Skip to content
Cam Fancher

#2Cam Fancher

Cam Fancher is a Volume Passer for Michigan State.

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 Cam Fancher'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.

2026 Production

Passing
6/6 Comp/Att44 Pass yards0 Pass TD0 INT100.0% Comp %
Rushing
11 Rush yards0 Rush TD3 Carries3.7 Yards/carry

Performance Analysis · 2026 · vs QB peers

  • Efficiency0
  • Volume16
  • Dual-Threat0
  • Consistency50
  • Clutch37
Player type
Volume Passer

High-rep offense that leans on this QB's arm — value comes through cumulative production across a high number of plays.

High play countFranchise-volume role
Peer percentiles
Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)0th %ile · below avg
Key findings
  • Below-average efficiency vs QB peers — value comes through volume, not per-play impact.
  • Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.

NIL Market Tier· 2026

On3 valuation ↗
Starter

Meaningful starter. Local collective + position-group 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.

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+0.2700.27Wk 1 vs Toledo: -0.16 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Eastern Michigan: +0.27 EPA/play2
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+C/ATTPass YdsPass TDINTRush YdsRush TDEPA/play
1vsToledoW30-20-9.430-0.16
2vsEastern MichiganW35-7-15.66/64400800.27

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
5.7%
Passing plays
9.4%
Rushing plays
3.3%
Standard downs
6.7%
Passing downs
2.6%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.07
Passing downs
0.05
Pass / Rush EPA
0.16 / -0.13

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.