Usage Score
13.7
Player Dossier
2013-2016Texas A&M
Ricky Seals-Jones
WR • 6'5" • Sealy, TX, USA
Vertical playmakerExplosive finisher
Ricky Seals-Jones reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Efficiency
77.1
Consistency
68.4
Season Value
55
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2015 Postseason · Texas A&M
13141415151616
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 1
- Seasons Tracked
- 7
- Program Path
- Texas A&M
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: Alabama
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.
Ricky Seals-Jones, WR. Best season Best season by value score: 2015 Postseason · Texas A&M. Ricky Seals-Jones reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2015 Postseason
Texas A&M paired 560 primary output with 73.8 efficiency.
Supporting note
2016 Postseason role shape
target-driven usage with 77.1 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value stayed steady
2016 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: UTSA
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.
2016 Postseason · Texas A&M
Games
9
Receiving Yards / G
37
Efficiency
77.1
Usage
13.7
Consistency
68.4
Best Game by takeover score
Kansas State
Hover a point or expand a game row to keep the active game context visible here.
Game-by-Game Trend
123456789
Chronological game order.
Game by game trend chart. Kansas State: 34. UCLA: 57. Unknown: 33. Auburn: 38. Arkansas: 47. Alabama: 25. New Mexico State: 20. Ole Miss: 4. UTSA: 75
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. Kansas State: 6 by 37.8. UCLA: 4 by 95. Unknown: 2 by 100. Auburn: 3 by 84.4. Arkansas: 1 by 100. Alabama: 1 by 100. New Mexico State: 2 by 66.7. Ole Miss: 1 by 26.7. UTSA: 6 by 83.3
Split Comparison
Wins47.4 · n=5 · +26.4 vs Losses
Losses21 · n=3 · -26.4 vs Wins
First Half41.8 · n=5 · +10.8 vs Second Half
Second Half31 · n=4 · -10.8 vs First Half
Game Log
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
9 games
Featured metric
Receiving Yards
Top game by takeover score
UTSA
Best efficiency game
100 vs Alabama
| Result | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thu 12/29 | @ Kansas State | L 28-33 | — | 6 | 34 | 5.7 | 5.70 | 1 | 11 |
| Sat 11/19 | vs UTSA | W 23-10 | — | 6 | 75 | 12.5 | 12.50 | 0 | 37 |
| Sun 11/13 | vs Ole Miss | L 28-29 | — | 1 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 0 | 4 |
| Sat 10/29 | vs New Mexico State | W 52-10 | — | 2 | 20 | 10 | 10 | 0 | 10 |
| Sat 10/22 | @ Alabama | L 14-33 | — | 1 | 25 | 25 | 25 | 0 | 25 |
| Sun 9/25 | vs Arkansas | W 45-24 | — | 1 | 47 | 47 | 47 | 0 | 47 |
| Sat 9/17 | @ Auburn | W 29-16 | — | 3 | 38 | 12.7 | 12.70 | 0 | 16 |
| Sat 9/10 | vs Unknown | — | — | 2 | 33 | 16.5 | 16.50 | 0 | 21 |
| Sat 9/3 | vs UCLA | W 31-24 | — | 4 | 57 | 14.3 | 14.30 | 0 | 33 |
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
Texas A&M
2013-2016
Opening stop
Season Progression
2013201420142015201520162016
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2013 Regular Season | Texas A&M | 84 | 100 | 15 | — |
| 2014 Postseason | Texas A&M | 465 | 63.4 | 16.3 | 381 |
| 2014 Regular Season | Texas A&M | 465 | 63.4 | 16.3 | 0 |
| 2015 Postseason | Texas A&M | 560 | 73.8 | 18.2 | 95 |
| 2015 Regular Season | Texas A&M | 560 | 73.8 | 18.2 | 0 |
| 2016 Postseason | Texas A&M | 333 | 77.1 | 13.7 | -227 |
| 2016 Regular Season | Texas A&M | 333 | 77.1 | 13.7 | 0 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
Alabama
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
107
Primary metric
107 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#2
Rice
84
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
84 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#3
UTSA
75
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
75 receiving yards with a 83.3 efficiency score.
#4
South Carolina
88
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
88 receiving yards with a 97.8 efficiency score.
#5
Ole Miss
84
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
84 receiving yards with a 80 efficiency score.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2015 Postseason · Texas A&M
560 primary output · 73.8 efficiency · 18.2 usage
60.9
#2
2015 Regular Season · Texas A&M
60.9
560 primary · 73.8 efficiency · 18.2 usage
#3
2014 Postseason · Texas A&M
58.5
465 primary · 63.4 efficiency · 16.3 usage
Milestones
1
100+ receiving yards
1
8+ catch outings
0
2+ TD games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Recruit Profile
5★
Class 2013 · Rating 0.988
Sealy · Sealy, TX
- Committed To
- Texas A&M
- Commit Date
- Jan 1, 2013
Career Facts
1
Career teams
7
Seasons tracked
1,442
Career Receiving Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 7 tracked seasons, 34 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.