Skip to content
Marcel Reed

#10Marcel Reed

QB·Texas A&M·20259.0 pts line value1st Round

Marcel Reed is a Dual-Threat QB for Texas A&M. Marcel's 2025 season ranks in the 88th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 472 plays — a above-average rate for the QB.

What projects, and what doesn't · QBs · 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)0.46
    Beats guessing the QB average by 16%. n=2,421 QB seasons
  • EPA per play (efficiency)0.05
    Not projectable — we do not forecast this. n=1,965 QB seasons
  • Total EPA (value)0.51
    Beats guessing the QB average by 20%. n=1,965 QB seasons

Across all positions, usage carries year to year at 0.47 and efficiency at 0.07. So Marcel Reed'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

Passing
234/377 Comp/Att3169 Pass yards25 Pass TD12 INT62.1% Comp %
Rushing
493 Rush yards6 Rush TD104 Carries4.7 Yards/carry

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs QB peers

  • Efficiency88
  • Volume100
  • Dual-Threat91
  • Consistency88
  • Clutch73
Player type
Dual-Threat QB

A genuine rushing threat who stresses defenses horizontally. Extends plays with legs and forces extra gap assignments.

Rushing threatScrambles for valueStresses defensive structure
Peer percentiles
Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)88th %ile · above avg
Game-to-game consistency88th %ile · above avg
Key findings
  • Above-average efficiency for the QB position (88th percentile).
  • High-volume role — one of the team's most-used QBs by play share.
  • High game-to-game consistency — reliable floor each week.
  • 6 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
  • Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
  • Peak game: 0.63 EPA/play in Wk 8 vs Arkansas (SP+ 5).

NIL Market Tier· 2025

On3 valuation ↗
Star

Top-10 nationally. Multiple mid-to-large collective deals expected.

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.

Historical Comparables · QB · 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
Stetson BennettGeorgia0.63512.5323.0
Kyle McCordSyracuse0.50912.1321.4
Sam HartmanWake Forest0.55611.8359.6
Trace McSorleyPenn State0.51312.7321.0
Tanner MordecaiSMU0.63014.0321.5

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+0.6300.63Wk 1 vs UTSA: +0.45 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Utah State: +0.32 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Notre Dame: +0.49 EPA/play3Wk 5 vs Auburn: +0.27 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs Mississippi State: +0.37 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Florida: +0.53 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Arkansas: +0.63 EPA/play8Wk 9 vs LSU: +0.59 EPA/play9Wk 11 vs Missouri: +0.20 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs South Carolina: +0.48 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Samford: +0.40 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs Texas: +0.05 EPA/play14
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+C/ATTPass YdsPass TDINTQBRRush YdsRush TDEPA/play
1vsUTSAW42-243.722/342894079.73900.45
2vsUtah StateW44-22-3.119/282203066.06610.32
3@Notre DameW41-4024.417/373602175.33700.49
5vsAuburnW16-1011.615/222070135.1-2300.27
6vsMississippi StateW31-94.113/231802156.73010.37
7vsFloridaW34-173.516/262341180.33710.53
8@ArkansasW45-425.123/322803083.55510.63
9@LSUW49-2510.312/212022292.410820.59
11@MissouriW38-1714.420/292212090.12900.20
12vsSouth CarolinaW31-305.922/394393279.81300.48
13vsSamfordW48-010/151203065.0400.40
14@TexasL17-2716.220/321800265.47100.05
20vsMiamiL3-1020.725/392370258.6270

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
52.6%
Passing plays
92.3%
Rushing plays
19.3%
Standard downs
47.9%
Passing downs
63.9%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.31
Passing downs
0.47
Pass / Rush EPA
0.40 / 0.36

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

Career · rolling EPA, game by game

Per-game EPA5-game avg
+0.690−0.04
EPA per play · 2025 · 13 games

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.