Player Stats

Driphus Jackson 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

Total offense
6,716
Passing yards
5,912
Rushing yards
804
Touchdowns
54

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesTotal OffensePass YdsRush YdsTDOverall
2011 Regular SeasonRice00000-
2012 PostseasonRice829626432232.8
2012 Regular SeasonRice846240854532.8
2013 PostseasonRice8-40-4032.2
2013 Regular SeasonRice821050160132.2
2014 PostseasonRice1335931841374.8
2014 Regular SeasonRice132,8842,5243602274.8
2015 Regular SeasonRice122,5092,3481612162.2

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2014 Postseason

Rice paired 3,243 primary output with 64.2 efficiency.

Supporting note

2015 Regular Season role shape

pass-led usage with 56.4 efficiency.

Supporting note

Career value cooled off

2015 Regular Season fell back from the prior stop by season value score.

Supporting note

Peak game by takeover score: UTSA

Loss shaped by high passing volume and turnover pressure. 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 Regular Season · Rice

Games

12

Primary Metric / G

209.1

Efficiency

56.4

Usage

21

Consistency

68.4

Best Game by takeover score

UTSA

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.

123456789101112

Chronological game order.

Game by game trend chart. Wagner: 202. Texas: 154. North Texas: 359. Baylor: 106. Western Kentucky: 81. Florida Atlantic: 311. Army: 280. Louisiana Tech: 211. UTEP: 240. Southern Miss: 25. UTSA: 395. Charlotte: 145

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. Wagner: 32 by 61.6. Texas: 41 by 45. North Texas: 45 by 63.5. Baylor: 31 by 53.8. Western Kentucky: 13 by 45.6. Florida Atlantic: 46 by 64.2. Army: 37 by 64.9. Louisiana Tech: 39 by 57.9. UTEP: 33 by 60.5. Southern Miss: 27 by 43.1. UTSA: 50 by 62.1. Charlotte: 31 by 54.8

Split Comparison

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

Wins259.4 · Games = 5 · +86.3 vs Losses
Losses173.1 · Games = 7 · -86.3 vs Wins