output · 77.1 efficiency · 11.3 usage
59.6
#2
2015 Regular Season · Central Michigan
59.6
612 primary · 77.1 efficiency · 11.3 usage
#3
2014 Regular Season · Central Michigan
34.4
124 primary · 62.1 efficiency · 7.2 usage
Milestones
3
100+ receiving yards
1
8+ catch outings
1
2+ TD games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Recruit Profile
3★
Class 2011 · Rating 0.8267
Cousino Senior · Warren, MI
- Committed To
- Central Michigan
- Commit Date
- Jan 1, 2011
Career Facts
1
Career teams
7
Seasons tracked
879
Career Receiving Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 7 tracked seasons, 30 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.