#1Donovan Smith

QB·Houston·20234.9 pts line valueDay 3 (Rds 4–7)

Donovan Smith is a Dual-Threat QB for Houston. Donovan's 2023 season ranks in the 3th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 495 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 Donovan Smith'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

255/396 Comp/Att2800 Pass yards22 Pass TD13 INT64.4% Comp %

Rushing

429 Rush yards6 Rush TD138 Carries3.1 Yards/carry

Performance Analysis · 2023 · vs QB peers

Efficiency3
Volume100
Dual-Threat100
Consistency76
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)3th %ile · below avg

Game-to-game consistency76th %ile · above 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 consistency — reliable floor each week.
▸3 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
▸Peak game: 0.67 EPA/play in Wk 13 vs UCF (SP+ 3).

NIL Market Tier· 2023

On3 valuation ↗

Contributor

Rotational contributor. Smaller collective or local 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
1	vsUTSA	W17-14	5.4	22/34	233	2	0	72.8	31	0	0.24
2	@Rice	L41-43	-10.2	24/42	260	2	1	57.6	57	3	0.17
3	vsTCU	L13-36	7.9	17/35	225	0	2	14.2	-10	0	-0.02
4	vsSam Houston	W38-7	-13.8	31/40	294	1	0	69.0	26	0	0.33
5	@Texas Tech	L28-49	6.1	29/40	335	4	0	92.9	59	0	0.66
7	vsWest Virginia	W41-39	7.5	21/27	253	4	0	84.4	34	1	0.43
8	vsTexas	L24-31	23.2	32/46	378	3	1	79.8	-12	0	0.36
9	@Kansas State	L0-41	16.2	13/28	88	0	1	11.6	3	0	-0.22
10	@Baylor	W25-24	-8.3	21/27	236	2	2	64.3	66	1	0.37
11	vsCincinnati	L14-24	-6.8	16/28	102	2	3	48.2	88	0	0.23
12	vsOklahoma State	L30-43	6.7	17/29	235	1	2	57.6	63	1	0.35
13	@UCF	L13-27	3.4	12/20	161	1	1	46.5	24	0	0.67

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

66.8%

Passing plays

95.3%

Rushing plays

31.8%

Standard downs

60.2%

Passing downs

79.5%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: 0.29
Passing downs: 0.34
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.28 / 0.43

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

Career · rolling EPA, game by game

Per-game EPA5-game avg

EPA per play · 2023 · 12 games

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.