Skip to content
Mohamed Ibrahim

#24Mohamed Ibrahim

RB·Minnesota·2022202020182.4 pts line valueDay 3 (Rds 4–7)

Mohamed Ibrahim is a 3-year Featured Back for Minnesota. Mohamed's 2018 season ranks in the 18th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 198 plays — a developing rate for the RB. Mohamed's production has improved each season, a positive development trajectory.

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 Mohamed Ibrahim'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.

2018 Production

Rushing
1161 Rush yards9 Rush TD202 Carries5.7 Yards/carry
Receiving
4 Receptions26 Rec yards0 Rec TD6.5 Yards/rec
Returns
1 Kick returns19 KR yards0 KR TD

Performance Analysis · 2018 · vs RB peers

  • Efficiency18
  • Volume87
  • Explosiveness54
  • Consistency76
  • Receiving10
Player type
Featured Back

The centerpiece of the run game — high carry volume, used in early downs and goal-line, true workhorse role.

Primary ball carrierHigh volumeGoal-line threat
Peer percentiles
Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)18th %ile · below avg
Game-to-game consistency76th %ile · above avg
Career trajectory:↑ Rising
Key findings
  • Below-average efficiency vs RB peers — value comes through volume, not per-play impact.
  • High-volume role — one of the team's most-used RBs by play share.
  • Career trajectory is upward — WEPA value has improved season over season.
  • High game-to-game consistency — reliable floor each week.
  • 3 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
  • Peak game: 0.62 EPA/play in Wk 1 vs New Mexico State (SP+ -20).

Historical Comparables · RB · 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
Saquon BarkleyPenn State0.3403.997.9
Dalvin CookFlorida State0.3404.399.3
Travis EtienneClemson0.4704.7100.1
James FlandersTulsa0.3904.9103.7
Saquon BarkleyPenn State0.4105.298.4

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+0.6200.62Wk 1 vs New Mexico State: +0.62 EPA/play1Wk 4 vs Maryland: +0.13 EPA/play4Wk 6 vs Iowa: +0.06 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Ohio State: +0.49 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Nebraska: -0.11 EPA/play8Wk 10 vs Illinois: +0.40 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Purdue: +0.38 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Northwestern: +0.26 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Wisconsin: +0.10 EPA/play13Wk 1 vs Georgia Tech: +0.41 EPA/play1
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+CarRush YdsAvgRush TDRecRec YdsRec TDEPA/play
1vsNew Mexico StateW48-10-20.2910111.200.62
4@MarylandL13-423.026953.700.13
6vsIowaL31-4813.313624.802100.06
7@Ohio StateL14-3024.1231586.920.49
8@NebraskaL28-535.418492.71-0.11
10@IllinoisL31-55-7.918985.420.40
11vsPurdueW41-106.5181558.600.38
12vsNorthwesternL14-241.920984.9122500.26
13@WisconsinW37-1515.5261214.710.10
1vsGeorgia TechW34-100.3312247.220.41

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
30.6%
Passing plays
1.7%
Rushing plays
54.0%
Standard downs
32.7%
Passing downs
25.8%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.25
Passing downs
0.22
Pass / Rush EPA
0.30 / 0.24

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

Career · rolling EPA, game by game

Per-game EPA5-game avg
+0.950−0.3220202022
EPA per play · 2018 — 2022 · 29 games
SeasonTeamLine valueTotal EPA
2018Minnesota
2.4
60.9
2020Minnesota
6.7
80.9
2022Minnesota
5.3
103.6

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.