Usage Score
—
Player Dossier
2004-2007UTEP
—
Marcus Thomas shows a productive multi-phase profile across the tracked sample.
Usage Score
—
Efficiency
—
Consistency
65.4
Season Value
82.7
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2004 Regular Season · UTEP
Snapshot
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.
Marcus Thomas, player. Best season Best season by value score: 2004 Regular Season · UTEP. Marcus Thomas shows a productive multi-phase profile across the tracked sample.
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2004 Regular Season
UTEP paired 0 primary output with — efficiency.
Supporting note
2007 Regular Season role shape
impact-led usage with — efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value is trending up
2007 Regular Season improved on the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: Tulsa
Win with a strong all-around stat line. It landed in the 100th percentile of the selected season.
Analysis workspace
Filter the strongest season sample, inspect game-level shape, and then drop into the full log without losing the story of the year.
Understand the selected season before dropping into the full game log.
Games
10
Primary Metric / G
1.6
Efficiency
—
Usage
—
Consistency
65.4
Best Game by takeover score
UCF
Chronological game order.
Game by game trend chart. New Mexico State: 1. Unknown: 2. SMU: 3. Tulsa: 3. East Carolina: 2. Houston: 0. Rice: 2. Tulane: 1. Southern Miss: 2. UCF: 0
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
10 games
Featured metric
Touchdowns
Top game by takeover score
Tulsa
Best efficiency game
— vs UCF
| Result | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 11/24 | @ UCF | L 20-36 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 9 | -1 | -0.10 | 0 | 4 |
| Sun 11/18 | vs Southern Miss | L 30-56 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 22 | 106 | 4.80 | 2 | 30 |
| Sun 11/11 | @ Tulane | L 19-34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 11 | 124 | 11.30 | 1 | 59 |
| Sat 11/3 | @ Rice | L 48-56 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 19 | 51 | 2.70 | 1 | 21 |
| Sun 10/28 | vs Houston | L 31-34 | 1 | 1 | 13 | 100.0 | 0 | 0 | — | 28 | 178 | 6.40 | 0 | 30 |
| Sun 10/14 | vs East Carolina | L 42-45 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 22 | 103 | 4.70 | 1 | 31 |
| Sun 10/7 | vs Tulsa | W 48-47 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 27 | 134 | 5 | 3 | 38 |
| Sat 9/29 | @ SMU | W 48-45 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 35 | 207 | 5.90 | 3 | 27 |
| Sun 9/23 | vs Unknown | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 11 | 105 | 9.50 | 2 | 27 |
| Sun 9/16 | @ New Mexico State | L 24-29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 21 | 74 | 3.50 | 1 | 12 |
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
UTEP
2004-2007
Opening stop
Season Progression
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2004 Regular Season | UTEP | 0 | — | — | — |
| 2005 Regular Season | UTEP | 7 | — | — | 7 |
| 2006 Regular Season | UTEP | 7 | — | — | 0 |
| 2007 Regular Season | UTEP | 16 | — | — | 9 |
#1 Featured game
SMU
Loss with a strong all-around stat line.
2
Primary metric
2 primary-metric impact.
#2
Tulsa
2
Primary metric
Win with a strong all-around stat line.
2 primary-metric impact.
#3
Houston
2
Primary metric
Loss with a strong all-around stat line.
2 primary-metric impact.
#4
Tulsa
3
Primary metric
Win with a strong all-around stat line.
3 primary-metric impact.
#5
SMU
3
Primary metric
Win with a strong all-around stat line.
3 primary-metric impact.
#1 Season by value score
2004 Regular Season · UTEP
0 primary output · — efficiency · — usage
100
#2
2007 Regular Season · UTEP
82.7
16 primary · — efficiency · — usage
#3
2006 Regular Season · UTEP
75.8
7 primary · — efficiency · — usage
9
Impact games
0
Splash games
0
10+ tackle games
Recruit Profile
Class 2008 · Rating 0.7889
Camden Fairview · Camden, AR
Career Facts
1
Career teams
4
Seasons tracked
0
Career Touchdowns
Data Context
Coverage spans 4 tracked seasons, 39 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.
Marcus Thomas quick answers
Recruiting profile
2-star recruit