Skip to content
Jayden Maiava

#14Jayden Maiava

QB·USC·2025202312.6 pts line value1st Round

Jayden Maiava is a 2-year Dual-Threat QB for USC. Jayden's 2025 season ranks in the 95th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 440 plays — a elite 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 Jayden Maiava'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
265/403 Comp/Att3711 Pass yards24 Pass TD10 INT65.8% Comp %
Rushing
157 Rush yards6 Rush TD54 Carries2.9 Yards/carry

Air yards

Where the ball goes, and how much of the gain is the throw rather than the run after it.

53
Attempts
6.8y
Avg depth
7.2y
After catch
89%
Catch rate

The ball travels 6.8 yards in the air on an average throw 1.0 yards shorter than the median. Another 7.2 comes after the catch.

Where he throws

attempts · completion rate · yards
deep
1
0% · 0y
2
100% · 88y
1
100% · 31y
short
15
80% · 103y
13
92% · 152y
21
95% · 252y
leftmiddleright

Depth and direction come from CFBD’s passing detail, which is backfilled after the games: this covers weeks 1–2 only. Spikes, throwaways and intentional grounding are excluded before any average.

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs QB peers

  • Efficiency95
  • Volume100
  • Dual-Threat100
  • Consistency85
  • Clutch85
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)95th %ile · elite
Game-to-game consistency85th %ile · above avg
Key findings
  • Top-10% efficiency among QBs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
  • High-volume role — one of the team's most-used QBs by play share.
  • High game-to-game consistency — reliable floor each week.
  • 8 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 — 0.33 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
  • Peak game: 1.19 EPA/play in Wk 1 vs Missouri State (SP+ -11).

NIL Market Tier· 2025

On3 valuation ↗
Elite

Top-3 player at position nationally. Collective + national brand 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.

Historical Comparables · QB · efficiency + volume + value

Players from 2013–2025 matched on EPA efficiency, play volume, and adjusted value tier — not just one metric.

PlayerTeamWEPA/playLine valTotal EPA
Stetson BennettGeorgia0.63512.5323.0
Tanner MordecaiSMU0.63014.0321.5
Malik CunninghamLouisville0.68114.7341.6
Kaidon SalterLiberty0.71114.7345.6
Blake SimsAlabama0.69615.4329.4

Comps are statistical — efficiency, volume, and value tier all factor in. Style and conference context differ.

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+1.1901.19Wk 1 vs Missouri State: +1.19 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Georgia Southern: +1.06 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Purdue: +0.57 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Michigan State: +0.81 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs Illinois: +0.47 EPA/play5Wk 7 vs Michigan: +0.46 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Notre Dame: +0.24 EPA/play8Wk 10 vs Nebraska: +0.35 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Northwestern: +0.57 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Iowa: +0.37 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Oregon: +0.35 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs UCLA: +0.49 EPA/play14
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+C/ATTPass YdsPass TDINTQBRRush YdsRush TDEPA/play
1vsMissouri StateW73-13-10.715/182952096.1911.19
2vsGeorgia SouthernW59-20-9.416/244124096.4501.06
3@PurdueW33-17-6.117/282820090.11010.57
4vsMichigan StateW45-31-3.420/26234303120.81
5@IllinoisL32-3412.930/433642185.5200.47
7vsMichiganW31-1312.425/322652189.4-700.46
8@Notre DameL24-3424.422/423282287.5-900.24
10@NebraskaW21-176.29/231350172.56210.35
11vsNorthwesternW38-175.824/332992193.01010.57
12vsIowaW26-2119.723/322541088.71100.37
13@OregonL27-4225.925/433063295.81600.35
14vsUCLAW29-10-8.721/292572087.31000.49
20vsTCUL27-308.318/302801269.370

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
52.5%
Passing plays
95.4%
Rushing plays
10.2%
Standard downs
46.6%
Passing downs
68.6%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.44
Passing downs
0.66
Pass / Rush EPA
0.53 / 0.68

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

Career · rolling EPA, game by game

Per-game EPA5-game avg
+1.420−0.332025
EPA per play · 2023 — 2025 · 27 games
SeasonTeamLine valueTotal EPA
2023UNLV
7.0
220.6
2025USC
12.6
254.1

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.

EPA = expected points added (opponent-adjusted). NIL estimates are model-based ranges, not reported deals. Data: CollegeFootballData. Not betting advice.