Skip to content
Drew Allar

#15Drew Allar

QB·Penn State·202420237.5 pts line valueDay 3 (Rds 4–7)

Drew Allar is a 2-year Dual-Threat QB for Penn State. Drew's 2023 season ranks in the 28th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 447 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 Drew Allar'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
233/388 Comp/Att2631 Pass yards25 Pass TD2 INT60.1% Comp %
Rushing
210 Rush yards4 Rush TD74 Carries2.8 Yards/carry

Performance Analysis · 2023 · vs QB peers

  • Efficiency28
  • Volume100
  • Dual-Threat100
  • Consistency86
  • Clutch70
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)28th %ile · below avg
Game-to-game consistency86th %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.
  • 6 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
  • Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
  • Peak game: 0.63 EPA/play in Wk 10 vs Maryland (SP+ 11).

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.

PlayerTeamWEPA/playLine valTotal EPA
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

+0.6300.63Wk 1 vs West Virginia: +0.60 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Delaware: +0.45 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Illinois: +0.24 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Iowa: +0.39 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs Northwestern: +0.19 EPA/play5Wk 7 vs Massachusetts: +0.45 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Ohio State: -0.01 EPA/play8Wk 9 vs Indiana: +0.37 EPA/play9Wk 10 vs Maryland: +0.63 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Michigan: +0.29 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Rutgers: +0.47 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Michigan State: +0.54 EPA/play13
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+C/ATTPass YdsPass TDINTQBRRush YdsRush TDEPA/play
1vsWest VirginiaW38-157.521/293253086.6100.60
2vsDelawareW63-722/262041078.52710.45
3@IllinoisW30-13-2.516/332080066.62400.24
4vsIowaW31-05.825/371664084.82200.39
5@NorthwesternW41-13-1.318/331891040.7410.19
7vsMassachusettsW63-0-17.516/231623070.6110.45
8@Ohio StateL12-2025.218/421911029.4-230-0.01
9vsIndianaW33-24-7.420/312103157.2500.37
10@MarylandW51-1511.025/342404096.93900.63
11vsMichiganL15-2431.310/22701056.74910.29
12vsRutgersW27-63.56/13790082.62800.47
13vsMichigan StateW42-0-6.817/262922079.9-700.54
20vsOle MissL25-3818.419/392952172.8400

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
50.0%
Passing plays
94.5%
Rushing plays
11.7%
Standard downs
42.5%
Passing downs
70.0%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.30
Passing downs
0.46
Pass / Rush EPA
0.31 / 0.71

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

Career · rolling EPA, game by game

Per-game EPA5-game avg
+1.180−0.262024
EPA per play · 2023 — 2024 · 29 games
SeasonTeamLine valueTotal EPA
2023Penn State
7.5
229.2
2024Penn State
8.0
262.7

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.