Usage Score
30.5
Player Dossier
2025-2025Michigan
Andrew Marsh
WR • 6'0" • 190 lbs • Fulshear, TX, USA
Alpha targetExplosive finisher
Andrew Marsh reads as a alpha target based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Efficiency
81
Consistency
40.9
Season Value
62.8
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2025 Postseason · Michigan
2525
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 1
- Seasons Tracked
- 2
- Program Path
- Michigan
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: Northwestern
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.
Andrew Marsh, WR. Best season Best season by value score: 2025 Postseason · Michigan. Andrew Marsh reads as a alpha target based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Andrew Marsh played WR for Michigan. Across 1 tracked season, Andrew Marsh recorded 13 rushing yards, 651 receiving yards, and 1 tackles. His top tracked season came in 2025 with Michigan.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2025 Postseason
Michigan paired 651 primary output with 81 efficiency.
Supporting note
2025 Postseason role shape
target-driven usage with 81 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value stayed steady
2025 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: Northwestern
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 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 Postseason · Michigan
Games
12
Receiving Yards / G
54.3
Efficiency
81
Usage
30.5
Consistency
40.9
Best Game by takeover score
Texas
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. Texas: 10. New Mexico: 0. Oklahoma: 0. Central Michigan: 30. Wisconsin: 80. USC: 138. Washington: 49. Michigan State: 54. Purdue: 25. Northwestern: 189. Maryland: 76. Ohio State: 0
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. Texas: 3 by 22.2. Central Michigan: 1 by 100. Wisconsin: 4 by 100. USC: 8 by 100. Washington: 5 by 65.3. Michigan State: 3 by 100. Purdue: 4 by 41.7. Northwestern: 12 by 100. Maryland: 5 by 100
Split Comparison
Compare how this player performed across different situations. "Games" shows how many matchups are included in each split.
Wins62.9 · Games = 8 · +25.9 vs Losses
Losses37 · Games = 4 · -25.9 vs Wins
First Half43 · Games = 6 · -22.5 vs Second Half
Second Half65.5 · Games = 6 · +22.5 vs First Half
Game Log
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
12 games
Featured metric
Receiving Yards
Top game by takeover score
Northwestern
Best efficiency game
100 vs Maryland
| Result | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wed 12/31 | @ Texas | L 27-41 | — | 3 | 10 | 3.3 | 3.30 | 1 | 8 |
| Sat 11/29 | vs Ohio State | L 9-27 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Sat 11/22 | @ Maryland | W 45-20 | — | 5 | 76 | 15.2 | 15.20 | 1 | 25 |
| Sat 11/15 | @ Northwestern100 receiving yards · High volume | W 24-22 | — | 12 | 189 | 13.8 | 15.80 | 0 | 32 |
| Sat 11/1 | vs Purdue | W 21-16 | — | 4 | 25 | 6.3 | 6.30 | 0 | 20 |
| Sat 10/25 | @ Michigan State | W 31-20 | — | 3 | 54 | 18 | 18 | 0 | 27 |
| Sat 10/18 | vs Washington | W 24-7 | — | 5 | 49 | 9.8 | 9.80 | 1 | 22 |
| Sat 10/11 | @ USC100 receiving yards · High volume | L 13-31 | — | 8 | 138 | 17.3 | 17.30 | 1 | 69 |
| Sat 10/4 | vs Wisconsin | W 24-10 | — | 4 | 80 | 20 | 20 | 0 | 32 |
| Sat 9/13 | vs Central Michigan | W 63-3 | — | 1 | 30 | 26.5 | 30 | 0 | 30 |
| Sat 9/6 | @ Oklahoma | L 13-24 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Sat 8/30 | vs New Mexico | W 34-17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
Michigan
2025
Opening stop
Season Progression
20252025
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 Postseason | Michigan | 651 | 81 | 30.5 | — |
| 2025 Regular Season | Michigan | 651 | 81 | 30.5 | 0 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
Northwestern
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
189
Primary metric
189 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#2
USC
138
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
138 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#3
Maryland
76
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
76 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#4
Michigan State
54
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
54 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#5
Wisconsin
80
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
80 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2025 Postseason · Michigan
651 primary output · 81 efficiency · 30.5 usage
62.8
#2
2025 Regular Season · Michigan
62.8
651 primary · 81 efficiency · 30.5 usage
Milestones
2
100+ receiving yards
2
8+ catch outings
0
2+ TD games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Recruit Profile
4★
Class 2025 · Rating 0.9448
Katy Jordan · Fulshear, TX
- Committed To
- Michigan
- Commit Date
- Jan 1, 2025
Career Facts
1
Career teams
2
Seasons tracked
651
Career Receiving Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 2 tracked seasons, 12 games, and SP opponent-strength context when available. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.