Usage Score
17.8
Player Dossier
2012-2016Kansas State
Charles Jones
RB • 5'10" • Mandeville, LA, USA
Balanced backfield optionSteady chain mover
Charles Jones leans balanced backfield option traits and 54.2 efficiency.
Efficiency
54.2
Consistency
62.1
Season Value
56.2
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2015 Postseason · Kansas State
1213141415151616
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 1
- Seasons Tracked
- 8
- Program Path
- Kansas State
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: Texas Tech
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.
Charles Jones, RB. Best season Best season by value score: 2015 Postseason · Kansas State. Charles Jones leans balanced backfield option traits and 54.2 efficiency.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2015 Postseason
Kansas State paired 835 primary output with 53.3 efficiency.
Supporting note
2016 Postseason role shape
backfield-heavy usage with 54.2 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: Texas Tech
Win with 134 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 then drop into the full log without losing the story of the year.
Season Explorer
Understand the selected season before dropping into the full game log.
2016 Postseason · Kansas State
Games
13
Scrimmage Yards / G
55.8
Efficiency
54.2
Usage
17.8
Consistency
62.1
Best Game by takeover score
Texas A&M
Hover a point or expand a game row to keep the active game context visible here.
Game-by-Game Trend
12345678910111213
Chronological game order.
Game by game trend chart. Texas A&M: 19. Stanford: 82. Florida Atlantic: 52. Unknown: 39. West Virginia: 53. Texas Tech: 134. Oklahoma: 46. Texas: 95. Iowa State: 37. Oklahoma State: 79. Baylor: 46. Kansas: 29. TCU: 15
Volume vs Efficiency
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. Texas A&M: 5 by 39.6. Stanford: 12 by 62.1. Florida Atlantic: 9 by 55.3. Unknown: 6 by 55.8. West Virginia: 16 by 34.5. Texas Tech: 20 by 70. Oklahoma: 10 by 45.7. Texas: 14 by 70.5. Iowa State: 12 by 32.1. Oklahoma State: 8 by 91.1. Baylor: 6 by 79.9. Kansas: 6 by 28.9. TCU: 4 by 39.1
Split Comparison
Wins53.4 · n=8 · -11.6 vs Losses
Losses65 · n=4 · +11.6 vs Wins
First Half60.7 · n=7 · +10.5 vs Second Half
Second Half50.2 · n=6 · -10.5 vs First Half
Game Log
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
13 games
Featured metric
Scrimmage Yards
Top game by takeover score
Texas Tech
Best efficiency game
91.1 vs Oklahoma State
| Result | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thu 12/29 | vs Texas A&M | W 33-28 | 5 | 19 | 3.80 | 0 | — | — | 3.8 |
| Sat 12/3 | @ TCU | W 30-6 | 4 | 15 | 3.80 | 0 | — | — | 3.8 |
| Sat 11/26 | vs Kansas | W 34-19 | 5 | 7 | 1.40 | 0 | 1 | 22 | 4.8 |
| Sat 11/19 | @ Baylor | W 42-21 | 6 | 46 | 7.70 | 0 | — | — | 7.7 |
| Sat 11/5 | vs Oklahoma State | L 37-43 | 7 | 70 | 10 | 0 | 1 | 9 | 9.9 |
| Sat 10/29 | @ Iowa State | W 31-26 | 12 | 37 | 3.10 | 0 | — | — | 3.1 |
| Sat 10/22 | vs Texas | W 24-21 | 12 | 81 | 6.80 | 0 | 2 | 14 | 6.8 |
| Sat 10/15 | @ Oklahoma | L 17-38 | 8 | 34 | 4.30 | 0 | 2 | 12 | 4.6 |
| Sat 10/8 | vs Texas Tech100 rush yards | W 44-38 | 19 | 128 | 6.70 | 1 | 1 | 6 | 6.7 |
| Sat 10/1 | @ West Virginia | L 16-17 | 16 | 53 | 3.30 | 0 | — | — | 3.3 |
| Sat 9/24 | vs Unknown | — | 5 | 23 | 4.60 | 1 | 1 | 16 | 6.5 |
| Sat 9/17 | vs Florida Atlantic | W 63-7 | 8 | 40 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 12 | 5.8 |
| Sat 9/3 | @ Stanford | L 13-26 | 8 | 43 | 5.40 | 0 | 4 | 39 | 6.8 |
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
Kansas State
2012-2016
Opening stop
Season Progression
20122013201420142015201520162016
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2012 Regular Season | Kansas State | 0 | — | — | — |
| 2013 Regular Season | Kansas State | 0 | — | — | 0 |
| 2014 Postseason | Kansas State | 615 | 40.9 | 19.3 | 615 |
| 2014 Regular Season | Kansas State | 615 | 40.9 | 19.3 | 0 |
| 2015 Postseason | Kansas State | 835 | 53.3 | 22.1 | 220 |
| 2015 Regular Season | Kansas State | 835 | 53.3 | 22.1 | 0 |
| 2016 Postseason | Kansas State | 726 | 54.2 | 17.8 | -109 |
| 2016 Regular Season | Kansas State | 726 | 54.2 | 17.8 | 0 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
Texas Tech
Win with 134 yards from scrimmage and efficient touch value.
134
Primary metric
134 scrimmage yards and 40.8 usage.
#2
Texas
122
Primary metric
Loss with 122 yards from scrimmage and efficient touch value.
122 scrimmage yards and 37.5 usage.
#3
UTEP
76
Primary metric
Win with 76 yards from scrimmage and efficient touch value.
76 scrimmage yards and 24 usage.
#4
Unknown
72
Primary metric
Game with 72 yards from scrimmage and efficient touch value.
72 scrimmage yards and 12.7 usage.
#5
Iowa State
75
Primary metric
Win with 75 yards from scrimmage and efficient touch value.
75 scrimmage yards and 23.2 usage.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2015 Postseason · Kansas State
835 primary output · 53.3 efficiency · 22.1 usage
60.7
#2
2015 Regular Season · Kansas State
60.7
835 primary · 53.3 efficiency · 22.1 usage
#3
2016 Postseason · Kansas State
56.2
726 primary · 54.2 efficiency · 17.8 usage
Milestones
3
100+ rush yards
0
150+ scrimmage yards
7
2+ TD games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Recruit Profile
2★
Class 2012 · Rating 0.7593
Mandeville · Mandeville, LA
- Committed To
- Kansas State
- Commit Date
- Jan 1, 2012
Career Facts
1
Career teams
8
Seasons tracked
2,176
Career Scrimmage Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 8 tracked seasons, 39 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.