Receiver, New Mexico, 2007–11
Michael Scarlett
- Number
- No. 9
- Height
- 6′2″
- Hometown
- Albuquerque, NM
Michael Scarlett played receiver at New Mexico (2007–11).
Receiving
| Season | Team | Rec | Yds | Avg | TD | Long |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2008* | New Mexico | 11 | 104 | 9.5 | 0 | 18 |
| 2010 | New Mexico | 2 | 19 | 9.5 | 0 | 10 |
| 2011 | New Mexico | 6 | 55 | 9.2 | 1 | 19 |
| Career | 19 | 178 | 9.4 | 1 | 19 | |
Season lines from CollegeFootballData, regular season and bowls. * That team-season’s player lines are missing part of the team’s yards in our source, so these numbers may be short.
On the roster
| Season | Team | No. | Pos | Ht |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2008 | New Mexico | 9 | WR | |
| 2009 | New Mexico | 9 | WR | |
| 2010 | New Mexico | 9 | WR | |
| 2011 | New Mexico | 9 | WR | 6′2″ |
As each season’s roster listed the player (CollegeFootballData). Classes before the latest listing are counted back from it; “Yr 1” is the year on file where that count can’t place a season he played (a redshirt, transfer or 2020 year); height and weight as last listed.
Game by game
2011 New Mexico 4 games, 6 catches, 55 yards, 1 TD
| Date | Opponent | Result | Rec | Yds | TD | Long | Rush |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 10 | at | L 3–52 | 2 | 13 | 0 | 7 | – |
| Sep 24 | vs. | L 45–48 | 2 | 28 | 1 | 19 | – |
| Oct 1 | vs. | L 28–42 | 1 | 7 | 0 | 7 | – |
| Oct 29 | vs. | L 0–42 | 1 | 7 | 0 | 7 | – |
2010 New Mexico 3 games, 2 catches, 19 yards
2008 New Mexico 6 games, 11 catches, 104 yards
| Date | Opponent | Result | Rec | Yds | TD | Long | Rush |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 11 | at | L 3–21 | 3 | 27 | 0 | 12 | – |
| Oct 18 | vs. | W 70–7 | – | – | – | – | – |
| Oct 23 | at | L 10–23 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 5 | – |
| Nov 1 | vs. | L 10–13 | 1 | 6 | 0 | 6 | 15 |
| Nov 8 | at | L 20–27 | 3 | 51 | 0 | 18 | 14 |
| Nov 15 | at | L 6–20 | 3 | 15 | 0 | 9 | 13 |
Box scores from CollegeFootballData, 2004 on. ✦ postseason; ★ a career high on file.
Is this you, or do you know of something wrong or missing here? Suggest a correction. We check each one against a source before changing the page.
