Player Stats

Luke Stice 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

Tackles
51
TFL
2
Sacks
1

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesTacklesTFLSacksQB HurPDTDOverall
2012 Regular SeasonHouston10-0--050
2013 Regular SeasonHouston20-0--050
2014 Regular SeasonHouston00-0--0-
2015 Regular SeasonHouston00-0--0-
2016 Regular SeasonTexas Tech105121--044

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2012 Regular Season

Houston paired 0 primary output with 0 efficiency.

Supporting note

2016 Regular Season role shape

impact-led usage with 23 efficiency.

Supporting note

Career value is trending up

2016 Regular Season improved on the prior stop by season value score.

Supporting note

Multi-stop career journey

Production spans 2 team stops, with role shifts visible across Houston, Texas Tech.

Supporting note

Peak game by takeover score: Oklahoma State

Loss with 3 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet. 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 Regular Season · Texas Tech

Games

10

Havoc Plays / G

0.3

Efficiency

23

Usage

6

Consistency

3.3

Best Game by takeover score

Oklahoma State

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. Stephen F. Austin: 0. Arizona State: 0. Louisiana Tech: 0. Kansas: 0. Kansas State: 0. TCU: 0. Texas: 0. Oklahoma State: 3. Iowa State: 0. Baylor: 0

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. Stephen F. Austin: 4 by 16.7. Arizona State: 7 by 29.2. Louisiana Tech: 1 by 4.2. Kansas: 1 by 4.2. Kansas State: 3 by 12.5. TCU: 1 by 4.2. Texas: 2 by 8.3. Oklahoma State: 5 by 50.8. Iowa State: 12 by 50. Baylor: 15 by 50

Split Comparison

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

Wins0 · Games = 5 · -0.6 vs Losses
Losses0.6 · Games = 5 · +0.6 vs Wins