Skip to content
Kenneth Farrow

#35Kenneth Farrow

RB·Houston·201520142.1 pts line valueDay 3 (Rds 4–7)

Kenneth Farrow is a 2-year Explosive Back for Houston. Kenneth's 2015 season ranks in the 30th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 179 plays — a developing 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 Kenneth Farrow'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
958 Rush yards12 Rush TD185 Carries5.2 Yards/carry
Receiving
10 Receptions119 Rec yards0 Rec TD11.9 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2015 · vs RB peers

  • Efficiency30
  • Volume57
  • Explosiveness44
  • Consistency38
  • Receiving23
Player type
Explosive Back

Elite per-carry efficiency — breaks big runs and creates chunk plays at a top rate while in a limited role.

Big-play threatHigh EPA per carryCapitalises on opportunities
Peer percentiles
Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)30th %ile · below avg
Game-to-game consistency38th %ile · below avg
Key findings
  • Below-average efficiency vs RB peers — value comes through volume, not per-play impact.
  • High game-to-game variance — boom-or-bust profile.
  • 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: 1.12 EPA/play in Wk 8 vs UCF (SP+ -16).

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
Saquon BarkleyPenn State0.3403.997.9
Travis EtienneClemson0.4704.7100.1
Dalvin CookFlorida State0.3404.399.3
James FlandersTulsa0.3904.9103.7
Saquon BarkleyPenn State0.4105.298.4

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+1.1201.12Wk 1 vs Tennessee Tech: +0.13 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Louisville: +0.08 EPA/play2Wk 4 vs Texas State: -0.14 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs Tulsa: +0.38 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs SMU: +0.75 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Tulane: -0.01 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs UCF: +1.12 EPA/play8Wk 9 vs Vanderbilt: -0.15 EPA/play9Wk 10 vs Cincinnati: -0.14 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Memphis: +0.60 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs UConn: -0.15 EPA/play12Wk 1 vs Florida State: -0.11 EPA/play1
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+CarRush YdsAvgRush TDRecRec YdsRec TDEPA/play
1vsTennessee TechW52-2411494.5021500.13
2@LouisvilleW34-3113.2271094.0011000.08
4vsTexas StateW59-14-15.517684.00-0.14
5@TulsaW38-24-8.5191598.420.38
6vsSMUW49-28-17.511403.6312800.75
7@TulaneW42-7-14.014775.50100-0.01
8@UCFW59-10-15.51316712.8312801.12
9vsVanderbiltW34-0-1.616825.11-0.15
10vsCincinnatiW33-305.3301063.51180-0.14
11vsMemphisW35-348.010464.6223200.60
12@UConnL17-20-6.314463.301-20-0.15
1vsFlorida StateW38-2423.2393.00-0.11

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
20.1%
Passing plays
2.5%
Rushing plays
33.1%
Standard downs
24.4%
Passing downs
10.5%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.07
Passing downs
0.63
Pass / Rush EPA
0.76 / 0.12

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

Career · rolling EPA, game by game

Per-game EPA5-game avg
+1.240−0.282015
EPA per play · 2014 — 2015 · 25 games
SeasonTeamLine valueTotal EPA
2014Houston
2.7
57.7
2015Houston
2.1
51.5

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.