Skip to content
Brevyn Spann-Ford
Brevyn Spann-Ford

#88Brevyn Spann-Ford

Brevyn Spann-Ford is a Slot Specialist TE for Minnesota.

What projects, and what doesn't · TEs · 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)0.42
    Beats guessing the TE average by 9%. n=2,225 TE seasons
  • EPA per play (efficiency)0.04
    Not projectable — we do not forecast this. n=2,016 TE seasons
  • Total EPA (value)0.46
    Beats guessing the TE average by 13%. n=2,016 TE seasons

Across all positions, usage carries year to year at 0.47 and efficiency at 0.07. So Brevyn Spann-Ford'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.

2023 Production

Receiving
25 Receptions239 Rec yards2 Rec TD9.6 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2023 · vs TE peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume11
  • Explosiveness17
  • Consistency50
  • Pass-Down100
Player type
Slot Specialist TE

The offense's primary passing-down weapon — routes, separation, and reliability on 3rd down define this role.

3rd-down converterRoute technicianHigh passing-down share
Peer percentiles
Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)100th %ile · elite
Game-to-game consistency50th %ile · average
Key findings
  • Top-10% efficiency among TEs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
  • Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
  • 4 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
  • Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
  • Strong second-half surge — EPA/play improved 0.95 from the first to second half of the season.
  • Peak game: 2.07 EPA/play in Wk 10 vs Illinois (SP+ -3).

NIL Market Tier· 2023

On3 valuation ↗
Elite

Top-3 player at position nationally. Collective + national brand deals.

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.

Historical Comparables · TE · efficiency + volume + value

Players from 2013–2025 matched on EPA efficiency, play volume, and adjusted value tier — not just one metric.

PlayerTeamWEPA/playLine valTotal EPA
Ty ThompsonTulane0.4200.720.2
Seth GreenMinnesota0.3900.032.4

Comps are statistical — efficiency, volume, and value tier all factor in. Style and conference context differ.

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+2.0702.07Wk 1 vs Nebraska: +0.61 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Eastern Michigan: -0.20 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs North Carolina: -0.24 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Northwestern: -0.16 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs Louisiana: -0.10 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs Michigan: -0.22 EPA/play6Wk 9 vs Michigan State: +0.40 EPA/play9Wk 10 vs Illinois: +2.07 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Purdue: +1.36 EPA/play11Wk 13 vs Wisconsin: +1.07 EPA/play13
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
1vsNebraskaW13-100.35459.00150.61
2vsEastern MichiganW25-6-12.3252.504-0.20
3@North CarolinaL13-317.4263.004-0.24
4@NorthwesternL34-37-1.3273.504-0.16
5vsLouisianaW35-240.4133.003-0.10
6vsMichiganL10-5231.3100.000-0.22
9vsMichigan StateW27-12-6.824321.50300.40
10vsIllinoisL26-27-2.535819.31312.07
11@PurdueL30-49-7.355911.81221.36
13vsWisconsinL14-289.42136.5081.07

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
3.8%
Passing plays
9.1%
Rushing plays
0.0%
Standard downs
2.9%
Passing downs
6.0%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.60
Passing downs
0.95
Pass / Rush EPA
0.77 / —

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

EPA = expected points added (opponent-adjusted). NIL estimates are model-based ranges, not reported deals. Data: CollegeFootballData. Not betting advice.