Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2016 Postseason
Wake Forest paired 36.5 primary output with 41 efficiency.
Player Stats
Duke Ejiofor 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
- 93
- TFL
- 33.5
- Sacks
- 17
- QB hurries
- 13
- Passes defended
- 5
Season Ledger
Crawlable season-by-season stats
| Season | Team | Games | Tackles | TFL | Sacks | QB Hur | PD | TD | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2013 Regular Season | Wake Forest | 0 | 0 | - | 0 | - | - | 0 | - |
| 2014 Regular Season | Wake Forest | 0 | 0 | - | 0 | - | - | 0 | - |
| 2015 Regular Season | Wake Forest | 0 | 0 | - | 0 | - | - | 0 | - |
| 2016 Postseason | Wake Forest | 13 | 6 | 2 | 0.5 | - | - | 0 | 74.2 |
| 2016 Regular Season | Wake Forest | 13 | 44 | 15 | 10 | 4 | 4 | 0 | 74.2 |
| 2017 Postseason | Wake Forest | 11 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 1 | - | 0 | 73.6 |
| 2017 Regular Season | Wake Forest | 11 | 38 | 14.5 | 6.5 | 8 | 1 | 0 | 73.6 |
Player insights
Supporting note
2017 Postseason role shape
impact-led usage with 44.9 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value stayed steady
2017 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: Georgia Tech
Loss with backfield disruption leading the way. 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.
2017 Postseason · Wake Forest
Games
11
Havoc Plays / G
3
Efficiency
44.9
Usage
13
Consistency
59.1
Best Game by takeover score
Georgia Tech
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.
Chronological game order.
Game by game trend chart. Texas A&M: 3. Presbyterian: 4. Boston College: 2. Utah State: 5. App State: 2. Florida State: 5.5. Clemson: 0. Georgia Tech: 6. Louisville: 2. Notre Dame: 2.5. Duke: 1
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. Texas A&M: 5 by 50.8. Presbyterian: 4 by 56.7. Boston College: 2 by 28.3. Utah State: 2 by 58.3. App State: 4 by 36.7. Florida State: 8 by 83.3. Clemson: 3 by 12.5. Georgia Tech: 6 by 75. Louisville: 5 by 40.8. Notre Dame: 2 by 33.3. Duke: 2 by 18.3
Split Comparison
Compare how this player performed across different situations. "Games" shows how many matchups are included in each split.
Wins3 · Games = 6 · +0 vs Losses
Losses3 · Games = 5 · +0 vs Wins
Next best actions
Keep exploring Duke Ejiofor
Move from the player story into the game log, career arc, team context, and video shelf.