Player Stats

Joe Ostman 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
130
TFL
34
Sacks
22
QB hurries
8

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesTacklesTFLSacksQB HurPDTDOverall
2013 Regular SeasonCentral Michigan00-0--0-
2014 Regular SeasonCentral Michigan00-0--0-
2015 Regular SeasonCentral Michigan00-0--0-
2016 PostseasonCentral Michigan125-0--071.5
2016 Regular SeasonCentral Michigan126413.586-071.5
2017 PostseasonCentral Michigan10622--081.9
2017 Regular SeasonCentral Michigan105518.5122-081.9

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2017 Postseason

Central Michigan paired 36.5 primary output with 57.9 efficiency.

Supporting note

2017 Postseason role shape

impact-led usage with 57.9 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: Ball State

Win 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 · Central Michigan

Games

10

Havoc Plays / G

3.6

Efficiency

57.9

Usage

22.3

Consistency

69.7

Best Game by takeover score

Ball 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. Wyoming: 4. Rhode Island: 2. Kansas: 3. Miami (OH): 4. Boston College: 0. Ohio: 6. Toledo: 2.5. Ball State: 8. Kent State: 4. Northern Illinois: 3

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: 6 by 65. Rhode Island: 1 by 24.2. Kansas: 3 by 42.5. Miami (OH): 8 by 73.3. Boston College: 6 by 25. Ohio: 8 by 83.3. Toledo: 6 by 50. Ball State: 5 by 70.8. Kent State: 11 by 85.8. Northern Illinois: 7 by 59.2

Split Comparison

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

Wins4.3 · Games = 6 · +1.7 vs Losses
Losses2.6 · Games = 4 · -1.7 vs Wins