Usage Score
22.3
Player Dossier
2012-2015Memphis
Mose Frazier
WR • 5'11" • Memphis, TN, USA
Vertical playmakerExplosive finisher
Mose Frazier reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Efficiency
74.7
Consistency
71.3
Season Value
65
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2015 Postseason · Memphis
121314141515
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 1
- Seasons Tracked
- 6
- Program Path
- Memphis
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: Temple
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.
Mose Frazier, WR. Best season Best season by value score: 2015 Postseason · Memphis. Mose Frazier reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2015 Postseason
Memphis paired 797 primary output with 74.7 efficiency.
Supporting note
2015 Postseason role shape
target-driven usage with 74.7 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value stayed steady
2015 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: Tulsa
Win 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 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.
2015 Postseason · Memphis
Games
13
Receiving Yards / G
61.3
Efficiency
74.7
Usage
22.3
Consistency
71.3
Best Game by takeover score
Auburn
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. Auburn: 47. Unknown: 89. Kansas: 77. Bowling Green: 66. Cincinnati: 16. South Florida: 31. Ole Miss: 83. Tulsa: 128. Tulane: 75. Navy: 61. Houston: 33. Temple: 35. SMU: 56
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. Auburn: 4 by 78.3. Unknown: 6 by 98.9. Kansas: 4 by 100. Bowling Green: 7 by 62.9. Cincinnati: 2 by 53.3. South Florida: 2 by 100. Ole Miss: 8 by 69.2. Tulsa: 10 by 85.3. Tulane: 7 by 71.4. Navy: 6 by 67.8. Houston: 4 by 55. Temple: 8 by 29.2. SMU: 2 by 100
Split Comparison
Wins66.5 · n=8 · +22.5 vs Losses
Losses44 · n=4 · -22.5 vs Wins
First Half58.4 · n=7 · -6.2 vs Second Half
Second Half64.7 · n=6 · +6.2 vs First Half
Game Log
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
13 games
Featured metric
Receiving Yards
Top game by takeover score
Tulsa
Best efficiency game
100 vs SMU
| Result | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wed 12/30 | vs Auburn | L 10-31 | — | 4 | 47 | 7.6 | 11.80 | 0 | 29 |
| Sat 11/28 | vs SMU | W 63-0 | — | 2 | 56 | 22.3 | 28 | 1 | 34 |
| Sat 11/21 | @ TempleHigh volume | L 12-31 | — | 8 | 35 | 4 | 4.40 | 0 | 11 |
| Sun 11/15 | @ Houston | L 34-35 | — | 4 | 33 | 8.3 | 8.30 | 0 | 10 |
| Sun 11/8 | vs Navy | L 20-45 | — | 6 | 61 | 9.4 | 10.20 | 0 | 33 |
| Sat 10/31 | vs Tulane | W 41-13 | — | 7 | 75 | 9.2 | 10.70 | 0 | 18 |
| Sat 10/24 | @ Tulsa100 receiving yards · High volume | W 66-42 | — | 10 | 128 | 11.1 | 12.80 | 0 | 45 |
| Sat 10/17 | vs Ole MissHigh volume | W 37-24 | — | 8 | 83 | 10.4 | 10.40 | 1 | 31 |
| Fri 10/2 | @ South Florida | W 24-17 | — | 2 | 31 | 15.5 | 15.50 | 0 | 19 |
| Thu 9/24 | vs Cincinnati | W 53-46 | — | 2 | 16 | 8.3 | 8 | 0 | 12 |
| Sat 9/19 | @ Bowling Green | W 44-41 | — | 7 | 66 | 6.5 | 9.40 | 0 | 26 |
| Sat 9/12 | @ Kansas | W 55-23 | — | 4 | 77 | 20.1 | 19.30 | 0 | 42 |
| Sat 9/5 | vs Unknown2+ TD | — | — | 6 | 89 | 14.8 | 14.80 | 2 | 44 |
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
Memphis
2012-2015
Opening stop
Season Progression
201220132014201420152015
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2012 Regular Season | Memphis | 0 | — | — | — |
| 2013 Regular Season | Memphis | 296 | 89.6 | 11.9 | 296 |
| 2014 Postseason | Memphis | 506 | 64.5 | 18.2 | 210 |
| 2014 Regular Season | Memphis | 506 | 64.5 | 18.2 | 0 |
| 2015 Postseason | Memphis | 797 | 74.7 | 22.3 | 291 |
| 2015 Regular Season | Memphis | 797 | 74.7 | 22.3 | 0 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
Temple
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
110
Primary metric
110 receiving yards with a 91.7 efficiency score.
#2
Houston
81
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
81 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#3
Tulsa
128
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
128 receiving yards with a 85.3 efficiency score.
#4
Unknown
89
Primary metric
Game with an explosive receiving profile.
89 receiving yards with a 98.9 efficiency score.
#5
South Florida
82
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
82 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2015 Postseason · Memphis
797 primary output · 74.7 efficiency · 22.3 usage
65
#2
2015 Regular Season · Memphis
65
797 primary · 74.7 efficiency · 22.3 usage
#3
2013 Regular Season · Memphis
51.2
296 primary · 89.6 efficiency · 11.9 usage
Milestones
2
100+ receiving yards
4
8+ catch outings
1
2+ TD games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Career Facts
1
Career teams
6
Seasons tracked
1,599
Career Receiving Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 6 tracked seasons, 34 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.