Skip to content
Robert Lowe

#28Robert Lowe

RB·Texas State·20142.8 pts line valueDay 3 (Rds 4–7)

Robert Lowe is a Featured Back for Texas State. Robert's 2014 season ranks in the 38th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 204 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 Robert Lowe'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.

2014 Production

Rushing
1091 Rush yards12 Rush TD185 Carries5.9 Yards/carry
Receiving
24 Receptions207 Rec yards1 Rec TD8.6 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2014 · vs RB peers

  • Efficiency38
  • Volume72
  • Explosiveness58
  • Consistency72
  • Receiving58
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)38th %ile · below avg
Game-to-game consistency72th %ile · average
Key findings
  • Below-average efficiency vs RB peers — value comes through volume, not per-play impact.
  • High game-to-game consistency — reliable floor each week.
  • 4 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
  • Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
  • Peak game: 0.76 EPA/play in Wk 13 vs Arkansas State (SP+ -0).

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

+0.7600.76Wk 1 vs Arkansas-Pine Bluff: +0.50 EPA/play1Wk 3 vs Navy: +0.59 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Illinois: +0.16 EPA/play4Wk 6 vs Idaho: -0.02 EPA/play6Wk 8 vs Louisiana: +0.04 EPA/play8Wk 9 vs UL Monroe: +0.15 EPA/play9Wk 10 vs New Mexico State: +0.40 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Georgia Southern: -0.04 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs South Alabama: +0.07 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Arkansas State: +0.76 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs Georgia State: +0.41 EPA/play14
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+CarRush YdsAvgRush TDRecRec YdsRec TDEPA/play
1vsArkansas-Pine BluffW65-01415010.7132300.50
3vsNavyL21-353.416925.8133900.59
4@IllinoisL35-420.4261174.5045500.16
6vsIdahoW35-30-17.412433.60-0.02
8vsLouisianaL10-342.28364.500.04
9@UL MonroeW22-18-10.017915.4211000.15
10@New Mexico StateW37-29-23.316654.121800.40
11vsGeorgia SouthernL25-28-2.411393.515190-0.04
12@South AlabamaL20-24-4.316764.8132600.07
13vsArkansas StateW45-27-0.3292368.141500.76
14@Georgia StateW54-31-22.8201467.3032210.41

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
25.2%
Passing plays
8.1%
Rushing plays
39.4%
Standard downs
27.4%
Passing downs
20.2%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.24
Passing downs
0.50
Pass / Rush EPA
0.44 / 0.28

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

Career · rolling EPA, game by game

Per-game EPA5-game avg
+0.840−0.12
EPA per play · 2014 · 11 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.