#12Drew Hare

QB·Northern Illinois·20145.9 pts line valueDay 3 (Rds 4–7)

Drew Hare is a Dual-Threat QB for Northern Illinois. Drew's 2014 season ranks in the 25th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 463 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 Drew Hare'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.

2014 Production

Passing

194/326 Comp/Att2322 Pass yards18 Pass TD2 INT59.5% Comp %

Rushing

900 Rush yards8 Rush TD159 Carries5.7 Yards/carry

Punting

1 Punts7 Punt yards7.0 Yards/punt7 Long0 Inside 20

Performance Analysis · 2014 · vs QB peers

Efficiency25
Volume100
Dual-Threat96
Consistency83
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)25th %ile · below avg

Game-to-game consistency83th %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 — 0.24 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
▸Peak game: 0.74 EPA/play in Wk 2 vs Northwestern (SP+ 2).

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	vsPresbyterian	W55-3	—	8/13	100	1	0	87.3	51	0	0.41
2	@Northwestern	W23-15	1.5	6/10	109	2	0	75.9	31	1	0.74
3	@UNLV	W48-34	-17.6	18/28	285	3	0	95.0	74	1	0.70
4	@Arkansas	L14-52	12.2	18/29	179	2	0	29.3	17	0	0.40
6	vsKent State	W17-14	-13.7	8/15	93	0	0	54.6	34	0	0.15
7	vsCentral Michigan	L17-34	-5.2	18/33	231	2	1	45.4	28	0	0.31
8	vsMiami (OH)	W51-41	-18.7	12/16	185	1	0	97.9	180	2	0.69
9	@Eastern Michigan	W28-17	-25.9	8/14	44	0	0	97.5	166	1	0.35
11	@Ball State	W35-21	-6.6	16/27	126	0	0	31.6	40	0	-0.02
12	vsToledo	W27-24	2.3	14/22	190	1	0	52.3	66	0	0.26
13	@Ohio	W21-14	-11.7	15/23	178	2	0	84.7	67	0	0.35
14	@Western Michigan	W31-21	-0.8	9/20	159	1	0	45.7	36	2	0.19
15	vsBowling Green	W51-17	-5.4	29/49	218	2	1	71.5	60	1	0.19
1	vsMarshall	L23-52	16.8	15/27	225	1	0	62.7	50	0	0.41

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

44.4%

Passing plays

85.0%

Rushing plays

22.1%

Standard downs

39.4%

Passing downs

57.2%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: 0.17
Passing downs: 0.64
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.32 / 0.38

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 · 2014 · 14 games

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.