#21Isaiah Rudison

RB·New Mexico State·2025

Isaiah Rudison is a Pass-Catching Back for New Mexico State. Isaiah's 2025 season produced -0.9 total EPA across 43 plays.

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 Isaiah Rudison'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

158 Rush yards2 Rush TD42 Carries3.8 Yards/carry

Receiving

9 Receptions44 Rec yards0 Rec TD4.9 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs RB peers

Efficiency0
Volume19
Explosiveness16
Consistency0
Receiving70

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)0th %ile · below avg

Game-to-game consistency0th %ile · below avg

Key findings

▸Below-average efficiency vs RB peers — value comes through volume, not per-play impact.
▸Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
▸High game-to-game variance — boom-or-bust profile.
▸Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
▸Strong second-half surge — EPA/play improved 0.25 from the first to second half of the season.
▸Peak game: 0.72 EPA/play in Wk 9 vs Missouri State (SP+ -11).

NIL Market Tier· 2025

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+	Car	Rush Yds	Avg	Rush TD	Rec	Rec Yds	Rec TD	EPA/play
2	vsTulsa	W21-14	-10.0	2	3	1.5	0	1	7	0	0.05
3	@Louisiana Tech	L14-49	-1.3	2	2	1.0	0	—	—	—	-0.68
5	@New Mexico	L20-38	0.9	2	2	1.0	0	—	—	—	-0.55
6	vsSam Houston	W37-10	-27.8	6	20	3.3	0	—	—	—	-0.12
8	@Liberty	L27-30	-9.0	4	18	4.5	0	—	—	—	-0.06
9	vsMissouri State	L17-24	-10.7	2	5	2.5	1	—	—	—	0.72
10	@Western Kentucky	L16-35	1.6	7	34	4.9	0	—	—	—	0.08
11	vsKennesaw State	L21-24	-5.4	4	8	2.0	0	1	3	0	-0.19
12	@Tennessee	L9-42	15.0	6	11	1.8	1	2	13	0	-0.12
13	@UTEP	W34-31	-17.5	4	41	10.3	0	2	13	0	0.41
14	vsMiddle Tennessee	L24-31	-16.0	3	14	4.7	0	3	8	0	-0.29

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

6.5%

Passing plays

2.5%

Rushing plays

13.2%

Standard downs

7.7%

Passing downs

4.5%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: -0.09
Passing downs: 0.22
Pass / Rush EPA: -0.09 / 0.01

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