#7Cameron Rising

QB·Utah·20225.8 pts line valueDay 3 (Rds 4–7)

Cameron Rising is a Dual-Threat QB for Utah. Cameron's 2022 season ranks in the 18th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 438 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 Cameron Rising'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

249/385 Comp/Att3034 Pass yards26 Pass TD8 INT64.7% Comp %

Rushing

466 Rush yards6 Rush TD77 Carries6.1 Yards/carry

Punting

1 Punts35 Punt yards35.0 Yards/punt35 Long0 Inside 20

Performance Analysis · 2022 · vs QB peers

Efficiency18
Volume100
Dual-Threat100
Consistency78
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)18th %ile · below avg

Game-to-game consistency78th %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.
▸Production faded as the season progressed — 0.24 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
▸Peak game: 0.69 EPA/play in Wk 5 vs Oregon State (SP+ 14).

NIL Market Tier· 2022

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+	C/ATT	Pass Yds	Pass TD	INT	QBR	Rush Yds	Rush TD	EPA/play
1	@Florida	L26-29	10.4	22/32	216	1	1	90.0	91	0	0.32
2	vsSouthern Utah	W73-7	—	17/23	254	3	0	59.3	-5	0	0.64
3	vsSan Diego State	W35-7	-4.4	18/30	224	4	0	63.0	4	0	0.34
4	@Arizona State	W34-13	-4.1	19/29	260	2	1	95.4	27	0	0.46
5	vsOregon State	W42-16	14.3	19/25	199	3	0	96.3	73	1	0.69
6	@UCLA	L32-42	15.0	23/32	287	0	1	88.3	59	2	0.36
7	vsUSC	W43-42	18.9	30/44	415	2	0	92.5	60	3	0.53
10	vsArizona	W45-20	-3.2	13/25	151	1	0	43.0	-7	0	-0.21
11	vsStanford	W42-7	-7.2	20/33	219	3	1	80.4	34	0	0.48
12	@Oregon	L17-20	18.9	21/38	170	0	3	33.4	43	0	-0.17
13	@Colorado	W63-21	-20.4	17/19	234	3	0	91.2	13	0	0.61
14	vsUSC	W47-24	18.9	22/34	310	3	0	—	18	0	0.44
1	vsPenn State	L21-35	22.4	8/21	95	1	1	—	56	0	0.24

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

49.8%

Passing plays

91.3%

Rushing plays

14.7%

Standard downs

45.4%

Passing downs

62.3%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: 0.21
Passing downs: 0.65
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.28 / 0.73

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

Career · rolling EPA, game by game

Per-game EPA5-game avg

EPA per play · 2022 · 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.