Skip to content
Quincy Craig

#24Quincy Craig

Quincy Craig is a Committee Back for Arizona. Quincy's 2025 season ranks in the 0th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 79 plays — a developing rate for the RB.

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 Quincy Craig'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
364 Rush yards2 Rush TD65 Carries5.6 Yards/carry
Receiving
14 Receptions114 Rec yards1 Rec TD8.1 Yards/rec
Returns
2 Kick returns43 KR yards0 KR TD

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs RB peers

  • Efficiency0
  • Volume30
  • Explosiveness52
  • Consistency0
  • Receiving66
Player type
Committee Back

Part of a rotation — contributes in a complementary role and keeps the featured back fresh.

Rotational roleSituational use
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.
  • 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.
  • Production faded as the season progressed — 0.24 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
  • Peak game: 1.32 EPA/play in Wk 11 vs Kansas (SP+ 4).

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

+1.3201.32Wk 1 vs Hawai'i: +1.27 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Weber State: +0.08 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Kansas State: -0.14 EPA/play3Wk 5 vs Iowa State: -0.19 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs Oklahoma State: +0.47 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs BYU: +0.08 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Houston: -0.91 EPA/play8Wk 10 vs Colorado: +0.18 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Kansas: +1.32 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Cincinnati: -0.06 EPA/play12Wk 14 vs Arizona State: -0.42 EPA/play14
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+CarRush YdsAvgRush TDRecRec YdsRec TDEPA/play
1vsHawai'iW40-61.7712517.911.27
2vsWeber StateW48-38313.901600.08
3vsKansas StateW23-177.0393.00-0.14
5@Iowa StateL14-399.9461.50160-0.19
6vsOklahoma StateW41-13-15.132400.47
7vsBYUL27-3315.96366.0021100.08
8@HoustonL28-317.4221.00-0.91
10@ColoradoW52-17-8.37253.6011000.18
11vsKansasW24-204.134715.7121311.32
12@CincinnatiW30-244.511524.702160-0.06
14@Arizona StateW23-73.9420.502280-0.42
20vsSMUL19-2413.410292.90

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
10.4%
Passing plays
3.8%
Rushing plays
18.0%
Standard downs
11.3%
Passing downs
8.5%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.06
Passing downs
0.36
Pass / Rush EPA
0.44 / 0.05

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.