Usage Score
22.3
Player Dossier
2013-2017Central Michigan
Mark Chapman
WR • 6'0" • 180 lbs • Port Huron, MI, USA
Vertical playmakerExplosive finisher
Mark Chapman reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Efficiency
81.2
Consistency
69.1
Season Value
68.2
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2017 Postseason · Central Michigan
13141516161717
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 1
- Seasons Tracked
- 7
- Program Path
- Central Michigan
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: Kansas
Scouting Read
Best season and peak-game context are pinned here so the rest of the page can stay analytical without losing the headline story.
Mark Chapman, WR. Best season Best season by value score: 2017 Postseason · Central Michigan. Mark Chapman reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2017 Postseason
Central Michigan paired 875 primary output with 81.2 efficiency.
Supporting note
2017 Postseason role shape
target-driven usage with 81.2 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: Kansas
Win with an explosive receiving profile. It landed in the 100th percentile of the selected season.
Analysis workspace
Season Workbench
Filter the strongest season sample, inspect game-level shape, and then drop into the full log without losing the story of the year.
Season Explorer
Understand the selected season before dropping into the full game log.
2017 Postseason · Central Michigan
Games
13
Receiving Yards / G
67.3
Efficiency
81.2
Usage
22.3
Consistency
69.1
Best Game by takeover score
Wyoming
Hover a point or expand a game row to keep the active game context visible here.
Game-by-Game Trend
12345678910111213
Chronological game order.
Game by game trend chart. Wyoming: 70. Unknown: 88. Kansas: 168. Syracuse: 50. Miami (OH): 71. Boston College: 42. Ohio: 66. Toledo: 71. Ball State: 34. Western Michigan: 3. Eastern Michigan: 53. Kent State: 85. Northern Illinois: 74
Volume vs Efficiency
Low volume / high quality
High volume / high quality
Low volume / lower quality
High volume / lower quality
Volume on the x-axis, quality on the y-axis.
Volume versus efficiency scatter chart. Wyoming: 5 by 93.3. Unknown: 5 by 100. Kansas: 8 by 100. Syracuse: 7 by 47.6. Miami (OH): 4 by 100. Boston College: 4 by 70. Ohio: 6 by 73.3. Toledo: 5 by 94.7. Ball State: 4 by 56.7. Western Michigan: 1 by 20. Eastern Michigan: 3 by 100. Kent State: 4 by 100. Northern Illinois: 3 by 100
Split Comparison
Wins69 · n=7 · +8.2 vs Losses
Losses60.8 · n=5 · -8.2 vs Wins
First Half79.3 · n=7 · +26.0 vs Second Half
Second Half53.3 · n=6 · -26.0 vs First Half
Game Log
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
13 games
Featured metric
Receiving Yards
Top game by takeover score
Kansas
Best efficiency game
100 vs Northern Illinois
| Result | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fri 12/22 | @ Wyoming | L 14-37 | — | 5 | 70 | 14 | 14 | 0 | 43 |
| Fri 11/24 | vs Northern Illinois | W 31-24 | — | 3 | 74 | 21.8 | 24.70 | 1 | 56 |
| Wed 11/15 | @ Kent State | W 42-23 | — | 4 | 85 | 17.8 | 21.30 | 1 | 33 |
| Thu 11/9 | vs Eastern Michigan | W 42-30 | — | 3 | 53 | 17.7 | 17.70 | 0 | 43 |
| Thu 11/2 | @ Western Michigan | W 35-28 | — | 1 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 3 |
| Sat 10/21 | @ Ball State | W 56-9 | — | 4 | 34 | 8.5 | 8.50 | 0 | 10 |
| Sat 10/14 | vs Toledo | L 10-30 | — | 5 | 71 | 14.2 | 14.20 | 0 | 33 |
| Sat 10/7 | @ Ohio | W 26-23 | — | 6 | 66 | 11 | 11 | 0 | 24 |
| Sat 9/30 | @ Boston College | L 8-28 | — | 4 | 42 | 10.5 | 10.50 | 0 | 16 |
| Sat 9/23 | vs Miami (OH) | L 14-31 | — | 4 | 71 | 17.8 | 17.80 | 0 | 31 |
| Sat 9/16 | @ Syracuse | L 17-41 | — | 7 | 50 | 7.1 | 7.10 | 0 | 17 |
| Sat 9/9 | @ Kansas100 receiving yards · High volume | W 45-27 | — | 8 | 168 | 21 | 21 | 3 | 75 |
| Thu 8/31 | vs Unknown | — | — | 5 | 88 | 17.6 | 17.60 | 0 | 34 |
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
Central Michigan
2013-2017
Opening stop
Season Progression
2013201420152016201620172017
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2013 Regular Season | Central Michigan | 0 | — | — | — |
| 2014 Regular Season | Central Michigan | 9 | 60 | 5.9 | 9 |
| 2015 Regular Season | Central Michigan | 559 | 74.8 | 16.3 | 550 |
| 2016 Postseason | Central Michigan | 592 | 83.7 | 19.4 | 33 |
| 2016 Regular Season | Central Michigan | 592 | 83.7 | 19.4 | 0 |
| 2017 Postseason | Central Michigan | 875 | 81.2 | 22.3 | 283 |
| 2017 Regular Season | Central Michigan | 875 | 81.2 | 22.3 | 0 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
Kansas
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
168
Primary metric
168 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#2
UNLV
80
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
80 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#3
Ball State
100
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
100 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#4
Kent State
73
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
73 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#5
Western Michigan
70
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
70 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2017 Postseason · Central Michigan
875 primary output · 81.2 efficiency · 22.3 usage
68.2
#2
2017 Regular Season · Central Michigan
68.2
875 primary · 81.2 efficiency · 22.3 usage
#3
2016 Postseason · Central Michigan
63.1
592 primary · 83.7 efficiency · 19.4 usage
Milestones
2
100+ receiving yards
1
8+ catch outings
2
2+ TD games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Recruit Profile
3★
Class 2013 · Rating 0.8267
Port Huron · Port Huron, MI
- Committed To
- Central Michigan
- Commit Date
- Jan 1, 2013
Career Facts
1
Career teams
7
Seasons tracked
2,035
Career Receiving Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 7 tracked seasons, 38 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.