#12Amari Odom

QB·Kennesaw State·2025

Amari Odom is a Dual-Threat QB for Kennesaw State. Amari's 2025 season ranks in the 8th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 380 plays — a developing rate for the QB.

What projects, and what doesn't · QBs · held out 2019-2025

How well one season predicts the next, measured on seasons the model never trained on. 1.00 would be perfectly predictable; 0.00 means last year told us nothing.

Usage share (volume)0.46
Beats guessing the QB average by 16%. n=2,421 QB seasons
EPA per play (efficiency)0.05
Not projectable — we do not forecast this. n=1,965 QB seasons
Total EPA (value)0.51
Beats guessing the QB average by 20%. n=1,965 QB seasons

Across all positions, usage carries year to year at 0.47 and efficiency at 0.07. So Amari Odom's projection is a projection of opportunity — how much of the offense he runs through. How well he converts it is something this model does not claim to know a year in advance, and the number above is why.

2025 Production

Passing

189/291 Comp/Att2594 Pass yards19 Pass TD8 INT64.9% Comp %

Rushing

347 Rush yards7 Rush TD120 Carries2.9 Yards/carry

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs QB peers

Efficiency8
Volume100
Dual-Threat97
Consistency82
Clutch100

Player type

Dual-Threat QB

A genuine rushing threat who stresses defenses horizontally. Extends plays with legs and forces extra gap assignments.

Rushing threatScrambles for valueStresses defensive structure

Peer percentiles

Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)8th %ile · below avg

Game-to-game consistency82th %ile · above avg

Key findings

▸Below-average efficiency vs QB peers — value comes through volume, not per-play impact.
▸High-volume role — one of the team's most-used QBs by play share.
▸High game-to-game consistency — reliable floor each week.
▸5 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
▸Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
▸Production faded as the season progressed — 0.14 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
▸Peak game: 0.71 EPA/play in Wk 14 vs Liberty (SP+ -9).

NIL Market Tier· 2025

On3 valuation ↗

Star

Top-10 nationally. Multiple mid-to-large collective deals expected.

Tier is a model estimate based on position, school brand, performance rank, and usage — not a reported deal. NIL deals are private. For a real market valuation, see On3's NIL profile, which factors in social following and actual deal tracking.

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost

Wk	Opponent	Result	Opp SP+	C/ATT	Pass Yds	Pass TD	INT	QBR	Rush Yds	Rush TD	EPA/play
2	@Indiana	L9-56	32.4	10/16	176	0	1	56.2	5	0	0.33
3	vsMerrimack	W27-13	—	12/14	108	1	0	42.2	22	1	0.48
4	vsArkansas State	W28-21	-8.8	25/34	308	1	0	71.0	101	1	0.40
5	vsMiddle Tennessee	W24-16	-16.0	11/17	162	2	0	48.5	34	0	0.46
9	@Florida International	W45-26	-10.5	10/15	205	1	0	85.7	36	1	0.64
10	vsUTEP	W33-20	-17.5	6/10	86	0	0	78.4	6	1	0.16
11	@New Mexico State	W24-21	-15.5	14/30	219	3	2	29.6	20	0	0.01
12	@Jacksonville State	L26-35	-6.7	19/31	248	0	3	28.3	51	1	0.04
13	vsMissouri State	W41-34	-10.7	24/34	387	5	0	78.0	32	1	0.27
14	@Liberty	W48-42	-9.0	14/23	240	4	0	81.9	72	1	0.71
15	@Jacksonville State	W19-15	-6.7	26/32	246	1	0	70.1	-3	0	0.32
20	vsWestern Michigan	L6-41	-1.4	18/35	209	1	2	10.0	-29	0	—

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

46.7%

Passing plays

80.4%

Rushing plays

21.2%

Standard downs

42.7%

Passing downs

55.7%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: 0.11
Passing downs: 0.68
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.33 / 0.38

Usage = share of team plays (CFBD has no true snap counts).