#10Zion Webb

QB·Jacksonville State·2023

Zion Webb is a Dual-Threat QB for Jacksonville State. Zion's 2023 season ranks in the 0th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 339 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 Zion Webb'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

111/220 Comp/Att1437 Pass yards6 Pass TD8 INT50.5% Comp %

Rushing

708 Rush yards7 Rush TD132 Carries5.4 Yards/carry

Performance Analysis · 2023 · vs QB peers

Efficiency0
Volume100
Dual-Threat100
Consistency33
Clutch57

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 consistency33th %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.
▸Peak game: 1.67 EPA/play in Wk 7 vs Liberty (SP+ 8).

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
0	vsUTEP	W17-14	-16.2	10/20	67	0	0	33.6	55	0	—
1	vsEast Tennessee State	W49-3	—	0/1	0	0	0	75.6	—	—	-0.70
2	@Coastal Carolina	L16-30	-1.2	9/18	150	0	0	27.5	21	0	0.09
5	@Sam Houston	W35-28	-13.8	0/4	0	0	1	0.1	9	0	-0.44
6	@Middle Tennessee	W45-30	-9.5	11/21	186	2	0	90.6	101	1	0.56
7	vsLiberty	L13-31	8.0	1/2	18	0	1	14.9	3	0	1.67
8	vsWestern Kentucky	W20-17	-2.0	22/39	218	0	1	47.0	146	1	0.16
9	@Florida International	W41-16	-21.2	9/19	105	1	0	70.3	125	2	0.31
10	@South Carolina	L28-38	4.3	12/23	183	2	1	46.4	65	0	0.44
12	vsLouisiana Tech	W56-17	-12.9	6/17	106	0	0	84.7	122	3	0.56
13	@New Mexico State	L17-20	-1.8	17/30	248	0	2	25.1	-9	0	0.05
20	vsLouisiana	W34-31	0.4	14/26	156	1	2	38.6	70	0	—

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

37.3%

Passing plays

65.9%

Rushing plays

20.9%

Standard downs

31.4%

Passing downs

50.0%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: 0.19
Passing downs: 0.28
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.13 / 0.41

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