Player Stats

Kareem Hunt College Stats

Career production, season-by-season totals, and the selected-season workbench are grouped here for stat-first searches.

Stat Footprint

Career production snapshot

Scrimmage yards
5,500
Rushing yards
4,945
Receiving yards
555
Touchdowns
45

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesScrimmageRush YdsRec YdsTDOverall
2013 Regular SeasonToledo1193486668656.3
2014 PostseasonToledo10266271-5585.5
2014 Regular SeasonToledo101,4041,360441185.5
2015 PostseasonToledo985796272.1
2015 Regular SeasonToledo9933894391072.1
2016 PostseasonToledo1314612026284.2
2016 Regular SeasonToledo131,7321,355377984.2

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 compare the statistical profile without scrolling through the full player page.

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

Western Michigan

Hover a point or expand a game row to keep the active game context visible here.

Active game

Hover over a point

Hover or select a game to keep its context visible here without the page shifting around.

Game-by-Game Trend

Follow how the selected stat changes from one game to the next. Spikes mark standout outings, while dips show quieter weeks.

12345678910111213

Chronological game order.

Game by game trend chart. App State: 146. Arkansas State: 104. Maine: 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

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. App State: 24 by 59.4. Arkansas State: 21 by 49.3. Maine: 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

Compare how this player performed across different situations. "Games" shows how many matchups are included in each split.

Wins130.8 · Games = 9 · -44.5 vs Losses
Losses175.3 · Games = 4 · +44.5 vs Wins