Usage Score
38.6
Player Dossier
2013-2016Toledo
Kareem Hunt
RB • 6'0" • Willoughby, OH, USA
Workhorse runnerSteady chain mover
Kareem Hunt leans workhorse runner traits and 60.3 efficiency.
Efficiency
60.3
Consistency
76.6
Season Value
68.9
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2014 Postseason · Toledo
13141415151616
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 1
- Seasons Tracked
- 7
- Program Path
- Toledo
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: Western Michigan
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.
Kareem Hunt, RB. Best season Best season by value score: 2014 Postseason · Toledo. Kareem Hunt leans workhorse runner traits and 60.3 efficiency.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2014 Postseason
Toledo paired 1,670 primary output with 79.4 efficiency.
Supporting note
2016 Postseason role shape
backfield-heavy usage with 60.3 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value stayed steady
2016 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: Western Michigan
Loss 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.
2016 Postseason · Toledo
Games
13
Scrimmage Yards / G
144.5
Efficiency
60.3
Usage
38.6
Consistency
76.6
Best Game by takeover score
App State
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. App State: 146. Arkansas State: 104. Unknown: 67. Fresno State: 123. BYU: 195. Eastern Michigan: 141. Bowling Green: 125. Central Michigan: 96. Ohio: 87. Akron: 157. Northern Illinois: 159. Ball State: 205. Western Michigan: 273
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. App State: 24 by 59.4. Arkansas State: 21 by 49.3. Unknown: 16 by 44.9. Fresno State: 19 by 67.4. BYU: 31 by 60. Eastern Michigan: 29 by 50.6. Bowling Green: 28 by 43.4. Central Michigan: 24 by 43.9. Ohio: 21 by 38.1. Akron: 19 by 84.4. Northern Illinois: 25 by 66.6. Ball State: 23 by 76.5. Western Michigan: 23 by 99.5
Split Comparison
Wins138.8 · n=8 · -36.5 vs Losses
Losses175.3 · n=4 · +36.5 vs Wins
First Half128.7 · n=7 · -34.1 vs Second Half
Second Half162.8 · n=6 · +34.1 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
Western Michigan
Best efficiency game
99.5 vs Western Michigan
| Result | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 12/17 | vs App State100 rush yards · 2+ TD | L 28-31 | 22 | 120 | 5.50 | 2 | 2 | 26 | 6.1 |
| Fri 11/25 | @ Western Michigan100 rush yards · 150 scrimmage yards | L 35-55 | 20 | 200 | 10 | 1 | 3 | 73 | 11.9 |
| Thu 11/17 | vs Ball State100 rush yards · 150 scrimmage yards | W 37-19 | 17 | 107 | 6.30 | 0 | 6 | 98 | 8.9 |
| Thu 11/10 | @ Northern Illinois100 rush yards · 150 scrimmage yards | W 31-24 | 19 | 122 | 6.40 | 1 | 6 | 37 | 6.4 |
| Wed 11/2 | @ Akron100 rush yards · 150 scrimmage yards | W 48-17 | 17 | 136 | 8 | 1 | 2 | 21 | 8.3 |
| Thu 10/27 | vs Ohio | L 26-31 | 15 | 50 | 3.30 | 0 | 6 | 37 | 4.1 |
| Sat 10/22 | vs Central Michigan | W 31-17 | 20 | 87 | 4.30 | 0 | 4 | 9 | 4 |
| Sat 10/15 | vs Bowling Green | W 42-35 | 25 | 99 | 4 | 1 | 3 | 26 | 4.5 |
| Sat 10/8 | @ Eastern Michigan100 rush yards | W 35-20 | 29 | 141 | 4.90 | 1 | — | — | 4.9 |
| Sat 10/1 | @ BYU100 rush yards · 150 scrimmage yards | L 53-55 | 27 | 146 | 5.40 | 1 | 4 | 49 | 6.3 |
| Sat 9/17 | vs Fresno State100 rush yards | W 52-17 | 19 | 123 | 6.50 | 1 | — | — | 6.5 |
| Sat 9/10 | vs Unknown | — | 15 | 66 | 4.40 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 4.2 |
| Sat 9/3 | @ Arkansas State | W 31-10 | 17 | 78 | 4.60 | 1 | 4 | 26 | 5.0 |
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
Toledo
2013-2016
Opening stop
Season Progression
2013201420142015201520162016
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2013 Regular Season | Toledo | 934 | 52.4 | 22.9 | — |
| 2014 Postseason | Toledo | 1,670 | 79.4 | 33.4 | 736 |
| 2014 Regular Season | Toledo | 1,670 | 79.4 | 33.4 | 0 |
| 2015 Postseason | Toledo | 1,018 | 56.2 | 36.1 | -652 |
| 2015 Regular Season | Toledo | 1,018 | 56.2 | 36.1 | 0 |
| 2016 Postseason | Toledo | 1,878 | 60.3 | 38.6 | 860 |
| 2016 Regular Season | Toledo | 1,878 | 60.3 | 38.6 | 0 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
Western Michigan
Loss driven by a workhorse rushing load.
273
Primary metric
273 scrimmage yards and 53.5 usage.
#2
Bowling Green
273
Primary metric
Win driven by a workhorse rushing load.
273 scrimmage yards and 50.8 usage.
#3
Arkansas State
266
Primary metric
Win driven by a workhorse rushing load.
266 scrimmage yards and 44.6 usage.
#4
Eastern Michigan
196
Primary metric
Win driven by a workhorse rushing load.
196 scrimmage yards and 32.4 usage.
#5
Western Michigan
161
Primary metric
Loss driven by a workhorse rushing load.
161 scrimmage yards and 41.8 usage.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2014 Postseason · Toledo
1,670 primary output · 79.4 efficiency · 33.4 usage
71.7
#2
2014 Regular Season · Toledo
71.7
1,670 primary · 79.4 efficiency · 33.4 usage
#3
2016 Postseason · Toledo
68.9
1,878 primary · 60.3 efficiency · 38.6 usage
Milestones
31
100+ rush yards
14
150+ scrimmage yards
12
2+ TD games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Recruit Profile
3★
Class 2013 · Rating 0.8033
South · Willoughby, OH
- Committed To
- Toledo
- Commit Date
- Jan 1, 2013
Career Facts
1
Career teams
7
Seasons tracked
5,500
Career Scrimmage Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 7 tracked seasons, 43 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.