Skip to content
Turbo Richard

#1Turbo Richard

Turbo Richard is a Pass-Catching Back for Boston College. Turbo's 2025 season ranks in the 0th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 166 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 Turbo Richard'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

Rushing
749 Rush yards9 Rush TD145 Carries5.2 Yards/carry
Receiving
30 Receptions213 Rec yards2 Rec TD7.1 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs RB peers

  • Efficiency0
  • Volume68
  • Explosiveness44
  • Consistency0
  • Receiving73
Player type
Pass-Catching Back

Third-down weapon out of the backfield. Routes, hands, and separation in coverage define this role as much as rushing.

3rd-down backReceiving threatPass protection
Peer percentiles
Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)0th %ile · below avg
Game-to-game consistency0th %ile · below avg
Key findings
  • Below-average efficiency vs RB peers — value comes through volume, not per-play impact.
  • High game-to-game variance — boom-or-bust profile.
  • Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
  • Production faded as the season progressed — 0.14 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
  • Peak game: 0.56 EPA/play in Wk 5 vs California (SP+ -3).

NIL Market Tier· 2025

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

+0.6500.65Wk 1 vs Fordham: -0.05 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Michigan State: +0.07 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Stanford: +0.23 EPA/play3Wk 5 vs California: +0.56 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs Pittsburgh: -0.65 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Clemson: +0.08 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs UConn: +0.04 EPA/play8Wk 10 vs Notre Dame: -0.12 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs SMU: -0.21 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Georgia Tech: +0.09 EPA/play12Wk 14 vs Syracuse: -0.34 EPA/play14
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+CarRush YdsAvgRush TDRecRec YdsRec TDEPA/play
1vsFordhamW66-1016483.01-0.05
2@Michigan StateL40-42-3.413554.2176610.07
3@StanfordL20-30-11.814553.9058310.23
5vsCaliforniaL24-28-3.21517111.4241900.56
6@PittsburghL7-488.4620.301-30-0.65
7vsClemsonL10-419.518754.211600.08
8vsUConnL23-385.16254.201400.04
10vsNotre DameL10-2524.416261.60490-0.12
11vsSMUL13-4513.415493.303200-0.21
12vsGeorgia TechL34-369.31114112.823900.09
14@SyracuseW34-12-13.1151026.82100-0.34

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
23.8%
Passing plays
9.6%
Rushing plays
44.2%
Standard downs
27.8%
Passing downs
14.2%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.00
Passing downs
0.14
Pass / Rush EPA
-0.06 / 0.06

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

EPA = expected points added (opponent-adjusted). NIL estimates are model-based ranges, not reported deals. Data: CollegeFootballData. Not betting advice.