#2Tayven Jackson

QB·UCF·2025

Tayven Jackson is a Dual-Threat QB for UCF. Tayven's 2025 season ranks in the 3th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 340 plays — a developing 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 Tayven Jackson'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

200/315 Comp/Att2151 Pass yards10 Pass TD8 INT63.5% Comp %

Rushing

85 Rush yards3 Rush TD54 Carries1.6 Yards/carry

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs QB peers

Efficiency3
Volume100
Dual-Threat92
Consistency67
Clutch36

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)3th %ile · below avg

Game-to-game consistency67th %ile · average

Key findings

▸Below-average efficiency vs QB peers — value comes through volume, not per-play impact.
▸High-volume role — one of the team's most-used QBs by play share.
▸5 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
▸Production faded as the season progressed — 0.24 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
▸Peak game: 0.66 EPA/play in Wk 1 vs Jacksonville State (SP+ -7).

NIL Market Tier· 2025

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

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	vsJacksonville State	W17-10	-6.7	17/24	282	2	0	58.2	5	0	0.66
2	vsNorth Carolina A&T	W68-7	—	12/21	189	0	0	61.5	1	2	0.51
4	vsNorth Carolina	W34-9	-6.6	25/32	223	1	0	87.8	66	1	0.51
5	@Kansas State	L20-34	7.0	12/24	115	0	1	17.2	3	0	0.01
6	vsKansas	L20-27	4.1	14/23	97	0	0	30.8	-10	0	0.09
8	vsWest Virginia	W45-13	-6.8	23/34	277	2	1	89.8	0	0	0.49
10	@Baylor	L3-30	1.4	18/33	151	0	2	9.7	7	0	-0.26
11	vsHouston	L27-30	7.4	15/29	136	0	1	20.8	12	0	0.08
12	@Texas Tech	L9-48	27.6	27/33	178	1	1	51.9	-6	0	-0.03
13	vsOklahoma State	W17-14	-15.1	16/25	271	2	2	63.7	18	0	0.53
14	@BYU	L21-41	15.9	21/37	232	2	0	79.0	-11	0	0.25

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

51.8%

Passing plays

90.0%

Rushing plays

11.8%

Standard downs

47.9%

Passing downs

59.7%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: 0.28
Passing downs: 0.25
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.26 / 0.36

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