#15Ben Gulbranson

QB·Stanford·2025

Ben Gulbranson is a Dual-Threat QB for Stanford. Ben's 2025 season ranks in the 0th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 252 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 Ben Gulbranson'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

Passing

148/260 Comp/Att1813 Pass yards9 Pass TD10 INT56.9% Comp %

Rushing

-201 Rush yards0 Rush TD33 Carries-6.1 Yards/carry

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs QB peers

Efficiency0
Volume100
Dual-Threat59
Consistency68
Clutch38

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)0th %ile · below avg

Game-to-game consistency68th %ile · average

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.
▸3 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
▸Production faded as the season progressed — 0.19 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
▸Peak game: 0.53 EPA/play in Wk 5 vs San José State (SP+ -14).

NIL Market Tier· 2025

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.

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	EPA/play
0	@Hawai'i	L20-23	1.7	15/30	109	0	1	14.0	-8	—
2	@BYU	L3-27	15.9	17/32	142	0	2	6.7	-22	0.01
3	vsBoston College	W30-20	-8.5	13/22	186	1	0	55.4	2	0.44
4	@Virginia	L20-48	11.1	20/29	286	2	0	54.4	-45	0.42
5	vsSan José State	W30-29	-14.3	29/43	444	2	0	56.4	-27	0.53
7	@SMU	L10-34	13.4	22/40	278	1	1	15.4	-40	-0.13
8	vsFlorida State	W20-13	7.2	6/13	90	1	1	57.2	-12	0.38
9	@Miami	L7-42	20.7	9/21	50	1	2	19.8	-20	-0.10
10	vsPittsburgh	L20-35	8.4	17/30	228	1	3	29.9	-29	0.27

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

47.7%

Passing plays

85.7%

Rushing plays

3.0%

Standard downs

36.8%

Passing downs

69.2%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: 0.23
Passing downs: 0.22
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.26 / 0.19

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