Skip to content
Bryce Young

#9Bryce Young

QB·Alabama·2022202111.9 pts line valueDay 2 (Rds 2–3)

Bryce Young is a 2-year Dual-Threat QB for Alabama. Bryce's 2022 season ranks in the 90th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 420 plays — a elite 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 Bryce Young'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.

2022 Production

Passing
245/380 Comp/Att3328 Pass yards32 Pass TD5 INT64.5% Comp %
Rushing
185 Rush yards4 Rush TD49 Carries3.8 Yards/carry

Performance Analysis · 2022 · vs QB peers

  • Efficiency90
  • Volume100
  • Dual-Threat100
  • Consistency83
  • 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)90th %ile · elite
Game-to-game consistency83th %ile · above avg
Key findings
  • Top-10% efficiency among QBs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
  • High-volume role — one of the team's most-used QBs by play share.
  • High game-to-game consistency — reliable floor each week.
  • 5 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
  • Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
  • Peak game: 1.00 EPA/play in Wk 1 vs Kansas State (SP+ 21).

NIL Market Tier· 2022

On3 valuation ↗
Star

Top-10 nationally. Multiple mid-to-large collective deals expected.

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.

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
Kaidon SalterLiberty0.71114.7345.6
Malik CunninghamLouisville0.68114.7341.6
Blake SimsAlabama0.69615.4329.4

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+1.0001.00Wk 1 vs Utah State: +0.84 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Texas: +0.22 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs UL Monroe: +0.27 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Vanderbilt: +0.68 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs Arkansas: +0.37 EPA/play5Wk 7 vs Tennessee: +0.50 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Mississippi State: +0.22 EPA/play8Wk 10 vs LSU: +0.16 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Ole Miss: +0.33 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Austin Peay: +0.33 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Auburn: +0.77 EPA/play13Wk 1 vs Kansas State: +1.00 EPA/play1
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+C/ATTPass YdsPass TDINTQBRRush YdsRush TDEPA/play
1vsUtah StateW55-0-13.318/281955096.010010.84
2@TexasW20-1923.127/392131079.13800.22
3vsUL MonroeW63-7-15.713/182363281.7610.27
4vsVanderbiltW55-3-4.725/363854086.1600.68
5@ArkansasW49-2612.07/131731181.4410.37
7@TennesseeL49-5225.235/524552089.4-400.50
8vsMississippi StateW30-615.421/352492090.7-1300.22
10@LSUL31-3216.225/513281170.11000.16
11@Ole MissW30-2416.221/332093072.91000.33
12vsAustin PeayW34-018/242212036.9-1000.33
13vsAuburnW49-275.120/303433198.14810.77
1vsKansas StateW45-2021.415/2132150-1001.00

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
52.1%
Passing plays
91.3%
Rushing plays
8.4%
Standard downs
45.3%
Passing downs
68.8%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.25
Passing downs
0.75
Pass / Rush EPA
0.43 / 0.60

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

Career · rolling EPA, game by game

Per-game EPA5-game avg
+1.18+0.072022
EPA per play · 2021 — 2022 · 27 games
SeasonTeamLine valueTotal EPA
2021Alabama
18.6
473.3
2022Alabama
11.9
270.7

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.