Usage Score
4.7
Player Dossier
2012-2016Texas A&M
WR • 6'4" • Carthage, TX, USA
Edward Pope reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Usage Score
4.7
Efficiency
85
Consistency
76.5
Season Value
45.6
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2014 Regular Season · Texas A&M
Snapshot
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.
Edward Pope, WR. Best season Best season by value score: 2014 Regular Season · Texas A&M. Edward Pope reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2014 Regular Season
Texas A&M paired 454 primary output with 72.4 efficiency.
Supporting note
2016 Regular Season role shape
target-driven usage with 85 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value stayed steady
2016 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: New Mexico State
Win with an explosive receiving profile. It landed in the 100th percentile of the selected season.
Analysis workspace
Filter the strongest season sample, inspect game-level shape, and then drop into the full log without losing the story of the year.
Understand the selected season before dropping into the full game log.
Games
4
Receiving Yards / G
18.5
Efficiency
85
Usage
4.7
Consistency
76.5
Best Game by takeover score
LSU
Chronological game order.
Game by game trend chart. UCLA: 16. Unknown: 6. New Mexico State: 28. LSU: 24
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. UCLA: 1 by 100. Unknown: 1 by 40. New Mexico State: 1 by 100. LSU: 1 by 100
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
4 games
Featured metric
Receiving Yards
Top game by takeover score
New Mexico State
Best efficiency game
100 vs LSU
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
Texas A&M
2012-2016
Opening stop
Season Progression
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2012 Regular Season | Texas A&M | 0 | — | — | — |
| 2013 Regular Season | Texas A&M | 65 | 47.8 | 6.1 | 65 |
| 2014 Regular Season | Texas A&M | 454 | 72.4 | 10.6 | 389 |
| 2015 Postseason | Texas A&M | 65 | 55.2 | 10.3 | -389 |
| 2015 Regular Season | Texas A&M | 65 | 55.2 | 10.3 | 0 |
| 2016 Regular Season | Texas A&M | 74 | 85 | 4.7 | 9 |
#1 Featured game
Arkansas
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
151
Primary metric
151 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#2
New Mexico State
28
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
28 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#3
LSU
24
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
24 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#4
SMU
27
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
27 receiving yards with a 60 efficiency score.
#5
Unknown
25
Primary metric
Game with an explosive receiving profile.
25 receiving yards with a 55.6 efficiency score.
#1 Season by value score
2014 Regular Season · Texas A&M
454 primary output · 72.4 efficiency · 10.6 usage
55.6
#2
2016 Regular Season · Texas A&M
45.6
74 primary · 85 efficiency · 4.7 usage
#3
2015 Postseason · Texas A&M
43.7
65 primary · 55.2 efficiency · 10.3 usage
1
100+ receiving yards
0
8+ catch outings
1
2+ TD games
Recruit Profile
Class 2012 · Rating 0.9
Carthage · Carthage, TX
Career Facts
1
Career teams
6
Seasons tracked
658
Career Receiving Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 6 tracked seasons, 24 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.
Edward Pope quick answers
Recruiting profile
4-star recruit