Skip to content
Lamar Sperling

#32Lamar Sperling

Lamar Sperling is a Explosive Back for Buffalo. Lamar's 2025 season produced 7.0 total EPA across 34 plays.

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 Lamar Sperling'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
234 Rush yards1 Rush TD39 Carries6.0 Yards/carry
Receiving
3 Receptions12 Rec yards0 Rec TD4.0 Yards/rec
Returns
1 Kick returns12 KR yards0 KR TD

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs RB peers

  • Efficiency48
  • Volume20
  • Explosiveness60
  • Consistency0
  • Receiving26
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)48th %ile · average
Game-to-game consistency0th %ile · below avg
Key findings
  • Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
  • High game-to-game variance — boom-or-bust profile.
  • Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
  • Peak game: 0.67 EPA/play in Wk 5 vs UConn (SP+ 5).

NIL Market Tier· 2025

On3 valuation ↗
Starter

Meaningful starter. Local collective + position-group 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

+0.7900.79Wk 2 vs St. Francis (PA): +0.22 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Kent State: -0.79 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Troy: +0.17 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs UConn: +0.67 EPA/play5Wk 8 vs Massachusetts: +0.03 EPA/play8Wk 9 vs Akron: -0.24 EPA/play9Wk 13 vs Miami (OH): +0.42 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs Ohio: +0.05 EPA/play14
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+CarRush YdsAvgRush TDRecRec YdsRec TDEPA/play
2vsSt. Francis (PA)W45-611484.400.22
3@Kent StateW31-28-19.3221.00-0.79
4vsTroyL17-21-4.87355.001500.17
5vsUConnL17-205.1910611.810.67
8@MassachusettsW28-21-36.6122.001800.03
9vsAkronL16-24-13.9492.30-0.24
13vsMiami (OH)L20-37-3.43196.300.42
14vsOhioL26-31-4.02136.501-100.05

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
7.1%
Passing plays
1.0%
Rushing plays
13.8%
Standard downs
5.9%
Passing downs
9.6%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.00
Passing downs
0.41
Pass / Rush EPA
-0.20 / 0.24

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.