#9Lloyd Avant

RB·Tulsa·2024

Lloyd Avant is a Committee Back for Tulsa. Lloyd's 2024 season ranks in the 0th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 60 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 Lloyd Avant'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.

2024 Production

Rushing

259 Rush yards1 Rush TD76 Carries3.4 Yards/carry

Receiving

12 Receptions62 Rec yards0 Rec TD5.2 Yards/rec

Returns

14 Kick returns392 KR yards1 KR TD

Performance Analysis · 2024 · vs RB peers

Efficiency0
Volume28
Explosiveness8
Consistency36
Receiving50

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 consistency36th %ile · below avg

Key findings

▸Below-average efficiency vs RB peers — value comes through volume, not per-play impact.
▸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.
▸Strong second-half surge — EPA/play improved 0.14 from the first to second half of the season.

NIL Market Tier· 2024

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

EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost

Wk	Opponent	Result	Opp SP+	Car	Rush Yds	Avg	Rush TD	Rec	Rec Yds	Rec TD	EPA/play
1	vsNorthwestern State	W62-28	—	11	64	5.8	0	—	—	—	0.16
2	@Arkansas State	L24-28	-9.9	14	61	4.4	0	2	-2	0	-0.04
3	vsOklahoma State	L10-45	-2.6	6	18	3.0	0	3	24	0	-0.29
4	@Louisiana Tech	W23-20	-11.6	8	6	0.8	0	4	18	0	-0.46
5	@North Texas	L20-52	-4.5	4	12	3.0	0	1	0	0	-0.37
6	vsArmy	L7-49	9.2	5	16	3.2	0	—	—	—	-0.10
8	@Temple	L10-20	-20.3	4	11	2.8	0	—	—	—	-0.30
9	vsUTSA	W46-45	2.2	3	4	1.3	0	1	4	0	0.05
10	@UAB	L21-59	-11.3	8	24	3.0	0	—	—	—	0.02
12	vsEast Carolina	L31-38	-1.0	7	20	2.9	0	1	18	0	0.21
13	@South Florida	L30-63	-2.3	5	21	4.2	1	—	—	—	0.20
14	vsFlorida Atlantic	L16-63	-12.7	1	2	2.0	0	—	—	—	-0.45

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

9.9%

Passing plays

2.7%

Rushing plays

17.4%

Standard downs

12.0%

Passing downs

5.9%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: -0.24
Passing downs: 0.20
Pass / Rush EPA: -0.20 / -0.14

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