Skip to content
Tanner Morgan

#2Tanner Morgan

QB·Minnesota·201914.4 pts line value1st Round

Tanner Morgan is a Clutch Passer for Minnesota. Tanner's 2019 season ranks in the 93th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 364 plays — a elite 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 Tanner Morgan'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.

2019 Production

Passing
210/318 Comp/Att3253 Pass yards30 Pass TD7 INT66.0% Comp %
Rushing
-57 Rush yards1 Rush TD61 Carries-0.9 Yards/carry

Performance Analysis · 2019 · vs QB peers

  • Efficiency93
  • Volume100
  • Dual-Threat40
  • Consistency85
  • Clutch100
Player type
Clutch Passer

Elevates on passing downs — 3rd-and-medium, two-minute drills, and pressure situations are where this QB is best.

3rd-down precisionLate-game valueHigh passing-down EPA
Peer percentiles
Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)93th %ile · elite
Game-to-game consistency85th %ile · above avg
Key findings
  • Top-10% efficiency among QBs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
  • High-volume role — one of the team's most-used QBs by play share.
  • High game-to-game consistency — reliable floor each week.
  • 9 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
  • Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
  • Peak game: 1.19 EPA/play in Wk 11 vs Penn State (SP+ 24).

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
Blake SimsAlabama0.69615.4329.4
Kaidon SalterLiberty0.71114.7345.6
Dillon GabrielOklahoma0.73216.1346.4
Malik CunninghamLouisville0.68114.7341.6
Jayden DanielsLSU0.78317.5360.8

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+1.1901.19Wk 1 vs South Dakota State: +0.44 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Fresno State: +0.59 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Georgia Southern: +0.71 EPA/play3Wk 5 vs Purdue: +0.95 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs Illinois: +0.17 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Nebraska: +0.40 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Rutgers: +0.46 EPA/play8Wk 9 vs Maryland: +0.35 EPA/play9Wk 11 vs Penn State: +1.19 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Iowa: +0.51 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Northwestern: +0.65 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs Wisconsin: +0.26 EPA/play14Wk 1 vs Auburn: +0.43 EPA/play1
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+C/ATTPass YdsPass TDINTQBRRush YdsRush TDEPA/play
1vsSouth Dakota StateW28-2113/181761162.9800.44
2@Fresno StateW38-35-4.016/232342064.2210.59
3vsGeorgia SouthernW35-32-4.519/312893181.1-1700.71
5@PurdueW38-31-0.721/223964098.6-2800.95
6vsIllinoisW40-170.69/171553140.3-600.17
7vsNebraskaW34-72.68/131281073.6400.40
8@RutgersW42-7-14.615/282452080.2100.46
9vsMarylandW52-10-6.312/211382187.33000.35
11vsPenn StateW31-2624.318/2033930001.19
12@IowaL19-2316.725/3636810-2300.51
13@NorthwesternW38-22-5.515/2321141-1000.65
14vsWisconsinL17-3820.320/3729621-2000.26
1vsAuburnW31-2421.019/2927821200.43

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
42.1%
Passing plays
98.8%
Rushing plays
6.5%
Standard downs
33.4%
Passing downs
61.8%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.40
Passing downs
0.73
Pass / Rush EPA
0.59 / 0.10

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

Career · rolling EPA, game by game

Per-game EPA5-game avg
+1.30+0.06
EPA per play · 2019 · 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.