#16Austin Reed

QB·Western Kentucky·2023 20228.8 pts line valueDay 2 (Rds 2–3)

Austin Reed is a 2-year Dual-Threat QB for Western Kentucky. Austin's 2023 season ranks in the 38th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 491 plays — a developing 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 Austin 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.

2023 Production

Passing

289/470 Comp/Att3324 Pass yards31 Pass TD11 INT61.5% Comp %

Rushing

100 Rush yards4 Rush TD42 Carries2.4 Yards/carry

Punting

1 Punts37 Punt yards37.0 Yards/punt37 Long1 Inside 20

Performance Analysis · 2023 · vs QB peers

Efficiency38
Volume100
Dual-Threat100
Consistency85
Clutch95

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)38th %ile · below avg

Game-to-game consistency85th %ile · above avg

Key findings

▸Below-average efficiency vs QB peers — value comes through volume, not per-play impact.
▸High-volume role — one of the team's most-used QBs by play share.
▸High game-to-game consistency — reliable floor each week.
▸7 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
▸Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
▸Strong second-half surge — EPA/play improved 0.12 from the first to second half of the season.
▸Peak game: 0.70 EPA/play in Wk 13 vs Florida International (SP+ -21).

NIL Market Tier· 2023

On3 valuation ↗

Starter

Meaningful starter. Local collective + position-group 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.

Historical Comparables · QB · efficiency + volume + value

Players from 2013–2025 matched on EPA efficiency, play volume, and adjusted value tier — not just one metric.

Player	Team	Yr	Plays	WEPA/play	Line val	Total EPA
Stetson Bennett	Georgia	2022	509	0.635	12.5	323.0
Kyle McCord	Syracuse	2024	632	0.509	12.1	321.4
Sam Hartman	Wake Forest	2021	647	0.556	11.8	359.6
Trace McSorley	Penn State	2017	626	0.513	12.7	321.0
Jordan Travis	Florida State	2021	690	0.476	10.1	328.3

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost

Wk	Opponent	Result	Opp SP+	C/ATT	Pass Yds	Pass TD	INT	QBR	Rush Yds	Rush TD	EPA/play
1	vsSouth Florida	W41-24	-6.6	29/50	336	2	0	52.9	27	1	0.41
2	vsHouston Christian	W52-22	—	27/33	253	4	0	74.0	14	1	0.50
3	@Ohio State	L10-63	25.2	21/37	207	1	1	75.1	14	0	0.14
4	@Troy	L24-27	9.8	24/40	275	2	0	73.8	-11	0	0.13
5	vsMiddle Tennessee	W31-10	-9.5	30/52	297	2	1	54.8	23	1	0.25
6	@Louisiana Tech	W35-28	-12.9	19/34	297	3	1	72.5	4	0	0.55
8	@Jacksonville State	L17-20	-1.6	24/48	250	2	1	44.6	18	0	0.11
9	vsLiberty	L29-42	8.0	30/44	365	4	1	60.5	2	0	0.55
10	@UTEP	W21-13	-16.2	11/20	102	1	1	45.9	2	0	0.49
11	vsNew Mexico State	L29-38	-1.8	20/36	270	3	1	65.0	17	1	0.53
12	vsSam Houston	W28-23	-13.8	28/41	392	3	4	39.2	-4	0	0.30
13	@Florida International	W41-28	-21.2	26/35	280	4	0	84.6	-6	0	0.70

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

62.5%

Passing plays

96.6%

Rushing plays

12.0%

Standard downs

57.9%

Passing downs

71.9%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: 0.26
Passing downs: 0.54
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.37 / 0.40

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

Career · rolling EPA, game by game

Per-game EPA5-game avg

EPA per play · 2022 — 2023 · 24 games

Season	Team	Line value	WEPA/play	YoY Δ	Total EPA
2022	Western Kentucky	6.1	0.411	—	240.7
2023	Western Kentucky	8.8	0.520	+0.11	256.3

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.