Skip to content
Chandler Morris

#4Chandler Morris

QB·North Texas·202520246.2 pts line valueDay 3 (Rds 4–7)

Chandler Morris is a 2-year Dual-Threat QB for North Texas. Chandler's 2024 season ranks in the 15th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 528 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 Chandler Morris'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.

2024 Production

Passing
322/509 Comp/Att3774 Pass yards31 Pass TD12 INT63.3% Comp %
Rushing
242 Rush yards4 Rush TD60 Carries4.0 Yards/carry

Performance Analysis · 2024 · vs QB peers

  • Efficiency15
  • Volume100
  • Dual-Threat90
  • Consistency73
  • Clutch75
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)15th %ile · below avg
Game-to-game consistency73th %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.
  • High game-to-game consistency — reliable floor each week.
  • 5 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 — 0.25 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
  • Peak game: 0.91 EPA/play in Wk 1 vs South Alabama (SP+ 3).

NIL Market Tier· 2024

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.

Historical Comparables · QB · efficiency + volume + value

Players from 2013–2025 matched on EPA efficiency, play volume, and adjusted value tier — not just one metric.

PlayerTeamWEPA/playLine valTotal EPA
Jordan TravisFlorida State0.47610.1328.3

Comps are statistical — efficiency, volume, and value tier all factor in. Style and conference context differ.

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+0.9100.91Wk 1 vs South Alabama: +0.91 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Stephen F. Austin: +0.20 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Texas Tech: +0.06 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Wyoming: +0.41 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs Tulsa: +0.77 EPA/play5Wk 7 vs Florida Atlantic: +0.33 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Memphis: +0.30 EPA/play8Wk 9 vs Tulane: +0.42 EPA/play9Wk 11 vs Army: -0.10 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs UTSA: -0.02 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs East Carolina: +0.16 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs Temple: +0.42 EPA/play14
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+C/ATTPass YdsPass TDINTQBRRush YdsRush TDEPA/play
1@South AlabamaW52-382.832/414153090.31720.91
2vsStephen F. AustinW35-2026/443224322.3-700.20
3@Texas TechL21-664.315/27162238.8900.06
4vsWyomingW44-17-13.628/413052073.42200.41
5vsTulsaW52-20-20.622/344395046.4500.77
7@Florida AtlanticW41-37-12.727/453364161.52300.33
8@MemphisL44-529.636/614453173.77110.30
9vsTulaneL37-455.738/554493074.12010.42
11vsArmyL3-149.224/372140236.0-30-0.10
12@UTSAL27-482.221/362411228.4290-0.02
13vsEast CarolinaL28-40-1.032/482663058.23900.16
14@TempleW24-17-20.321/401801034.91700.42

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
62.6%
Passing plays
94.3%
Rushing plays
14.9%
Standard downs
56.3%
Passing downs
75.3%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.26
Passing downs
0.43
Pass / Rush EPA
0.32 / 0.35

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

Career · rolling EPA, game by game

Per-game EPA5-game avg
+1.020−0.232025
EPA per play · 2024 — 2025 · 26 games
SeasonTeamLine valueTotal EPA
2024North Texas
6.2
219.0
2025Virginia
4.7
162.7

Chart shows per-game EPA (bars) and rolling 5-game average (line). Season breaks marked with dashed lines. Line value = est. points over replacement per game.

EPA = expected points added (opponent-adjusted). NIL estimates are model-based ranges, not reported deals. Data: CollegeFootballData. Not betting advice.