#22Alton McCaskill

RB·Sam Houston·2025

Alton McCaskill is a Committee Back for Sam Houston.

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 Alton McCaskill'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.

2025 Production

Rushing

371 Rush yards1 Rush TD88 Carries4.2 Yards/carry

Receiving

9 Receptions66 Rec yards1 Rec TD7.3 Yards/rec

Air yards

Where the ball goes, and how much of the gain is the throw rather than the run after it.

Targets

-2.0y

Avg depth

2.3y

After catch

60%

Catch rate

The ball travels -2.0 yards in the air on an average target — 10.9 yards shorter than the median. Another 2.3 comes after the catch.

Where he is targeted

targets · completion rate · yards

deep

—

short

40% · 2y

100% · 4y

67% · 0y

leftmiddleright

Depth and direction come from CFBD’s passing detail, which is backfilled after the games: this covers weeks 1–2 only. Spikes, throwaways and intentional grounding are excluded before any average.

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs RB peers

Efficiency0
Volume57
Explosiveness24
Consistency0
Receiving42

Player type

Committee Back

Part of a rotation — contributes in a complementary role and keeps the featured back fresh.

Rotational roleSituational use

Peer percentiles

Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)0th %ile · below avg

Game-to-game consistency0th %ile · below avg

Key findings

▸Below-average efficiency vs RB peers — value comes through volume, not per-play impact.
▸High game-to-game variance — boom-or-bust profile.
▸Production faded as the season progressed — 0.27 EPA/play decline from first to second half.

NIL Market Tier· 2025

On3 valuation ↗

Contributor

Rotational contributor. Smaller collective or local 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

EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost

Wk	Opponent	Result	Opp SP+	Car	Rush Yds	Avg	Rush TD	Rec	Rec Yds	Rec TD	EPA/play
0	@Western Kentucky	L24-41	1.6	11	72	6.5	1	1	3	0	—
6	@New Mexico State	L10-37	-15.5	12	38	3.2	0	3	26	1	-0.01
7	vsJacksonville State	L27-29	-6.7	14	87	6.2	0	—	—	—	0.23
8	vsUTEP	L17-35	-17.5	11	52	4.7	0	2	15	0	0.10
11	@Oregon State	W21-17	-15.9	7	2	0.3	0	—	—	—	-0.48
12	vsDelaware	W26-23	-10.9	14	46	3.3	0	1	12	0	-0.04
13	@Middle Tennessee	L17-31	-16.0	11	42	3.8	0	2	10	0	-0.09
14	vsFlorida International	L16-56	-10.5	8	32	4.0	0	—	—	—	-0.05

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

19.8%

Passing plays

4.6%

Rushing plays

39.5%

Standard downs

25.0%

Passing downs

10.1%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: -0.00
Passing downs: -0.05
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.29 / -0.06

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