Skip to content
Kevin Riley

#6Kevin Riley

Kevin Riley is a Pass-Catching Back for Alabama.

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 Kevin Riley'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
224 Rush yards2 Rush TD59 Carries3.8 Yards/carry
Receiving
19 Receptions176 Rec yards1 Rec TD9.3 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs RB peers

  • Efficiency0
  • Volume34
  • Explosiveness16
  • Consistency0
  • Receiving97
Player type
Pass-Catching Back

Third-down weapon out of the backfield. Routes, hands, and separation in coverage define this role as much as rushing.

3rd-down backReceiving threatPass protection
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.
  • High game-to-game variance — boom-or-bust profile.
  • Peak game: 0.57 EPA/play in Wk 13 vs Eastern Illinois.

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

+0.8200.82Wk 1 vs Florida State: -0.22 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs UL Monroe: +0.22 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Wisconsin: -0.21 EPA/play3Wk 5 vs Georgia: -0.03 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs Vanderbilt: -0.17 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Missouri: +0.01 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Tennessee: -0.82 EPA/play8Wk 11 vs LSU: +0.11 EPA/play11Wk 13 vs Eastern Illinois: +0.57 EPA/play13
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+CarRush YdsAvgRush TDRecRec YdsRec TDEPA/play
1@Florida StateL17-317.25316.20140-0.22
2vsUL MonroeW73-0-21.611696.3064500.22
3vsWisconsinW38-14-4.47202.903280-0.21
5@GeorgiaW24-2124.110303.002370-0.03
6vsVanderbiltW30-1420.35173.401100-0.17
7@MissouriW27-2414.46162.7031510.01
8vsTennesseeW37-2015.03-2-0.70-0.82
11vsLSUW20-910.3155.000.11
13vsEastern IllinoisW56-08364.5233700.57
20vsIndianaL3-3832.4320.70

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
11.8%
Passing plays
6.3%
Rushing plays
18.0%
Standard downs
13.4%
Passing downs
7.8%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.06
Passing downs
-0.26
Pass / Rush EPA
0.48 / -0.19

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.