Skip to content
Jordan Howard

#8Jordan Howard

RB·Indiana·201520143.5 pts line valueDay 2 (Rds 2–3)

Jordan Howard is a 2-year Featured Back for Indiana. Jordan's 2015 season ranks in the 68th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 210 plays — a average rate for the RB.

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 Jordan 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.

2015 Production

Rushing
1213 Rush yards9 Rush TD196 Carries6.2 Yards/carry
Receiving
11 Receptions106 Rec yards1 Rec TD9.6 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2015 · vs RB peers

  • Efficiency68
  • Volume82
  • Explosiveness64
  • Consistency78
  • Receiving34
Player type
Featured Back

The centerpiece of the run game — high carry volume, used in early downs and goal-line, true workhorse role.

Primary ball carrierHigh volumeGoal-line threat
Peer percentiles
Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)68th %ile · average
Game-to-game consistency78th %ile · above avg
Key findings
  • High-volume role — one of the team's most-used RBs by play share.
  • High game-to-game consistency — reliable floor each week.
  • 3 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
  • Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
  • Peak game: 0.56 EPA/play in Wk 11 vs Michigan (SP+ 20).

Historical Comparables · RB · 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
Travis EtienneClemson0.4704.7100.1
Saquon BarkleyPenn State0.4105.298.4
James FlandersTulsa0.3904.9103.7
Nick WilsonArizona0.4105.2102.5
Saquon BarkleyPenn State0.3403.997.9

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+0.5600.56Wk 1 vs Southern Illinois: +0.49 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Florida International: +0.22 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Western Kentucky: +0.29 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Wake Forest: +0.29 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs Ohio State: -0.16 EPA/play5Wk 8 vs Michigan State: +0.14 EPA/play8Wk 10 vs Iowa: +0.52 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Michigan: +0.56 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Maryland: +0.25 EPA/play12
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+CarRush YdsAvgRush TDRecRec YdsRec TDEPA/play
1vsSouthern IllinoisW48-47201457.3322500.49
2vsFlorida InternationalW36-22-16.6271595.901500.22
3vsWestern KentuckyW38-3510.8312036.5033800.29
4@Wake ForestW31-24-4.5331685.110.29
5vsOhio StateL27-3429.514342.402160-0.16
8@Michigan StateL26-5215.611787.110.14
10vsIowaL27-359.3221747.9221500.52
11vsMichiganL41-4819.7352386.821710.56
12@MarylandW47-28-1.63144.700.25

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
28.8%
Passing plays
5.4%
Rushing plays
47.0%
Standard downs
33.9%
Passing downs
18.0%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.28
Passing downs
0.54
Pass / Rush EPA
0.39 / 0.33

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

Career · rolling EPA, game by game

Per-game EPA5-game avg
+0.740−0.402015
EPA per play · 2014 — 2015 · 20 games
SeasonTeamLine valueTotal EPA
2014UAB
3.7
76.7
2015Indiana
3.5
67.3

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.