#6Cody Kessler

QB·USC·2015 2014 20137.7 pts line valueDay 3 (Rds 4–7)

Cody Kessler is a 3-year Dual-Threat QB for USC. Cody's 2015 season ranks in the 28th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 490 plays — a developing rate for the QB. Cody's production has improved each season, a positive development trajectory.

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 Cody Kessler'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.

2015 Production

Passing

298/446 Comp/Att3536 Pass yards29 Pass TD7 INT66.8% Comp %

Rushing

-149 Rush yards4 Rush TD61 Carries-2.4 Yards/carry

Performance Analysis · 2015 · vs QB peers

Efficiency28
Volume100
Dual-Threat100
Consistency80
Clutch81

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)28th %ile · below avg

Game-to-game consistency80th %ile · above avg

Career trajectory:↑ Rising

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.
▸Career trajectory is upward — WEPA value has improved season over season.
▸High game-to-game consistency — reliable floor each week.
▸8 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 — 0.25 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
▸Peak game: 0.84 EPA/play in Wk 4 vs Arizona State (SP+ 10).

Historical Comparables · QB · efficiency + volume + value

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

Player	Team	Yr	Plays	WEPA/play	Line val	Total EPA
Stetson Bennett	Georgia	2022	509	0.635	12.5	323.0
Jordan Travis	Florida State	2021	690	0.476	10.1	328.3
Kyle McCord	Syracuse	2024	632	0.509	12.1	321.4
Sam Hartman	Wake Forest	2021	647	0.556	11.8	359.6

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

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
1	vsArkansas State	W55-6	0.5	19/26	240	4	0	55.1	-35	0	0.33
2	vsIdaho	W59-9	-12.2	26/31	410	3	0	93.3	3	0	0.84
3	vsStanford	L31-41	22.8	25/32	272	3	0	92.0	11	0	0.48
4	@Arizona State	W42-14	10.2	19/33	375	5	1	86.3	6	0	0.84
6	vsWashington	L12-17	9.7	16/29	156	0	2	7.9	-25	0	0.00
7	@Notre Dame	L31-41	22.4	30/46	365	2	2	52.7	-4	1	0.41
8	vsUtah	W42-24	11.0	21/28	264	1	0	66.6	-25	1	0.61
9	@California	W27-21	12.1	18/22	186	0	0	80.2	9	0	0.41
10	vsArizona	W38-30	4.7	22/36	243	2	0	37.2	-31	0	0.20
11	@Colorado	W27-24	-4.0	17/27	204	3	1	58.1	-14	0	0.41
12	@Oregon	L28-48	15.9	30/41	238	2	0	59.2	-18	0	-0.01
13	vsUCLA	W40-21	18.6	15/26	175	2	0	55.4	-1	1	0.43
14	vsStanford	L22-41	22.8	22/37	187	1	0	60.6	-8	1	0.17
1	vsWisconsin	L21-23	15.1	18/32	221	1	1	45.1	-17	0	0.17

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

50.5%

Passing plays

96.8%

Rushing plays

4.9%

Standard downs

42.4%

Passing downs

69.4%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: 0.25
Passing downs: 0.46
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.31 / 0.88

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

Career · rolling EPA, game by game

Per-game EPA5-game avg

EPA per play · 2013 — 2015 · 41 games

Season	Team	Line value	WEPA/play	YoY Δ	Total EPA
2013	USC	2.2	0.250	—	84.8
2014	USC	14.3	0.600	+0.35	312.0
2015	USC	7.7	0.470	-0.13	225.1

Chart shows per-game EPA (bars) and rolling 5-game average (line). Season breaks marked with dashed lines. Line value = est. points over replacement per game.