Skip to content
Ashton Gray
Ashton Gray

#3Ashton Gray

RB·North Texas·2025

Ashton Gray is a Explosive Back for North Texas.

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 Ashton Gray'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
377 Rush yards5 Rush TD58 Carries6.5 Yards/carry
Receiving
1 Receptions9 Rec yards0 Rec TD9.0 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs RB peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume22
  • Explosiveness70
  • Consistency15
  • Receiving12
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)100th %ile · elite
Game-to-game consistency15th %ile · below avg
Key findings
  • ▸Top-10% efficiency among RBs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
  • ▸Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
  • ▸High game-to-game variance — boom-or-bust profile.
  • ▸Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
  • ▸Production faded as the season progressed — 0.33 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
  • ▸Peak game: 0.95 EPA/play in Wk 9 vs Charlotte (SP+ -27).

NIL Market Tier· 2025

On3 valuation ↗
Elite

Top-3 player at position nationally. Collective + national brand 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

+0.950−0.95Wk 1 vs Lamar: -0.24 EPA/play1Wk 3 vs Washington State: +0.25 EPA/play3Wk 7 vs South Florida: -0.30 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs UTSA: +0.84 EPA/play8Wk 9 vs Charlotte: +0.95 EPA/play9Wk 12 vs UAB: -0.02 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Rice: -0.22 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs Temple: +0.10 EPA/play14Wk 15 vs Tulane: +0.00 EPA/play15
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+CarRush YdsAvgRush TDRecRec YdsRec TDEPA/play
1vsLamarW51-0—5122.40———-0.24
3vsWashington StateW59-103.8242.00———0.25
7vsSouth FloridaL36-6311.6133.00———-0.30
8vsUTSAW55-173.74328.00———0.84
9@CharlotteW54-20-26.74348.51———0.95
12@UABW53-24-15.8294.50———-0.02
13@RiceW56-24-14.87486.91———-0.22
14vsTempleW52-25-5.19364.00———0.10
15@TulaneL21-346.38475.91———0.00
20vsSan Diego StateW49-476.7161529.52190—

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
7.7%
Passing plays
0.5%
Rushing plays
15.4%
Standard downs
8.4%
Passing downs
5.6%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.39
Passing downs
0.81
Pass / Rush EPA
0.18 / 0.49

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.