Skip to content
J.T. Barrett

#16J.T. Barrett

QB·Ohio State·20172016201411.0 pts line valueDay 2 (Rds 2–3)

J.T. Barrett is a 3-year Dual-Threat QB for Ohio State. J.T.'s 2014 season ranks in the 75th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 461 plays — a above-average 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 J.T. Barrett'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
203/314 Comp/Att2834 Pass yards34 Pass TD10 INT64.6% Comp %
Rushing
938 Rush yards11 Rush TD171 Carries5.5 Yards/carry

Performance Analysis · 2014 · vs QB peers

  • Efficiency75
  • Volume100
  • Dual-Threat100
  • Consistency79
  • 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)75th %ile · above avg
Game-to-game consistency79th %ile · above avg
Career trajectory:→ Stable
Key findings
  • Above-average efficiency for the QB position (75th percentile).
  • High-volume role — one of the team's most-used QBs by play share.
  • High game-to-game consistency — reliable floor each week.
  • 6 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 — 0.09 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
  • Peak game: 0.83 EPA/play in Wk 11 vs Michigan State (SP+ 24).

Historical Comparables · QB · efficiency + volume + value

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

PlayerTeamWEPA/playLine valTotal EPA
Stetson BennettGeorgia0.63512.5323.0
Tanner MordecaiSMU0.63014.0321.5
Ryan HigginsLouisiana Tech0.58613.7334.6
Malik CunninghamLouisville0.68114.7341.6
Kaidon SalterLiberty0.71114.7345.6

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+0.8300.83Wk 1 vs Navy: +0.54 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Virginia Tech: -0.01 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Kent State: +0.40 EPA/play3Wk 5 vs Cincinnati: +0.49 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs Maryland: +0.43 EPA/play6Wk 8 vs Rutgers: +0.73 EPA/play8Wk 9 vs Penn State: -0.22 EPA/play9Wk 10 vs Illinois: +0.26 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Michigan State: +0.83 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Minnesota: +0.40 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Indiana: +0.28 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs Michigan: +0.50 EPA/play14
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+C/ATTPass YdsPass TDINTQBRRush YdsRush TDEPA/play
1vsNavyW34-173.412/152262174.25000.54
2vsVirginia TechL21-357.89/292191331.4701-0.01
3vsKent StateW66-0-13.723/303126171.3600.40
5vsCincinnatiW50-286.926/363304081.37900.49
6@MarylandW52-245.718/232674091.77110.43
8vsRutgersW56-17-1.519/312613099.110720.73
9@Penn StateW31-249.212/19741265.3752-0.22
10vsIllinoisW55-140.415/241672084.53800.26
11@Michigan StateW49-3724.116/263003097.98620.83
12@MinnesotaW31-246.815/252003195.418910.40
13vsIndianaW42-271.825/353024249.87800.28
14vsMichiganW42-288.213/211761093.98920.50

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
54.1%
Passing plays
95.1%
Rushing plays
28.1%
Standard downs
49.6%
Passing downs
66.7%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.21
Passing downs
0.73
Pass / Rush EPA
0.33 / 0.45

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

Career · rolling EPA, game by game

Per-game EPA5-game avg
+0.970−0.3420162017
EPA per play · 2014 — 2017 · 39 games
SeasonTeamLine valueTotal EPA
2014Ohio State
11.0
292.3
2016Ohio State
7.5
250.1
2017Ohio State
14.1
341.6

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.

EPA = expected points added (opponent-adjusted). NIL estimates are model-based ranges, not reported deals. Data: CollegeFootballData. Not betting advice.