#1Dequan Finn

QB·Miami (OH)·2025 2023 2022

Dequan Finn is a 2-year Dual-Threat QB for Miami (OH). Dequan's 2025 season ranks in the 8th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 264 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 Dequan Finn'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

106/181 Comp/Att1451 Pass yards9 Pass TD6 INT58.6% Comp %

Rushing

395 Rush yards4 Rush TD89 Carries4.4 Yards/carry

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs QB peers

Efficiency8
Volume100
Dual-Threat83
Consistency75
Clutch87

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)8th %ile · below avg

Game-to-game consistency75th %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.
▸3 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
▸Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
▸Strong second-half surge — EPA/play improved 0.23 from the first to second half of the season.
▸Peak game: 0.64 EPA/play in Wk 8 vs Eastern Michigan (SP+ -15).

NIL Market Tier· 2025

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.

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	@Wisconsin	L0-17	-4.4	9/18	83	0	2	12.1	13	0	-0.13
2	@Rutgers	L17-45	1.0	14/23	251	0	1	65.9	85	1	0.45
4	vsUNLV	L38-41	4.3	7/12	131	2	1	63.4	21	0	0.07
6	@Northern Illinois	W25-14	-16.7	14/26	170	1	0	51.1	90	0	0.25
7	@Akron	W20-7	-13.9	14/25	203	1	1	58.0	65	0	0.45
8	vsEastern Michigan	W44-30	-14.7	13/22	159	2	0	82.2	58	2	0.64
9	vsWestern Michigan	W26-17	-1.4	18/30	260	1	0	76.0	52	1	0.35
11	@Ohio	L20-24	-4.0	17/25	194	2	1	49.3	11	0	0.12

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

57.1%

Passing plays

91.2%

Rushing plays

30.3%

Standard downs

53.1%

Passing downs

66.4%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: 0.21
Passing downs: 0.45
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.32 / 0.32

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 — 2023 · 25 games

Season	Team	Line value	WEPA/play	YoY Δ	Total EPA
2022	Toledo	6.7	0.488	—	205.8
2023	Toledo	7.9	0.549	+0.06	234.3

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.