Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2014 Postseason
Pittsburgh paired 2,699 primary output with 65.2 efficiency.
Player Stats
Chad Voytik 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
- 3,517
- Passing yards
- 2,824
- Rushing yards
- 693
- Touchdowns
- 27
Season Ledger
Crawlable season-by-season stats
| Season | Team | Games | Total Offense | Pass Yds | Rush Yds | TD | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2012 Regular Season | Pittsburgh | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | - |
| 2013 Postseason | Pittsburgh | 4 | 132 | 108 | 24 | 1 | 21.3 |
| 2013 Regular Season | Pittsburgh | 4 | 10 | 8 | 2 | 0 | 21.3 |
| 2014 Postseason | Pittsburgh | 13 | 262 | 222 | 40 | 1 | 72.6 |
| 2014 Regular Season | Pittsburgh | 13 | 2,437 | 2,011 | 426 | 18 | 72.6 |
| 2015 Regular Season | Pittsburgh | 7 | 149 | 112 | 37 | 2 | 24.1 |
| 2016 Postseason | Arkansas State | 11 | -3 | 0 | -3 | 0 | 27.4 |
| 2016 Regular Season | Arkansas State | 11 | 530 | 363 | 167 | 5 | 27.4 |
Player insights
Supporting note
2016 Postseason role shape
pass-led usage with 32.1 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value stayed steady
2016 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Multi-stop career journey
Production spans 2 team stops, with role shifts visible across Pittsburgh, Arkansas State.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: Auburn
Loss with 227 yards of offense and 66.5 efficiency. 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.
2016 Postseason · Arkansas State
Games
11
Primary Metric / G
47.9
Efficiency
32.1
Usage
18.2
Consistency
17.4
Best Game by takeover score
Auburn
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. UCF: -3. Toledo: 162. Auburn: 227. Utah State: 5. Georgia Southern: 0. South Alabama: 6. UL Monroe: 12. New Mexico State: 27. Troy: 61. Louisiana: 6. Texas State: 24
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. UCF: 5 by 0. Toledo: 42 by 52.5. Auburn: 34 by 66.5. Utah State: 8 by 20.1. Georgia Southern: 1 by 0. South Alabama: 3 by 20. UL Monroe: 8 by 45.4. New Mexico State: 9 by 60.2. Troy: 14 by 43.6. Louisiana: 4 by 15. Texas State: 8 by 30
Split Comparison
Compare how this player performed across different situations. "Games" shows how many matchups are included in each split.
Wins18.1 · Games = 7 · -81.9 vs Losses
Losses100 · Games = 4 · +81.9 vs Wins
Next best actions
Keep exploring Chad Voytik
Move from the player story into the game log, career arc, team context, and video shelf.