Skip to content
Logan Fife
Logan Fife

#4Logan Fife

QB·Fresno State·2023

Logan Fife is a Dual-Threat QB for Fresno State. Logan's 2023 season ranks in the 0th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 101 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 Logan Fife'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
52/92 Comp/Att630 Pass yards3 Pass TD2 INT56.5% Comp %
Rushing
52 Rush yards1 Rush TD28 Carries1.9 Yards/carry

Performance Analysis · 2023 · vs QB peers

  • Efficiency0
  • Volume60
  • Dual-Threat100
  • Consistency52
  • Clutch100
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 consistency52th %ile · average
Key findings
  • ▸Below-average efficiency vs QB peers — value comes through volume, not per-play impact.
  • ▸Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
  • ▸Production faded as the season progressed — 0.53 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
  • ▸Peak game: 2.09 EPA/play in Wk 3 vs Arizona State (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.

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+2.090−2.09Wk 1 vs Purdue: +0.06 EPA/play1Wk 3 vs Arizona State: +2.09 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Kent State: +0.15 EPA/play4Wk 6 vs Wyoming: +0.37 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Utah State: +0.25 EPA/play7Wk 10 vs Boise State: +0.17 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs San José State: +0.04 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs New Mexico: +0.11 EPA/play12
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+C/ATTPass YdsPass TDINTQBRRush YdsRush TDEPA/play
1@PurdueW39-35-7.31/150083.4——0.06
3@Arizona StateW29-0-11.3—————1402.09
4vsKent StateW53-10-26.31/2130048.22300.15
6@WyomingL19-24-3.67/11681147.1000.37
7@Utah StateW37-32-10.922/392911064.72100.25
10vsBoise StateW37-305.91/2130010.3——0.17
11@San José StateL18-42-3.411/21115117.0-1200.04
12vsNew MexicoL17-25-16.59/161250028.1610.11

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
20.9%
Passing plays
29.9%
Rushing plays
7.7%
Standard downs
16.4%
Passing downs
30.3%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.01
Passing downs
0.43
Pass / Rush EPA
0.09 / 0.89

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.