Usage Score
15.4
Player Dossier
2007-2011Houston
QB • 6'2" • Abilene, TX, USA
Case Keenum is a balanced quarterback profile with 15.4 usage in the latest tracked season.
Usage Score
15.4
Efficiency
67.9
Consistency
90.9
Season Value
68.6
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2011 Postseason · Houston
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.
Case Keenum, QB. Best season Best season by value score: 2011 Postseason · Houston. Case Keenum is a balanced quarterback profile with 15.4 usage in the latest tracked season.
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2011 Postseason
Houston paired 5,666 primary output with 67.9 efficiency.
Supporting note
2011 Postseason role shape
pass-led usage with 67.9 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value stayed steady
2011 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: Penn State
Win with 542 yards of offense and 60.9 efficiency. 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
14
Primary Metric / G
404.7
Efficiency
67.9
Usage
15.4
Consistency
90.9
Best Game by takeover score
Penn State
Chronological game order.
Game by game trend chart. Penn State: 542. UCLA: 340. North Texas: 467. Louisiana Tech: 341. Unknown: 404. UTEP: 489. East Carolina: 292. Marshall: 392. Rice: 519. UAB: 409. Tulane: 333. SMU: 337. Tulsa: 446. Southern Miss: 355
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. Penn State: 76 by 60.9. UCLA: 47 by 70.6. North Texas: 47 by 67.9. Louisiana Tech: 45 by 53.9. Unknown: 37 by 71.3. UTEP: 47 by 87.6. East Carolina: 39 by 62.4. Marshall: 30 by 91.4. Rice: 41 by 63.5. UAB: 46 by 68.9. Tulane: 34 by 71.3. SMU: 49 by 68.3. Tulsa: 49 by 63.6. Southern Miss: 73 by 48.9
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
14 games
Featured metric
Total Offense
Top game by takeover score
Penn State
Best efficiency game
91.4 vs Marshall
| Result | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mon 1/2 | @ Penn State300-yard game · 3+ TD | W 30-14 | 45 | 69 | 532 | 65.2 | 3 | 0 | 60.9 | 7 | 10 | 1.40 | 0 | 9 |
| Sat 12/3 | vs Southern Miss300-yard game | L 28-49 | 41 | 67 | 373 | 61.2 | 2 | 2 | 48.9 | 6 | -18 | -3 | 0 | 9 |
| Fri 11/25 | @ Tulsa300-yard game · 3+ TD | W 48-16 | 33 | 46 | 457 | 71.7 | 5 | 0 | 63.6 | 3 | -11 | -3.70 | 0 | 5 |
| Sat 11/19 | vs SMU300-yard game | W 37-7 | 30 | 45 | 318 | 66.7 | 1 | 0 | 68.3 | 4 | 19 | 4.80 | 1 | 16 |
| Fri 11/11 | @ Tulane300-yard game · 3+ TD | W 73-17 | 22 | 29 | 325 | 75.9 | 3 | 0 | 71.3 | 5 | 8 | 1.60 | 0 | 10 |
| Sat 11/5 | @ UAB300-yard game · 3+ TD | W 56-13 | 39 | 44 | 407 | 88.6 | 2 | 0 | 68.9 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
| Fri 10/28 | vs Rice300-yard game · 3+ TD | W 73-34 | 24 | 37 | 534 | 64.9 | 9 | 1 | 63.5 | 4 | -15 | -3.80 | 0 | 2 |
| Sat 10/22 | vs Marshall300-yard game · 3+ TD | W 63-28 | 24 | 28 | 376 | 85.7 | 6 | 0 | 91.4 | 2 | 16 | 8 | 0 | 16 |
| Sat 10/8 | vs East Carolina300-yard game · 3+ TD | W 56-3 | 30 | 37 | 304 | 81.1 | 3 | 0 | 62.4 | 2 | -12 | -6 | 0 | 0 |
| Fri 9/30 | @ UTEP300-yard game | W 49-42 | 30 | 46 | 471 | 65.2 | 2 | 0 | 87.6 | 1 | 18 | 18 | 0 | 18 |
| Sun 9/25 | vs Unknown300-yard game | — | 29 | 34 | 415 | 85.3 | 2 | 0 | 71.3 | 3 | -11 | -3.70 | 0 | 0 |
| Sat 9/17 | @ Louisiana Tech300-yard game · 3+ TD | W 35-34 | 25 | 40 | 351 | 62.5 | 3 | 2 | 53.9 | 5 | -10 | -2 | 0 | 11 |
| Sat 9/10 | @ North Texas300-yard game · 3+ TD | W 48-23 | 26 | 41 | 458 | 63.4 | 5 | 0 | 67.9 | 6 | 9 | 1.50 | 0 | 7 |
| Sat 9/3 | vs UCLA300-yard game | W 38-34 | 30 | 40 | 310 | 75.0 | 2 | 0 | 70.6 | 7 | 30 | 4.30 | 0 | 10 |
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
Houston
2007-2011
Opening stop
Season Progression
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2007 Postseason | Houston | 2,671 | 64.8 | 18.2 | — |
| 2007 Regular Season | Houston | 2,671 | 64.8 | 18.2 | 0 |
| 2008 Postseason | Houston | 5,241 | 65.1 | 19.9 | 2,570 |
| 2008 Regular Season | Houston | 5,241 | 65.1 | 19.9 | 0 |
| 2009 Postseason | Houston | 5,829 | 66.4 | 16.2 | 588 |
| 2009 Regular Season | Houston | 5,829 | 66.4 | 16.2 | 0 |
| 2010 Regular Season | Houston | 707 | 76.1 | 5.3 | -5,122 |
| 2011 Postseason | Houston | 5,666 | 67.9 | 15.4 | 4,959 |
| 2011 Regular Season | Houston | 5,666 | 67.9 | 15.4 | 0 |
#1 Featured game
Oklahoma State
Loss with balanced pass-rush production and strong creator value.
468
Primary metric
468 total offense with 75.1 efficiency.
#2
Penn State
542
Primary metric
Win with 542 yards of offense and 60.9 efficiency.
542 total offense with 60.9 efficiency.
#3
TCU
333
Primary metric
Loss with 333 yards of offense and 58.5 efficiency.
333 total offense with 58.5 efficiency.
#4
Marshall
342
Primary metric
Win with 342 yards of offense and 73.8 efficiency.
342 total offense with 73.8 efficiency.
#5
Air Force
437
Primary metric
Loss with balanced pass-rush production and strong creator value.
437 total offense with 70.1 efficiency.
#1 Season by value score
2011 Postseason · Houston
5,666 primary output · 67.9 efficiency · 15.4 usage
68.6
#2
2011 Regular Season · Houston
68.6
5,666 primary · 67.9 efficiency · 15.4 usage
#3
2008 Postseason · Houston
66.9
5,241 primary · 65.1 efficiency · 19.9 usage
44
250+ passing yards
40
300+ total offense
0
3+ takeover TD games
43
Above avg efficiency
Recruit Profile
Class 2006 · Rating 0.7222
Wylie · Abilene, TX
Career Facts
1
Career teams
9
Seasons tracked
20,114
Career Total Offense
Data Context
Coverage spans 9 tracked seasons, 57 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.
Case Keenum quick answers
Recruiting profile
2-star recruit