#5Matt Zollers

QB·Missouri·2025

Matt Zollers is a Clutch Passer for Missouri.

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 Matt Zollers'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

47/88 Comp/Att503 Pass yards4 Pass TD2 INT53.4% Comp %

Rushing

-23 Rush yards0 Rush TD16 Carries-1.4 Yards/carry

Air yards

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

Attempts

-1.3y

Avg depth

17.2y

After catch

67%

Catch rate

The ball travels -1.3 yards in the air on an average throw — 9.1 yards shorter than the median. Another 17.2 comes after the catch.

Where he throws

attempts · completion rate · yards

deep

—

short

67% · 8y

33% · 5y

83% · 74y

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

Efficiency0
Volume61
Dual-Threat33
Consistency44
Clutch74

Player type

Clutch Passer

Elevates on passing downs — 3rd-and-medium, two-minute drills, and pressure situations are where this QB is best.

3rd-down precisionLate-game valueHigh passing-down EPA

Peer percentiles

Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)0th %ile · below avg

Game-to-game consistency44th %ile · below avg

Key findings

▸Below-average efficiency vs QB peers — value comes through volume, not per-play impact.
▸Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
▸Production faded as the season progressed — 1.09 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
▸Peak game: 2.27 EPA/play in Wk 1 vs Central Arkansas.

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+	C/ATT	Pass Yds	Pass TD	INT	QBR	Rush Yds	Rush TD	EPA/play
1	vsCentral Arkansas	W61-6	—	3/3	58	1	0	100.0	—	—	2.27
3	vsLouisiana	W52-10	-10.1	2/2	5	0	0	10.1	-4	0	-0.02
5	vsMassachusetts	W42-6	-36.6	1/1	12	0	0	75.9	4	0	0.46
9	@Vanderbilt	L10-17	20.3	14/23	138	1	0	93.5	4	0	0.39
11	vsTexas A&M	L17-38	20.7	7/22	77	0	0	17.4	-14	0	-0.21
12	vsMississippi State	W49-27	4.1	8/15	112	2	1	32.0	-22	0	-0.16
20	vsVirginia	L7-13	11.1	12/22	101	0	1	22.2	9	0	—

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

21.4%

Passing plays

47.4%

Rushing plays

4.2%

Standard downs

14.6%

Passing downs

39.3%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: -0.09
Passing downs: 0.07
Pass / Rush EPA: -0.02 / 0.06

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