Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2009 Postseason
East Carolina paired 1,331 primary output with 52.9 efficiency.
Player Stats
Career production, season-by-season totals, and the selected-season workbench are grouped here for stat-first searches.
Stat Footprint
Season Ledger
| Season | Team | Games | Scrimmage | Rush Yds | Rec Yds | TD | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2005 Regular Season | East Carolina | 6 | 228 | 210 | 18 | 1 | 42 |
| 2006 Postseason | East Carolina | 6 | 85 | 85 | 0 | 0 | 41 |
| 2006 Regular Season | East Carolina | 6 | 127 | 107 | 20 | 0 | 41 |
| 2007 Postseason | East Carolina | 13 | 8 | 8 | 0 | 2 | 30.3 |
| 2007 Regular Season | East Carolina | 13 | 255 | 197 | 58 | 4 | 30.3 |
| 2008 Regular Season | East Carolina | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | - |
| 2009 Postseason | East Carolina | 12 | 164 | 151 | 13 | 1 | 81.9 |
| 2009 Regular Season | East Carolina | 12 | 1,167 | 1,029 | 138 | 6 | 81.9 |
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2009 Postseason
East Carolina paired 1,331 primary output with 52.9 efficiency.
Supporting note
2009 Postseason role shape
backfield-heavy usage with 52.9 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value stayed steady
2009 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: Tulsa
Win driven by a workhorse rushing load. It landed in the 100th percentile of the selected season.
Analysis workspace
Filter the strongest season sample, inspect game-level shape, and compare the statistical profile without scrolling through the full player page.
Understand the selected season before dropping into the full game log.
Games
12
Scrimmage Yards / G
110.9
Efficiency
52.9
Usage
37.7
Consistency
74.9
Best Game by takeover score
Tulsa
Active game
Hover over a point
Hover or select a game to keep its context visible here without the page shifting around.
Follow how the selected stat changes from one game to the next. Spikes mark standout outings, while dips show quieter weeks.
Chronological game order.
Game by game trend chart. Arkansas: 164. App State: 114. West Virginia: 55. Marshall: 99. SMU: 154. Rice: 83. Memphis: 147. Virginia Tech: 69. Tulsa: 185. UAB: 48. Southern Miss: 101. Houston: 112
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. Arkansas: 34 by 48.7. App State: 16 by 73.4. West Virginia: 9 by 47.3. Marshall: 21 by 46. SMU: 26 by 62.2. Rice: 13 by 67.2. Memphis: 23 by 66.1. Virginia Tech: 14 by 53.7. Tulsa: 33 by 58. UAB: 20 by 25.6. Southern Miss: 21 by 50.7. Houston: 28 by 35.4
Compare how this player performed across different situations. "Games" shows how many matchups are included in each split.
Next best actions
Move from the player story into the game log, career arc, team context, and video shelf.