Player Stats

Andrew Tucker 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
403
Rushing yards
355
Receiving yards
48
Touchdowns
6

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesScrimmageRush YdsRec YdsTDOverall
2013 Regular SeasonNorth Texas00000-
2014 Regular SeasonNorth Texas144440058
2015 Regular SeasonNorth Texas479754040.9
2016 PostseasonNorth Texas1013130045.5
2016 Regular SeasonNorth Texas10134140-6445.5
2017 PostseasonNorth Texas733528056.4
2017 Regular SeasonNorth Texas71007822256.4

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2014 Regular Season

North Texas paired 44 primary output with 57.3 efficiency.

Supporting note

2017 Postseason role shape

backfield-heavy usage with 50.5 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: Lamar

Win with 29 yards from scrimmage and efficient touch value. It landed in the 85.7th 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 · North Texas

Games

7

Scrimmage Yards / G

19

Efficiency

50.5

Usage

5.6

Consistency

68.6

Best Game by takeover score

Lamar

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.

1234567

Chronological game order.

Game by game trend chart. Troy: 33. Lamar: 29. UAB: 0. Florida Atlantic: 22. UTEP: 24. Rice: 0. Florida Atlantic: 25

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. Troy: 9 by 21.5. Lamar: 4 by 75.5. Florida Atlantic: 3 by 80.6. UTEP: 4 by 62.5. Rice: 1 by 0. Florida Atlantic: 3 by 62.8

Split Comparison

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

Wins13.3 · Games = 4 · -13.4 vs Losses
Losses26.7 · Games = 3 · +13.4 vs Wins