#8Preston Stone

QB·SMU·20237.8 pts line valueDay 3 (Rds 4–7)

Preston Stone is a Dual-Threat QB for SMU. Preston's 2023 season ranks in the 60th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 345 plays — a average 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 Preston Stone'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.

2023 Production

Passing

206/344 Comp/Att3197 Pass yards28 Pass TD6 INT59.9% Comp %

Rushing

198 Rush yards4 Rush TD62 Carries3.2 Yards/carry

Punting

4 Punts147 Punt yards36.8 Yards/punt53 Long1 Inside 20

Performance Analysis · 2023 · vs QB peers

Efficiency60
Volume100
Dual-Threat64
Consistency80
Clutch99

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)60th %ile · average

Game-to-game consistency80th %ile · above avg

Key findings

▸High-volume role — one of the team's most-used QBs by play share.
▸High game-to-game consistency — reliable floor each week.
▸7 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 0.22 from the first to second half of the season.
▸Peak game: 1.44 EPA/play in Wk 3 vs Prairie View A&M.

NIL Market Tier· 2023

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

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	vsLouisiana Tech	W38-14	-12.9	23/37	248	3	0	66.8	11	0	0.32
2	@Oklahoma	L11-28	15.0	26/45	250	1	1	65.9	8	0	0.64
3	vsPrairie View A&M	W69-0	—	15/20	300	5	1	92.6	11	1	1.44
4	@TCU	L17-34	7.9	16/35	258	0	2	43.9	18	0	0.19
5	vsCharlotte	W34-16	-21.4	14/23	135	2	1	57.7	20	0	0.29
7	@East Carolina	W31-10	-12.8	19/38	276	3	0	51.2	25	0	0.30
8	@Temple	W55-0	-21.0	23/36	300	2	0	78.4	25	1	0.51
9	vsTulsa	W69-10	-13.7	15/20	371	3	0	99.5	—	—	1.43
10	@Rice	W36-31	-10.2	15/28	217	2	0	48.5	81	1	0.36
11	vsNorth Texas	W45-21	-6.7	11/20	234	2	1	36.9	-2	0	0.45
12	@Memphis	W38-34	3.5	15/23	286	2	0	92.5	10	1	0.64
13	vsNavy	W59-14	-13.7	14/19	322	3	0	99.0	-9	0	1.12

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

44.6%

Passing plays

86.3%

Rushing plays

10.7%

Standard downs

37.6%

Passing downs

62.8%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: 0.42
Passing downs: 0.71
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.58 / 0.22

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

Career · rolling EPA, game by game

Per-game EPA5-game avg

EPA per play · 2023 · 12 games

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.