#10Dylan Hopkins

QB·New Mexico·2023

Dylan Hopkins is a Dual-Threat QB for New Mexico. Dylan's 2023 season ranks in the 3th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 289 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 Dylan Hopkins'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.

2023 Production

Passing

157/282 Comp/Att2074 Pass yards11 Pass TD9 INT55.7% Comp %

Rushing

124 Rush yards1 Rush TD51 Carries2.4 Yards/carry

Performance Analysis · 2023 · vs QB peers

Efficiency3
Volume100
Dual-Threat77
Consistency78
Clutch94

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)3th %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.
▸6 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 — 0.18 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
▸Peak game: 1.15 EPA/play in Wk 2 vs Tennessee Tech.

NIL Market Tier· 2023

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	@Texas A&M	L10-52	15.6	15/24	115	0	1	63.8	0	0	0.29
2	vsTennessee Tech	W56-10	—	13/17	273	4	1	81.1	9	0	1.15
3	vsNew Mexico State	L17-27	-1.8	20/39	247	1	0	37.5	16	0	0.33
4	@Massachusetts	W34-31	-17.5	9/17	192	1	0	82.6	14	1	0.47
5	@Wyoming	L26-35	-3.6	14/30	151	1	1	42.1	36	0	0.49
7	vsSan José State	L24-52	-3.4	13/24	187	0	1	22.3	19	0	0.26
8	vsHawai'i	W42-21	-16.4	20/25	202	3	0	86.6	6	0	0.61
9	@Nevada	L24-34	-22.0	18/34	271	1	3	8.1	6	0	0.78
10	vsUNLV	L14-56	1.4	15/23	187	0	0	56.6	2	0	0.45
12	@Fresno State	W25-17	2.5	8/18	124	0	2	15.5	30	0	0.10
13	vsUtah State	L41-44	-10.9	12/31	125	0	0	29.7	-14	0	-0.13

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

42.4%

Passing plays

81.2%

Rushing plays

8.7%

Standard downs

33.9%

Passing downs

59.8%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: 0.27
Passing downs: 0.54
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.41 / 0.29

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