Player Stats

Wes Brown 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

Scrimmage yards
1,517
Rushing yards
1,080
Receiving yards
437
Touchdowns
11

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesScrimmageRush YdsRec YdsTDOverall
2012 Regular SeasonMaryland739638214261.8
2013 Regular SeasonMaryland00000-
2014 PostseasonMaryland12291514163.4
2014 Regular SeasonMaryland12525341184563.4
2015 Regular SeasonMaryland1040631789359.6
2016 PostseasonMaryland718414037.3
2016 Regular SeasonMaryland714321122037.3

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2014 Postseason

Maryland paired 554 primary output with 39.4 efficiency.

Supporting note

2016 Postseason role shape

backfield-heavy usage with 32.9 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: Michigan

Loss with 49 yards from scrimmage and efficient touch value. 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 · Maryland

Games

7

Scrimmage Yards / G

23

Efficiency

32.9

Usage

11

Consistency

56

Best Game by takeover score

Michigan

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.

1234567

Chronological game order.

Game by game trend chart. Boston College: 18. Purdue: 22. Indiana: 14. Michigan: 49. Ohio State: 16. Nebraska: 31. Rutgers: 11

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. Boston College: 2 by 62.5. Purdue: 6 by 17.8. Indiana: 3 by 48.6. Michigan: 7 by 29.2. Ohio State: 10 by 7.4. Nebraska: 4 by 59.4. Rutgers: 9 by 5.1

Split Comparison

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

Wins16.5 · Games = 2 · -9.1 vs Losses
Losses25.6 · Games = 5 · +9.1 vs Wins