Player Stats

Jamaal Williams 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
4,468
Rushing yards
3,901
Receiving yards
567
Touchdowns
36

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesScrimmageRush YdsRec YdsTDOverall
2012 PostseasonBYU13583127166.2
2012 Regular SeasonBYU131,0327442881266.2
2013 PostseasonBYU1231310074.1
2013 Regular SeasonBYU121,3271,202125774.1
2014 Regular SeasonBYU856551847455.2
2015 Regular SeasonBYU00000-
2016 PostseasonBYU102102100182.5
2016 Regular SeasonBYU101,2451,165801182.5

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2016 Postseason

BYU paired 1,455 primary output with 59 efficiency.

Supporting note

2016 Postseason role shape

backfield-heavy usage with 59 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: Toledo

Win driven by a workhorse rushing load. 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 · BYU

Games

10

Scrimmage Yards / G

145.5

Efficiency

59

Usage

41.3

Consistency

71.2

Best Game by takeover score

Toledo

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.

12345678910

Chronological game order.

Game by game trend chart. Wyoming: 210. Arizona: 172. Utah: 68. UCLA: 73. West Virginia: 180. Toledo: 286. Michigan State: 167. Mississippi State: 76. Cincinnati: 92. Utah State: 131

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. Wyoming: 26 by 83.7. Arizona: 30 by 58.8. Utah: 13 by 52. UCLA: 16 by 31.5. West Virginia: 26 by 72.9. Toledo: 30 by 89.7. Michigan State: 31 by 56.4. Mississippi State: 26 by 30.4. Cincinnati: 25 by 38.3. Utah State: 18 by 75.8

Split Comparison

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

Wins162 · Games = 7 · +55 vs Losses
Losses107 · Games = 3 · -55 vs Wins