Skip to content
Khobie Martin

#28Khobie Martin

Khobie Martin is a Committee Back for Indiana.

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 Khobie Martin'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
506 Rush yards6 Rush TD77 Carries6.6 Yards/carry
Receiving
1 Receptions14 Rec yards0 Rec TD14.0 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs RB peers

  • Efficiency0
  • Volume31
  • Explosiveness72
  • Consistency65
  • Receiving7
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 consistency65th %ile · average
Key findings
  • Below-average efficiency vs RB peers — value comes through volume, not per-play impact.
  • 4 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
  • Peak game: 0.84 EPA/play in Wk 3 vs Indiana State.

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

+0.8400.84Wk 2 vs Kennesaw State: -0.34 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Indiana State: +0.84 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Illinois: +0.66 EPA/play4Wk 8 vs Michigan State: +0.27 EPA/play8Wk 9 vs UCLA: -0.04 EPA/play9Wk 10 vs Maryland: +0.26 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Penn State: +0.58 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Wisconsin: +0.05 EPA/play12Wk 14 vs Purdue: +0.44 EPA/play14
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+CarRush YdsAvgRush TDRecRec YdsRec TDEPA/play
2vsKennesaw StateW56-9-5.4263.00-0.34
3vsIndiana StateW73-0111099.920.84
4vsIllinoisW63-1012.9121078.920.66
8vsMichigan StateW38-13-3.46406.700.27
9vsUCLAW56-6-8.79262.901140-0.04
10@MarylandW55-100.611807.310.26
11@Penn StateW27-2418.1111.000.58
12vsWisconsinW31-7-4.49333.700.05
14@PurdueW56-3-6.18516.410.44
20vsOregonW56-2225.944210.50
20vsAlabamaW38-314.84112.80

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
10.7%
Passing plays
0.4%
Rushing plays
17.7%
Standard downs
11.8%
Passing downs
6.8%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.03
Passing downs
Pass / Rush EPA
— / 0.03

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.