Player Stats

Marcus Smith 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
598
Receptions
51
Touchdowns
6

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesRecRec YdsTDOverall
2011 Regular SeasonNorth Texas0-00-
2012 Regular SeasonNorth Texas114042.5
2013 PostseasonNorth Texas4127059.7
2013 Regular SeasonNorth Texas4568059.7
2014 Regular SeasonNorth Texas915238666.4
2015 Regular SeasonNorth Texas1029261072.2

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2015 Regular Season

North Texas paired 261 primary output with 57.5 efficiency.

Supporting note

2015 Regular Season role shape

target-driven usage with 57.5 efficiency.

Supporting note

Career value is trending up

2015 Regular Season improved on the prior stop by season value score.

Supporting note

Peak game by takeover score: Tennessee

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 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 · North Texas

Games

10

Receiving Yards / G

26.1

Efficiency

57.5

Usage

17.9

Consistency

71.6

Best Game by takeover score

Tennessee

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.

12345678910

Chronological game order.

Game by game trend chart. SMU: 18. Rice: 27. Iowa: 22. Portland State: 39. Western Kentucky: 38. Marshall: 23. Louisiana Tech: 37. Tennessee: 46. Middle Tennessee: 8. UTEP: 3

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. SMU: 2 by 60. Rice: 3 by 60. Iowa: 3 by 48.9. Portland State: 3 by 86.7. Western Kentucky: 3 by 84.4. Marshall: 4 by 38.3. Louisiana Tech: 4 by 61.7. Tennessee: 5 by 61.3. Middle Tennessee: 1 by 53.3. UTEP: 1 by 20

Split Comparison

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

First Half28.8 · Games = 5 · +5.4 vs Second Half
Second Half23.4 · Games = 5 · -5.4 vs First Half