Skip to content
Iverson Howard

#24Iverson Howard

Iverson Howard is a Committee Back for Maryland.

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 Iverson Howard'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
125 Rush yards0 Rush TD39 Carries3.2 Yards/carry
Receiving
2 Receptions3 Rec yards0 Rec TD1.5 Yards/rec
Returns
7 Kick returns108 KR yards0 KR TD

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs RB peers

  • Efficiency0
  • Volume18
  • Explosiveness4
  • Consistency57
  • Receiving21
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 consistency57th %ile · average
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.
  • Production faded as the season progressed — 0.26 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
  • Peak game: 0.40 EPA/play in Wk 13 vs Michigan (SP+ 12).

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

+0.9100.91Wk 1 vs Florida Atlantic: -0.15 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Northern Illinois: -0.04 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Towson: +0.03 EPA/play3Wk 6 vs Washington: -0.61 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Nebraska: +0.13 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs UCLA: -0.91 EPA/play8Wk 10 vs Indiana: -0.51 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Rutgers: -0.57 EPA/play11Wk 13 vs Michigan: +0.40 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs Michigan State: -0.38 EPA/play14
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+CarRush YdsAvgRush TDRecRec YdsRec TDEPA/play
1vsFlorida AtlanticW39-7-8.78232.90-0.15
2vsNorthern IllinoisW20-9-16.7284.00-0.04
3vsTowsonW44-1715604.001200.03
6vsWashingtonL20-2418.4100.00110-0.61
7vsNebraskaL31-346.2273.500.13
8@UCLAL17-20-8.7100.00-0.91
10vsIndianaL10-5532.44123.00-0.51
11@RutgersL20-351.0200.00-0.57
13vsMichiganL20-4512.42115.500.40
14vsMichigan StateL28-38-3.4242.00-0.38

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
6.2%
Passing plays
0.7%
Rushing plays
15.1%
Standard downs
7.4%
Passing downs
3.9%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
-0.37
Passing downs
-0.29
Pass / Rush EPA
-0.29 / -0.37

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.