Skip to content
Trevone Boykin

#2Trevone Boykin

QB·TCU·2015201411.9 pts line valueDay 2 (Rds 2–3)

Trevone Boykin is a 2-year Dual-Threat QB for TCU. Trevone's 2015 season ranks in the 70th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 492 plays — a average 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 Trevone Boykin'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.

2015 Production

Passing
257/396 Comp/Att3575 Pass yards31 Pass TD10 INT64.9% Comp %
Rushing
612 Rush yards9 Rush TD123 Carries5.0 Yards/carry
Punting
1 Punts18 Punt yards18.0 Yards/punt18 Long0 Inside 20

Performance Analysis · 2015 · vs QB peers

  • Efficiency70
  • Volume100
  • Dual-Threat82
  • Consistency82
  • Clutch87
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)70th %ile · average
Game-to-game consistency82th %ile · above avg
Key findings
  • High-volume role — one of the team's most-used QBs by play share.
  • 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.
  • Production faded as the season progressed — 0.21 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
  • Peak game: 0.86 EPA/play in Wk 7 vs Iowa State (SP+ -0).

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
Tanner MordecaiSMU0.63014.0321.5
Ryan HigginsLouisiana Tech0.58613.7334.6
Baker MayfieldOklahoma0.56114.1323.7
J.T. BarrettOhio State0.59314.1341.6

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+0.8600.86Wk 1 vs Minnesota: +0.23 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Stephen F. Austin: +0.58 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs SMU: +0.82 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Texas Tech: +0.53 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs Texas: +0.60 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs Kansas State: +0.69 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Iowa State: +0.86 EPA/play7Wk 9 vs West Virginia: +0.52 EPA/play9Wk 10 vs Oklahoma State: +0.23 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Kansas: +0.24 EPA/play11Wk 13 vs Baylor: -0.15 EPA/play13
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+C/ATTPass YdsPass TDINTQBRRush YdsRush TDEPA/play
1@MinnesotaW23-178.126/422461170.19210.23
2vsStephen F. AustinW70-718/272854196.4600.58
3vsSMUW56-37-17.521/304545197.55010.82
4@Texas TechW55-524.534/544854084.34200.53
5vsTexasW50-73.720/353325091.75200.60
6@Kansas StateW52-452.620/303012292.312420.69
7@Iowa StateW45-21-0.327/324364097.87410.86
9vsWest VirginiaW40-1012.933/483893090.98410.52
10@Oklahoma StateL29-499.935/574451455.07320.23
11vsKansasW23-17-21.35/8540053.6-100.24
13vsBaylorW28-2119.518/331482121.3161-0.15

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
55.2%
Passing plays
89.4%
Rushing plays
24.0%
Standard downs
49.0%
Passing downs
72.1%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.37
Passing downs
0.60
Pass / Rush EPA
0.49 / 0.31

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

Career · rolling EPA, game by game

Per-game EPA5-game avg
+0.960−0.252015
EPA per play · 2014 — 2015 · 24 games
SeasonTeamLine valueTotal EPA
2014TCU
12.7
315.4
2015TCU
11.9
282.0

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.