Skip to content
Brad Jackson

#8Brad Jackson

QB·Texas State·20255.0 pts line value

Brad Jackson is a Dual-Threat QB for Texas State. Brad's 2025 season ranks in the 13th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 523 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 Brad Jackson'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
251/352 Comp/Att3223 Pass yards21 Pass TD7 INT71.3% Comp %
Rushing
744 Rush yards17 Rush TD174 Carries4.3 Yards/carry

Air yards

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

22
Attempts
6.4y
Avg depth
6.4y
After catch
68%
Catch rate

The ball travels 6.4 yards in the air on an average throw 1.4 yards shorter than the median. Another 6.4 comes after the catch.

Where he throws

attempts · completion rate · yards
deep
0
1
0% · 0y
0
short
5
100% · 30y
4
50% · 63y
12
67% · 57y
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 QB peers

  • Efficiency13
  • Volume100
  • Dual-Threat100
  • Consistency88
  • Clutch100
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)13th %ile · below avg
Game-to-game consistency88th %ile · above avg
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.
  • 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.
  • Peak game: 0.83 EPA/play in Wk 14 vs South Alabama (SP+ -13).

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

+0.8300.83Wk 1 vs Eastern Michigan: +0.60 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs UTSA: +0.41 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Arizona State: +0.22 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Nicholls: +0.51 EPA/play4Wk 6 vs Arkansas State: +0.26 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Troy: +0.53 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Marshall: +0.39 EPA/play8Wk 10 vs James Madison: +0.14 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Louisiana: +0.48 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Southern Miss: +0.53 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs UL Monroe: +0.38 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs South Alabama: +0.83 EPA/play14
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+C/ATTPass YdsPass TDINTQBRRush YdsRush TDEPA/play
1vsEastern MichiganW52-27-14.718/262144066.44800.60
2@UTSAW43-363.712/202861187.23420.41
3@Arizona StateL15-343.925/361841057.0910.22
4vsNichollsW35-313/201800086.13720.51
6@Arkansas StateL30-31-8.818/262301066.513110.26
7vsTroyL41-48-4.819/222480091.47710.53
8@MarshallL37-40-4.526/384442161.24810.39
10vsJames MadisonL20-5212.318/322301343.54310.14
11@LouisianaL39-42-10.126/333603160.41500.48
12@Southern MissW41-14-7.114/171921091.44920.53
13vsUL MonroeW31-14-21.625/322012171.48820.38
14vsSouth AlabamaW49-26-12.720/262802095.311330.83
20vsRiceW41-10-14.817/241743040.4521

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
57.0%
Passing plays
98.5%
Rushing plays
28.5%
Standard downs
49.5%
Passing downs
75.0%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.28
Passing downs
0.65
Pass / Rush EPA
0.42 / 0.47

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

Career · rolling EPA, game by game

Per-game EPA5-game avg
+0.89+0.07
EPA per play · 2025 · 13 games

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.