Skip to content
Timmy McClain

#7Timmy McClain

QB·UCF·2023

Timmy McClain is a Dual-Threat QB for UCF. Timmy's 2023 season ranks in the 25th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 108 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 Timmy McClain'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
64/102 Comp/Att1065 Pass yards9 Pass TD3 INT62.7% Comp %
Rushing
104 Rush yards1 Rush TD42 Carries2.5 Yards/carry

Performance Analysis · 2023 · vs QB peers

  • Efficiency25
  • Volume83
  • Dual-Threat77
  • Consistency26
  • Clutch100
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)25th %ile · below avg
Game-to-game consistency26th %ile · below avg
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.
  • High game-to-game variance — boom-or-bust profile.
  • 4 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 — 1.15 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
  • Peak game: 0.96 EPA/play in Wk 1 vs Kent State (SP+ -26).

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

+1.1701.17Wk 1 vs Kent State: +0.96 EPA/play1Wk 3 vs Villanova: +0.58 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Kansas State: +0.52 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs Baylor: +0.51 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs Kansas: +0.24 EPA/play6Wk 11 vs Oklahoma State: -1.17 EPA/play11
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+C/ATTPass YdsPass TDINTQBRRush YdsRush TDEPA/play
1vsKent StateW56-6-26.33/5530090.02100.96
3vsVillanovaW48-1420/283212067.74400.58
4@Kansas StateL31-4416.214/242643175.51500.52
5vsBaylorL35-36-8.313/252342161.01710.51
6@KansasL22-519.912/151362022.5500.24
11vsOklahoma StateW45-36.71/10000.610-1.17
20vsGeorgia TechL17-300.31/457012.910

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
29.0%
Passing plays
52.7%
Rushing plays
11.9%
Standard downs
27.5%
Passing downs
32.5%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.22
Passing downs
0.83
Pass / Rush EPA
0.49 / 0.28

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.