Usage Score
1.8
Player Dossier
2010-2013Louisville
FB • 6'2" • Kissimmee, FL, USA
B.J. Butler leans balanced backfield option traits and 57.7 efficiency.
Usage Score
1.8
Efficiency
57.7
Consistency
34.5
Season Value
37.1
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2012 Postseason · Louisville
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.
B.J. Butler, FB. Best season Best season by value score: 2012 Postseason · Louisville. B.J. Butler leans balanced backfield option traits and 57.7 efficiency.
B.J. Butler played FB for Louisville. Across 4 tracked seasons, B.J. Butler recorded 7 rushing yards and 60 receiving yards. His top tracked season came in 2012 with Louisville.
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2012 Postseason
Louisville paired 43 primary output with 100 efficiency.
Supporting note
2013 Regular Season role shape
backfield-heavy usage with 57.7 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value cooled off
2013 Regular Season fell back from the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: Unknown
Game with 17 yards from scrimmage and efficient touch value. 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
3
Scrimmage Yards / G
8
Efficiency
57.7
Usage
1.8
Consistency
34.5
Best Game by takeover score
Rutgers
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. Ohio: 3. Unknown: 17. Rutgers: 4
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. Ohio: 1 by 31.3. Unknown: 1 by 100. Rutgers: 1 by 41.7
Compare how this player performed across different situations. "Games" shows how many matchups are included in each split.
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
3 games
Featured metric
Scrimmage Yards
Top game by takeover score
Unknown
Best efficiency game
100 vs Unknown
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
Louisville
2010-2013
Opening stop
Season Progression
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 Regular Season | Louisville | 0 | — | — | — |
| 2011 Regular Season | Louisville | 0 | — | — | 0 |
| 2012 Postseason | Louisville | 43 | 100 | 3.7 | 43 |
| 2013 Regular Season | Louisville | 24 | 57.7 | 1.8 | -19 |
#1 Featured game
Florida
Win with 43 yards from scrimmage and efficient touch value.
43
Primary metric
43 scrimmage yards and 3.7 usage.
#2
Unknown
17
Primary metric
Game with 17 yards from scrimmage and efficient touch value.
17 scrimmage yards and 2 usage.
#3
Rutgers
4
Primary metric
Win with 4 yards from scrimmage and efficient touch value.
4 scrimmage yards and 1.8 usage.
#4
Ohio
3
Primary metric
Win with 3 yards from scrimmage and efficient touch value.
3 scrimmage yards and 1.5 usage.
#1 Season by value score
2012 Postseason · Louisville
43 primary output · 100 efficiency · 3.7 usage
75.4
#2
2013 Regular Season · Louisville
37.1
24 primary · 57.7 efficiency · 1.8 usage
#3
2010 Regular Season · Louisville
—
0 primary · — efficiency · — usage
0
100+ rush yards
0
150+ scrimmage yards
0
2+ TD games
Recruit Profile
Class 2010 · Rating 0.8983
Osceola · Kissimmee, FL
Career Facts
1
Career teams
4
Seasons tracked
67
Career Scrimmage Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 4 tracked seasons, 4 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.