#7Beau Pribula

QB·Missouri·2025

Beau Pribula is a Dual-Threat QB for Missouri. Beau's 2025 season ranks in the 0th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 356 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 Beau Pribula'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

Passing

182/270 Comp/Att1946 Pass yards11 Pass TD9 INT67.4% Comp %

Rushing

297 Rush yards6 Rush TD95 Carries3.1 Yards/carry

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs QB peers

Efficiency0
Volume100
Dual-Threat57
Consistency59
Clutch60

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 consistency59th %ile · average

Key findings

▸Below-average efficiency vs QB peers — value comes through volume, not per-play impact.
▸High-volume role — one of the team's most-used QBs by play share.
▸Production faded as the season progressed — 0.38 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
▸Peak game: 0.63 EPA/play in Wk 1 vs Central Arkansas.

NIL Market Tier· 2025

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

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

Wk	Opponent	Result	Opp SP+	C/ATT	Pass Yds	Pass TD	INT	QBR	Rush Yds	Rush TD	EPA/play
1	vsCentral Arkansas	W61-6	—	23/28	283	2	0	81.0	65	2	0.63
2	vsKansas	W42-31	4.1	30/39	334	3	0	82.7	6	0	0.50
3	vsLouisiana	W52-10	-10.1	15/22	174	2	1	91.7	5	1	0.34
4	vsSouth Carolina	W29-20	5.9	16/27	171	1	1	81.8	72	0	0.26
5	vsMassachusetts	W42-6	-36.6	26/29	241	1	1	29.4	-27	0	0.21
7	vsAlabama	L24-27	14.8	16/28	167	2	2	78.6	61	1	0.22
8	@Auburn	W23-17	11.6	23/40	252	0	2	76.4	28	1	0.14
9	@Vanderbilt	L10-17	20.3	9/14	68	0	0	17.6	10	0	-0.39
13	@Oklahoma	L6-17	18.3	20/36	231	0	2	50.6	-1	0	0.05
14	@Arkansas	W31-17	5.1	4/7	25	0	0	42.9	78	1	-0.01

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

47.9%

Passing plays

90.4%

Rushing plays

16.2%

Standard downs

41.6%

Passing downs

64.9%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: 0.19
Passing downs: 0.29
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.24 / 0.18

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