Skip to content
Dante Dowdell

#22Dante Dowdell

Dante Dowdell is a Committee Back for Kentucky.

What projects, and what doesn't · RBs · 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)0.52
    Beats guessing the RB average by 18%. n=4,219 RB seasons
  • EPA per play (efficiency)0.10
    Not projectable — we do not forecast this. n=3,575 RB seasons
  • Total EPA (value)0.41
    Beats guessing the RB average by 9%. n=3,575 RB seasons

Across all positions, usage carries year to year at 0.47 and efficiency at 0.07. So Dante Dowdell'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

Rushing
560 Rush yards3 Rush TD112 Carries5.0 Yards/carry
Receiving
7 Receptions30 Rec yards0 Rec TD4.3 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs RB peers

  • Efficiency0
  • Volume42
  • Explosiveness40
  • Consistency0
  • Receiving28
Player type
Committee Back

Part of a rotation — contributes in a complementary role and keeps the featured back fresh.

Rotational roleSituational use
Peer percentiles
Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)0th %ile · below avg
Game-to-game consistency0th %ile · below avg
Key findings
  • Below-average efficiency vs RB peers — value comes through volume, not per-play impact.
  • High game-to-game variance — boom-or-bust profile.
  • Strong second-half surge — EPA/play improved 0.18 from the first to second half of the season.
  • Peak game: 0.49 EPA/play in Wk 12 vs Tennessee Tech.

NIL Market Tier· 2025

On3 valuation ↗
Contributor

Rotational contributor. Smaller collective or local 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

+0.7800.78Wk 1 vs Toledo: +0.44 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Ole Miss: -0.01 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Eastern Michigan: -0.11 EPA/play3Wk 5 vs South Carolina: -0.20 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs Georgia: -0.34 EPA/play6Wk 8 vs Texas: -0.78 EPA/play8Wk 9 vs Tennessee: -0.10 EPA/play9Wk 10 vs Auburn: -0.15 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Florida: +0.26 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Tennessee Tech: +0.49 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Vanderbilt: -0.60 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs Louisville: +0.16 EPA/play14
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+CarRush YdsAvgRush TDRecRec YdsRec TDEPA/play
1vsToledoW24-166.0141299.211-100.44
2vsOle MissL23-3024.014564.002110-0.01
3vsEastern MichiganW48-23-14.78293.60-0.11
5@South CarolinaL13-355.913241.80-0.20
6@GeorgiaL14-3524.1791.30120-0.34
8vsTexasL13-1616.211272.50120-0.78
9vsTennesseeL34-5615.012524.30170-0.10
10@AuburnW10-311.63113.70-0.15
11vsFloridaW38-73.5710414.910.26
12vsTennessee TechW42-1013876.710.49
13@VanderbiltL17-4520.3451.30-0.60
14@LouisvilleL0-4112.46274.501900.16

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
14.7%
Passing plays
2.3%
Rushing plays
27.0%
Standard downs
17.4%
Passing downs
8.8%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
-0.02
Passing downs
0.00
Pass / Rush EPA
-0.04 / -0.02

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.