#16Chris Johnson Jr.

RB·SMU·2025

Chris Johnson Jr. is a Pass-Catching Back for SMU. Chris's 2025 season ranks in the 48th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 90 plays — a average rate for the RB.

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 Chris Johnson Jr.'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

479 Rush yards4 Rush TD67 Carries7.1 Yards/carry

Receiving

17 Receptions180 Rec yards1 Rec TD10.6 Yards/rec

Returns

4 Kick returns64 KR yards0 KR TD

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs RB peers

Efficiency48
Volume32
Explosiveness82
Consistency23
Receiving85

Player type

Pass-Catching Back

Third-down weapon out of the backfield. Routes, hands, and separation in coverage define this role as much as rushing.

3rd-down backReceiving threatPass protection

Peer percentiles

Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)48th %ile · average

Game-to-game consistency23th %ile · below avg

Key findings

▸High game-to-game variance — boom-or-bust profile.
▸3 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 — 0.61 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
▸Peak game: 1.26 EPA/play in Wk 7 vs Stanford (SP+ -12).

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+	Car	Rush Yds	Avg	Rush TD	Rec	Rec Yds	Rec TD	EPA/play
1	vsEast Texas A&M	W42-13	—	6	44	7.3	1	—	—	—	0.40
2	vsBaylor	L45-48	1.4	6	21	3.5	0	2	31	0	0.15
3	@Missouri State	W28-10	-10.7	6	46	7.7	0	1	30	0	0.39
4	@TCU	L24-35	8.3	5	19	3.8	0	2	21	0	0.29
6	vsSyracuse	W31-18	-13.1	—	—	—	—	1	-2	0	-0.17
7	vsStanford	W34-10	-11.8	5	96	19.2	1	2	42	1	1.26
8	@Clemson	W35-24	9.5	6	59	9.8	1	4	40	0	0.61
9	@Wake Forest	L12-13	5.7	8	29	3.6	0	1	1	0	-0.21
10	vsMiami	W26-20	20.7	4	2	0.5	0	1	0	0	-0.69
11	@Boston College	W45-13	-8.5	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
13	vsLouisville	W38-6	12.4	6	19	3.2	0	1	10	0	-0.00
14	@California	L35-38	-3.2	10	128	12.8	1	1	3	0	0.04
20	vsArizona	W24-19	12.0	5	16	3.2	0	1	4	0	—

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

11.3%

Passing plays

5.3%

Rushing plays

19.2%

Standard downs

11.1%

Passing downs

11.8%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: 0.15
Passing downs: 0.33
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.35 / 0.16

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