#23Noah White

RB·Utah State·2025

Noah White is a Pass-Catching Back for Utah State.

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 Noah White'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

93 Rush yards0 Rush TD25 Carries3.7 Yards/carry

Receiving

8 Receptions149 Rec yards0 Rec TD18.6 Yards/rec

Returns

1 Kick returns29 KR yards0 KR TD

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs RB peers

Efficiency0
Volume15
Explosiveness14
Consistency0
Receiving89

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.
▸3 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
▸Strong second-half surge — EPA/play improved 0.92 from the first to second half of the season.
▸Peak game: 2.75 EPA/play in Wk 12 vs UNLV (SP+ 4).

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
1	vsUTEP	W28-16	-17.5	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
2	@Texas A&M	L22-44	20.7	1	0	0.0	0	—	—	—	-1.10
3	vsAir Force	W49-30	-3.2	—	—	—	—	1	12	0	0.42
4	vsMcNeese	W48-7	—	8	49	6.1	0	1	9	0	0.15
5	@Vanderbilt	L35-55	20.3	3	5	1.7	0	—	—	—	-0.58
7	@Hawai'i	L26-44	1.7	—	—	—	—	1	3	0	—
8	vsSan José State	W30-25	-14.3	1	1	1.0	0	—	—	—	-0.60
9	@New Mexico	L14-33	0.9	2	-3	-1.5	0	1	13	0	-0.18
11	vsNevada	W51-14	-13.4	9	33	3.7	0	3	65	0	0.18
12	@UNLV	L26-29	4.3	—	—	—	—	1	47	0	2.75
13	@Fresno State	W28-17	1.8	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
14	vsBoise State	L24-25	3.1	1	8	8.0	0	—	—	—	1.04

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

5.3%

Passing plays

2.6%

Rushing plays

8.2%

Standard downs

5.7%

Passing downs

4.5%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: 0.02
Passing downs: -0.42
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.51 / -0.45

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