Usage Score
50.7
Player Dossier
2006-2009Stanford
Toby Gerhart
RB • 6'1" • Norco, CA, USA
Workhorse runnerSteady chain mover
Toby Gerhart leans workhorse runner traits and 57.9 efficiency.
Efficiency
57.9
Consistency
77.8
Season Value
71.6
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2009 Postseason · Stanford
0607080909
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 1
- Seasons Tracked
- 5
- Program Path
- Stanford
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: Notre Dame
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.
Toby Gerhart, RB. Best season Best season by value score: 2009 Postseason · Stanford. Toby Gerhart leans workhorse runner traits and 57.9 efficiency.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2009 Postseason
Stanford paired 2,028 primary output with 57.9 efficiency.
Supporting note
2009 Postseason role shape
backfield-heavy usage with 57.9 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: Notre Dame
Win driven by a workhorse rushing load. 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.
2009 Postseason · Stanford
Games
13
Scrimmage Yards / G
156
Efficiency
57.9
Usage
50.7
Consistency
77.8
Best Game by takeover score
Oklahoma
Hover a point or expand a game row to keep the active game context visible here.
Game-by-Game Trend
12345678910111213
Chronological game order.
Game by game trend chart. Oklahoma: 143. Washington State: 121. Wake Forest: 94. San José State: 121. Washington: 200. UCLA: 158. Oregon State: 107. Arizona: 141. Arizona State: 130. Oregon: 223. USC: 187. California: 165. Notre Dame: 238
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. Oklahoma: 33 by 44.4. Washington State: 23 by 54.8. Wake Forest: 18 by 51.9. San José State: 25 by 49.6. Washington: 27 by 77.2. UCLA: 31 by 50.1. Oregon State: 21 by 51.2. Arizona: 29 by 47.7. Arizona State: 28 by 48.3. Oregon: 38 by 61.1. USC: 30 by 64.3. California: 21 by 75.2. Notre Dame: 30 by 77.2
Split Comparison
Wins172.3 · n=8 · +42.3 vs Losses
Losses130 · n=5 · -42.3 vs Wins
First Half134.9 · n=7 · -45.8 vs Second Half
Second Half180.7 · n=6 · +45.8 vs First Half
Game Log
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
13 games
Featured metric
Scrimmage Yards
Top game by takeover score
Notre Dame
Best efficiency game
77.2 vs Notre Dame
| Result | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thu 12/31 | vs Oklahoma100 rush yards | L 27-31 | 32 | 135 | 4.20 | 1 | 1 | 8 | 4.3 |
| Sun 11/29 | vs Notre Dame100 rush yards · 150 scrimmage yards | W 45-38 | 29 | 205 | 7.10 | 3 | 1 | 33 | 7.9 |
| Sun 11/22 | vs California100 rush yards · 150 scrimmage yards | L 28-34 | 20 | 136 | 6.80 | 4 | 1 | 29 | 7.9 |
| Sat 11/14 | @ USC100 rush yards · 150 scrimmage yards | W 55-21 | 29 | 178 | 6.10 | 3 | 1 | 9 | 6.2 |
| Sat 11/7 | vs Oregon100 rush yards · 150 scrimmage yards | W 51-42 | 38 | 223 | 5.90 | 3 | — | — | 5.9 |
| Sun 10/25 | vs Arizona State100 rush yards | W 33-14 | 27 | 125 | 4.60 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 4.6 |
| Sat 10/17 | @ Arizona100 rush yards · 2+ TD | L 38-43 | 28 | 123 | 4.40 | 2 | 1 | 18 | 4.9 |
| Sat 10/10 | @ Oregon State2+ TD | L 28-38 | 20 | 96 | 4.80 | 2 | 1 | 11 | 5.1 |
| Sat 10/3 | vs UCLA100 rush yards · 150 scrimmage yards | W 24-16 | 29 | 134 | 4.60 | 3 | 2 | 24 | 5.1 |
| Sun 9/27 | vs Washington100 rush yards · 150 scrimmage yards | W 34-14 | 27 | 200 | 7.40 | 1 | — | — | 7.4 |
| Sun 9/20 | vs San José State100 rush yards · 2+ TD | W 42-17 | 24 | 113 | 4.70 | 2 | 1 | 8 | 4.8 |
| Sat 9/12 | @ Wake Forest | L 17-24 | 17 | 82 | 4.80 | 0 | 1 | 12 | 5.2 |
| Sat 9/5 | @ Washington State100 rush yards · 2+ TD | W 39-13 | 23 | 121 | 5.30 | 2 | — | — | 5.3 |
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
Stanford
2006-2009
Opening stop
Season Progression
20062007200820092009
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2006 Regular Season | Stanford | 499 | 38.5 | 22.1 | — |
| 2007 Regular Season | Stanford | 140 | 98.6 | 18.5 | -359 |
| 2008 Regular Season | Stanford | 1,250 | 58.1 | 35.3 | 1,110 |
| 2009 Postseason | Stanford | 2,028 | 57.9 | 50.7 | 778 |
| 2009 Regular Season | Stanford | 2,028 | 57.9 | 50.7 | 0 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
Notre Dame
Win driven by a workhorse rushing load.
238
Primary metric
238 scrimmage yards and 47.6 usage.
#2
San José State
140
Primary metric
Win with 140 yards from scrimmage and efficient touch value.
140 scrimmage yards and 18.5 usage.
#3
San José State
151
Primary metric
Win driven by a workhorse rushing load.
151 scrimmage yards and 46.9 usage.
#4
Oregon
223
Primary metric
Win driven by a workhorse rushing load.
223 scrimmage yards and 59.4 usage.
#5
Oregon State
147
Primary metric
Win with 147 yards from scrimmage and efficient touch value.
147 scrimmage yards and 34.5 usage.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2009 Postseason · Stanford
2,028 primary output · 57.9 efficiency · 50.7 usage
71.6
#2
2009 Regular Season · Stanford
71.6
2,028 primary · 57.9 efficiency · 50.7 usage
#3
2008 Regular Season · Stanford
59.3
1,250 primary · 58.1 efficiency · 35.3 usage
Milestones
21
100+ rush yards
7
150+ scrimmage yards
13
2+ TD games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Recruit Profile
3★
Class 2020 · Rating 0.8083
Warner Robins · Warner Robins, GA
- Committed To
- Georgia State
- Commit Date
- Jan 1, 2020
Career Facts
1
Career teams
5
Seasons tracked
3,917
Career Scrimmage Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 5 tracked seasons, 38 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.