#13E.J. Warner

QB·Temple·2023

E.J. Warner is a Dual-Threat QB for Temple. E.J.'s 2023 season ranks in the 0th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 418 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 E.J. Warner'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

256/445 Comp/Att3076 Pass yards23 Pass TD12 INT57.5% Comp %

Rushing

7 Rush yards0 Rush TD24 Carries0.3 Yards/carry

Punting

1 Punts27 Punt yards27.0 Yards/punt27 Long1 Inside 20

Performance Analysis · 2023 · vs QB peers

Efficiency0
Volume100
Dual-Threat100
Consistency74
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)0th %ile · below avg

Game-to-game consistency74th %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.
▸3 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
▸Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
▸Strong second-half surge — EPA/play improved 0.10 from the first to second half of the season.
▸Peak game: 1.07 EPA/play in Wk 10 vs Navy (SP+ -14).

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

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	EPA/play
1	vsAkron	W24-21	-21.6	28/49	292	2	0	43.5	1	0.32
2	@Rutgers	L7-36	3.5	20/47	230	1	2	29.2	-3	0.16
3	vsNorfolk State	W41-9	—	14/22	238	1	0	91.9	24	0.76
4	vsMiami	L7-41	9.6	22/39	240	1	2	34.6	-12	0.13
5	@Tulsa	L26-48	-13.7	27/49	269	2	1	39.5	4	0.16
6	vsUTSA	L34-49	5.4	42/65	472	5	0	75.1	-3	0.51
10	vsNavy	W32-18	-13.7	27/33	402	4	2	97.1	2	1.07
11	@South Florida	L23-27	-6.6	24/47	280	3	3	36.2	16	0.17
12	@UAB	L24-34	-14.7	25/46	323	2	1	56.5	-15	0.26
13	vsMemphis	L21-45	3.5	27/48	330	2	1	31.3	-7	0.04

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

65.0%

Passing plays

98.6%

Rushing plays

7.3%

Standard downs

56.2%

Passing downs

81.7%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: 0.15
Passing downs: 0.59
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.33 / 0.66

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