#9Grant Jordan

QB·Massachusetts·2025

Grant Jordan is a Dual-Threat QB for Massachusetts. Grant's 2025 season ranks in the 0th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 135 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 Grant Jordan'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

63/110 Comp/Att595 Pass yards3 Pass TD2 INT57.3% Comp %

Rushing

73 Rush yards2 Rush TD43 Carries1.7 Yards/carry

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs QB peers

Efficiency0
Volume100
Dual-Threat95
Consistency0
Clutch83

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)0th %ile · below avg

Game-to-game consistency0th %ile · below 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 variance — boom-or-bust profile.
▸Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
▸Production faded as the season progressed — 0.11 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
▸Peak game: 0.43 EPA/play in Wk 2 vs Bryant.

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+	C/ATT	Pass Yds	Pass TD	INT	QBR	Rush Yds	Rush TD	EPA/play
1	vsTemple	L10-42	-5.1	2/2	6	0	0	66.7	—	—	-0.21
2	vsBryant	L26-27	—	13/22	205	0	1	30.0	28	1	0.43
3	@Iowa	L7-47	19.7	9/14	37	0	0	11.5	-18	1	-0.08
5	@Missouri	L6-42	14.4	3/8	30	0	0	54.5	—	—	-0.13
11	@Akron	L10-44	-13.9	4/8	38	0	0	58.8	51	0	-0.07
13	@Ohio	L14-42	-4.0	10/21	56	1	1	23.3	17	0	-0.24
14	vsBowling Green	L14-45	-12.6	22/35	223	2	0	26.5	-5	0	0.13

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

35.1%

Passing plays

49.4%

Rushing plays

17.0%

Standard downs

32.8%

Passing downs

39.5%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: 0.02
Passing downs: 0.23
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.03 / 0.38

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