#32Isaiah West

RB·Ohio State·2025

Isaiah West is a Committee Back for Ohio State.

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 Isaiah West'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

310 Rush yards2 Rush TD59 Carries5.3 Yards/carry

Receiving

2 Receptions12 Rec yards0 Rec TD6.0 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs RB peers

Efficiency0
Volume27
Explosiveness46
Consistency0
Receiving14

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.
▸Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
▸High game-to-game variance — boom-or-bust profile.
▸Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
▸Strong second-half surge — EPA/play improved 0.12 from the first to second half of the season.
▸Peak game: 0.43 EPA/play in Wk 12 vs UCLA (SP+ -9).

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

EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost

Wk	Opponent	Result	Opp SP+	Car	Rush Yds	Avg	Rush TD	Rec	Rec Yds	Rec TD	EPA/play
2	vsGrambling	W70-0	—	8	42	5.3	1	—	—	—	0.31
6	vsMinnesota	W42-3	1.5	1	3	3.0	0	—	—	—	-0.31
7	@Illinois	W34-16	12.9	3	4	1.3	0	—	—	—	-0.74
8	@Wisconsin	W34-0	-4.4	9	55	6.1	0	—	—	—	0.14
10	vsPenn State	W38-14	18.1	4	13	3.3	0	—	—	—	-0.25
11	@Purdue	W34-10	-6.1	9	60	6.7	0	—	—	—	0.40
12	vsUCLA	W48-10	-8.7	8	61	7.6	1	2	12	0	0.43
13	vsRutgers	W42-9	1.0	8	48	6.0	0	—	—	—	-0.17
14	@Michigan	W27-9	12.4	6	20	3.3	0	—	—	—	-0.29
15	vsIndiana	L10-13	32.4	3	4	1.3	0	—	—	—	-0.60

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

9.4%

Passing plays

0.7%

Rushing plays

17.5%

Standard downs

10.1%

Passing downs

7.0%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: -0.14
Passing downs: 0.54
Pass / Rush EPA: -0.04 / 0.02

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