Skip to content
Joe Pesansky
Joe Pesansky

#16Joe Pesansky

QB·Florida International·2025

Joe Pesansky is a Dual-Threat QB for Florida International. Joe's 2025 season ranks in the 0th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 168 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 Joe Pesansky'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
89/159 Comp/Att1021 Pass yards11 Pass TD7 INT56.0% Comp %
Rushing
117 Rush yards2 Rush TD43 Carries2.7 Yards/carry

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs QB peers

  • Efficiency0
  • Volume88
  • Dual-Threat100
  • Consistency75
  • Clutch45
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 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.
  • ▸Strong second-half surge — EPA/play improved 0.12 from the first to second half of the season.
  • ▸Peak game: 0.71 EPA/play in Wk 2 vs Penn State (SP+ 18).

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

+0.710−0.71Wk 1 vs Bethune-Cookman: +0.34 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Penn State: +0.71 EPA/play2Wk 6 vs UConn: +0.01 EPA/play6Wk 8 vs Western Kentucky: -0.12 EPA/play8Wk 10 vs Missouri State: +0.37 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Middle Tennessee: +0.53 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Liberty: +0.36 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Jacksonville State: +0.19 EPA/play13
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+C/ATTPass YdsPass TDINTQBRRush YdsRush TDEPA/play
1vsBethune-CookmanW42-9—4/5460032.61300.34
2@Penn StateL0-3418.13/5220070.0900.71
6@UConnL10-515.17/121000214.6-1100.01
8@Western KentuckyW25-61.63/520009.600-0.12
10@Missouri StateL21-28-10.76/11721062.4——0.37
11@Middle TennesseeW56-30-16.017/282574244.11210.53
12vsLibertyW34-27-9.024/342062081.44010.36
13vsJacksonville StateW27-21-6.714/281962217.94000.19
20vsUTSAL20-573.711/311022120.1140—

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
30.9%
Passing plays
51.4%
Rushing plays
9.9%
Standard downs
28.0%
Passing downs
36.5%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.20
Passing downs
0.22
Pass / Rush EPA
0.25 / 0.46

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

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