Skip to content
Mike Weber

#25Mike Weber

RB·Ohio State·201720162.5 pts line valueDay 3 (Rds 4–7)

Mike Weber is a 2-year Explosive Back for Ohio State. Mike's 2017 season ranks in the 80th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 87 plays — a above-average rate for the RB.

What projects, and what doesn't · RBs · 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)0.52
    Beats guessing the RB average by 18%. n=4,219 RB seasons
  • EPA per play (efficiency)0.10
    Not projectable — we do not forecast this. n=3,575 RB seasons
  • Total EPA (value)0.41
    Beats guessing the RB average by 9%. n=3,575 RB seasons

Across all positions, usage carries year to year at 0.47 and efficiency at 0.07. So Mike Weber'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.

2017 Production

Rushing
626 Rush yards10 Rush TD101 Carries6.2 Yards/carry
Receiving
10 Receptions94 Rec yards0 Rec TD9.4 Yards/rec
Returns
9 Kick returns143 KR yards0 KR TD

Performance Analysis · 2017 · vs RB peers

  • Efficiency80
  • Volume37
  • Explosiveness64
  • Consistency57
  • Receiving41
Player type
Explosive Back

Elite per-carry efficiency — breaks big runs and creates chunk plays at a top rate while in a limited role.

Big-play threatHigh EPA per carryCapitalises on opportunities
Peer percentiles
Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)80th %ile · above avg
Game-to-game consistency57th %ile · average
Key findings
  • Above-average efficiency for the RB position (80th percentile).
  • 6 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
  • Peak game: 1.31 EPA/play in Wk 11 vs Michigan State (SP+ 14).

Historical Comparables · RB · 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
Travis EtienneClemson0.4704.7100.1
Clyde Edwards-HelaireLSU0.4905.0105.8
Saquon BarkleyPenn State0.4105.298.4
Devon JohnsonMarshall0.5206.0108.2
Dalvin CookFlorida State0.4505.8102.6

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+1.3101.31Wk 2 vs Oklahoma: +0.95 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Army: -0.14 EPA/play3Wk 5 vs Rutgers: +0.56 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs Maryland: +0.61 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Nebraska: +0.08 EPA/play7Wk 9 vs Penn State: +0.12 EPA/play9Wk 10 vs Iowa: +0.41 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Michigan State: +1.31 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Illinois: +0.72 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Michigan: +0.06 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs Wisconsin: -0.56 EPA/play14Wk 1 vs USC: -0.01 EPA/play1
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+CarRush YdsAvgRush TDRecRec YdsRec TDEPA/play
2vsOklahomaL16-3125.53299.7021000.95
3vsArmyW38-7-5.34133.30-0.14
5@RutgersW56-0-5.510444.430.56
6vsMarylandW62-14-4.513594.5115300.61
7@NebraskaW56-142.518824.600.08
9vsPenn StateW39-3826.07213.015900.12
10@IowaL24-559.85275.401600.41
11vsMichigan StateW48-313.8916218.021.31
12vsIllinoisW52-14-7.4111089.820.72
13@MichiganW31-2019.612574.810.06
14vsWisconsinW27-2126.8461.50-0.56
1vsUSCW24-717.95183.601160-0.01

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
12.9%
Passing plays
2.9%
Rushing plays
21.0%
Standard downs
15.8%
Passing downs
4.8%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.43
Passing downs
0.23
Pass / Rush EPA
0.46 / 0.40

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

Career · rolling EPA, game by game

Per-game EPA5-game avg
+1.520−1.042017
EPA per play · 2016 — 2017 · 25 games
SeasonTeamLine valueTotal EPA
2016Ohio State
2.6
62.4
2017Ohio State
2.5
48.8

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.