Skip to content
Cody Kessler

#6Cody Kessler

QB·USC·20152014201314.3 pts line value1st Round

Cody Kessler is a 3-year Clutch Passer for USC. Cody's 2014 season ranks in the 83th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 478 plays — a above-average rate for the QB. Cody's production has improved each season, a positive development trajectory.

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 Cody Kessler'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

Passing
315/452 Comp/Att3826 Pass yards39 Pass TD5 INT69.7% Comp %
Rushing
-152 Rush yards2 Rush TD55 Carries-2.8 Yards/carry
Punting
7 Punts231 Punt yards33.0 Yards/punt47 Long3 Inside 20

Performance Analysis · 2014 · vs QB peers

  • Efficiency83
  • Volume100
  • Dual-Threat19
  • Consistency82
  • 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)83th %ile · above avg
Game-to-game consistency82th %ile · above avg
Career trajectory:↑ Rising
Key findings
  • Above-average efficiency for the QB position (83th percentile).
  • High-volume role — one of the team's most-used QBs by play share.
  • Career trajectory is upward — WEPA value has improved season over season.
  • 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 0.09 from the first to second half of the season.
  • Peak game: 0.83 EPA/play in Wk 1 vs Fresno State (SP+ -7).

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
Tanner MordecaiSMU0.63014.0321.5
Malik CunninghamLouisville0.68114.7341.6
Kaidon SalterLiberty0.71114.7345.6
Blake SimsAlabama0.69615.4329.4
Stetson BennettGeorgia0.63512.5323.0

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+0.8300.83Wk 1 vs Fresno State: +0.83 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Stanford: +0.19 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Boston College: +0.37 EPA/play3Wk 5 vs Oregon State: +0.40 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs Arizona State: +0.15 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Arizona: +0.22 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Colorado: +0.78 EPA/play8Wk 9 vs Utah: +0.51 EPA/play9Wk 10 vs Washington State: +0.73 EPA/play10Wk 12 vs California: +0.45 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs UCLA: -0.01 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs Notre Dame: +0.78 EPA/play14Wk 1 vs Nebraska: +0.27 EPA/play1
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+C/ATTPass YdsPass TDINTQBRRush YdsRush TDEPA/play
1vsFresno StateW52-13-6.925/373944097.62810.83
2@StanfordW13-1021.415/221350051.0-2000.19
3@Boston CollegeL31-374.931/413174054.5-3000.37
5vsOregon StateW35-103.224/322612068.9-2500.40
6vsArizona StateL34-3813.528/452730055.7610.15
7@ArizonaW28-267.620/301851163.6600.22
8vsColoradoW56-28-5.019/263197097.0-2000.78
9@UtahL21-248.824/322642166.7-1400.51
10@Washington StateW44-17-1.721/324005086.0-1900.73
12vsCaliforniaW38-30-0.631/423714193.7-2400.45
13@UCLAL20-3817.722/342141118.9-400-0.01
14vsNotre DameW49-1410.832/403726094.8300.78
1vsNebraskaW45-4213.123/393213143.6-300.27

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
51.0%
Passing plays
98.2%
Rushing plays
4.7%
Standard downs
45.8%
Passing downs
61.9%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.26
Passing downs
0.71
Pass / Rush EPA
0.46 / -0.01

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

Career · rolling EPA, game by game

Per-game EPA5-game avg
+0.980−0.6920142015
EPA per play · 2013 — 2015 · 41 games
SeasonTeamLine valueTotal EPA
2013USC
2.2
84.8
2014USC
14.3
312.0
2015USC
7.7
225.1

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.