Skip to content
Stone Earle

#4Stone Earle

Stone Earle is a Dual-Threat QB for North Texas. Stone's 2023 season produced 14.0 total EPA across 49 plays.

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 Stone Earle'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
22/40 Comp/Att274 Pass yards4 Pass TD4 INT55.0% Comp %
Rushing
70 Rush yards0 Rush TD16 Carries4.4 Yards/carry

Performance Analysis · 2023 · vs QB peers

  • Efficiency0
  • Volume77
  • Dual-Threat100
  • Consistency89
  • Clutch51
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)0th %ile · below avg
Game-to-game consistency89th %ile · above avg
Key findings
  • Below-average efficiency vs QB peers — value comes through volume, not per-play impact.
  • High game-to-game consistency — reliable floor each week.

NIL Market Tier· 2023

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

+0.3500.35Wk 1 vs California: +0.35 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Florida International: +0.24 EPA/play2Wk 6 vs Navy: +0.13 EPA/play6
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+C/ATTPass YdsPass TDINTQBRRush YdsRush TDEPA/play
1vsCaliforniaL21-58-0.112/191743233.3-800.35
2@Florida InternationalL39-46-21.210/201001237.27100.24
6@NavyL24-27-13.70/100028.0700.13

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
27.1%
Passing plays
41.3%
Rushing plays
13.1%
Standard downs
24.4%
Passing downs
32.8%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.26
Passing downs
0.32
Pass / Rush EPA
0.23 / 0.46

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.