Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2009 Regular Season
Western Michigan paired 1,381 primary output with 56.7 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2006 Postseason | Western Michigan | 13 | 111 | 109 | 2 | 1 | 52.6 |
| 2006 Regular Season | Western Michigan | 13 | 618 | 524 | 94 | 2 | 52.6 |
| 2007 Regular Season | Western Michigan | 12 | 1,213 | 848 | 365 | 6 | 72.8 |
| 2008 Postseason | Western Michigan | 12 | 84 | 56 | 28 | 0 | 77.6 |
| 2008 Regular Season | Western Michigan | 12 | 1,222 | 970 | 252 | 11 | 77.6 |
| 2009 Regular Season | Western Michigan | 12 | 1,381 | 1,164 | 217 | 12 | 83 |
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2009 Regular Season
Western Michigan paired 1,381 primary output with 56.7 efficiency.
Supporting note
2009 Regular Season role shape
backfield-heavy usage with 56.7 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value is trending up
2009 Regular Season improved on the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: Toledo
Win with 177 yards from scrimmage and efficient touch value. It landed in the 91.7th 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
115.1
Efficiency
56.7
Usage
36.4
Consistency
75.3
Best Game by takeover score
Toledo
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. Michigan: 46. Indiana: 63. Miami (OH): 98. Hofstra: 186. Northern Illinois: 68. Toledo: 177. Central Michigan: 131. Buffalo: 174. Kent State: 70. Michigan State: 120. Eastern Michigan: 140. Ball State: 108
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. Michigan: 14 by 33.4. Indiana: 18 by 29.6. Miami (OH): 19 by 53.1. Hofstra: 28 by 69.1. Northern Illinois: 15 by 43. Toledo: 16 by 96.1. Central Michigan: 26 by 49.6. Buffalo: 31 by 54.2. Kent State: 17 by 42.6. Michigan State: 10 by 100. Eastern Michigan: 25 by 58.3. Ball State: 22 by 50.8
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.