Skip to content
Justin Williams-Thomas
Justin Williams-Thomas

#6Justin Williams-Thomas

Justin Williams-Thomas is a Explosive Back for Marshall. Justin's 2025 season produced 10.9 total EPA across 33 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 Justin Williams-Thomas'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
197 Rush yards2 Rush TD35 Carries5.6 Yards/carry
Receiving
3 Receptions41 Rec yards1 Rec TD13.7 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs RB peers

  • Efficiency98
  • Volume16
  • Explosiveness52
  • Consistency33
  • Receiving40
Player type
Explosive Back

Elite per-carry efficiency — breaks big runs and creates chunk plays at a top rate while in a limited role.

Big-play threatHigh EPA per carryCapitalises on opportunities
Peer percentiles
Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)98th %ile · elite
Game-to-game consistency33th %ile · below avg
Key findings
  • Top-10% efficiency among RBs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
  • Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
  • High game-to-game variance — boom-or-bust profile.
  • 3 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
  • Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
  • Strong second-half surge — EPA/play improved 0.34 from the first to second half of the season.
  • Peak game: 1.24 EPA/play in Wk 10 vs Coastal Carolina (SP+ -15).

NIL Market Tier· 2025

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

+1.2401.24Wk 1 vs Georgia: +0.13 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Missouri State: -0.18 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Eastern Kentucky: +0.74 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Middle Tennessee: -0.39 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs Louisiana: +0.10 EPA/play5Wk 7 vs Old Dominion: -0.27 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Texas State: +0.67 EPA/play8Wk 10 vs Coastal Carolina: +1.24 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs James Madison: +0.03 EPA/play11
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+CarRush YdsAvgRush TDRecRec YdsRec TDEPA/play
1@GeorgiaL7-4524.14246.000.13
2vsMissouri StateL20-21-10.78617.61-0.18
3vsEastern KentuckyW38-76152.5134110.74
4@Middle TennesseeW42-28-16.06101.70-0.39
5@LouisianaL51-54-10.1155.000.10
7vsOld DominionW48-245.9122.00-0.27
8vsTexas StateW40-372.3199.000.67
10@Coastal CarolinaL27-44-15.155310.601.24
11vsJames MadisonL23-3512.33186.000.03

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
5.5%
Passing plays
1.2%
Rushing plays
8.1%
Standard downs
6.9%
Passing downs
2.0%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.11
Passing downs
2.56
Pass / Rush EPA
1.73 / 0.19

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.