#5Emory Jones

QB·Cincinnati·2023

Emory Jones is a Dual-Threat QB for Cincinnati. Emory's 2023 season ranks in the 0th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 437 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 Emory Jones'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

197/322 Comp/Att2219 Pass yards18 Pass TD10 INT61.2% Comp %

Rushing

560 Rush yards4 Rush TD155 Carries3.6 Yards/carry

Performance Analysis · 2023 · vs QB peers

Efficiency0
Volume100
Dual-Threat86
Consistency69
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 consistency69th %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.
▸3 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 — 0.15 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
▸Peak game: 1.23 EPA/play in Wk 1 vs Eastern Kentucky.

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	Rush TD	EPA/play
1	vsEastern Kentucky	W66-13	—	19/23	345	5	0	96.6	26	2	1.23
2	@Pittsburgh	W27-21	-7.3	18/26	125	2	1	61.3	17	0	0.20
3	vsMiami (OH)	L24-31	2.8	18/34	265	0	2	61.6	101	1	0.33
4	vsOklahoma	L6-20	15.0	22/41	235	0	2	41.9	42	0	-0.09
5	@BYU	L27-35	-3.3	23/37	256	3	1	67.5	94	0	0.43
7	vsIowa State	L10-30	7.5	14/26	96	1	2	61.0	72	0	0.17
8	vsBaylor	L29-32	-8.3	19/30	162	2	0	41.0	56	0	0.08
9	@Oklahoma State	L13-45	6.7	6/16	117	0	1	10.1	33	0	0.07
10	vsUCF	L26-28	3.4	16/22	217	1	1	53.4	5	0	0.24
11	@Houston	W24-14	-7.8	13/16	131	1	0	66.4	9	0	0.23
12	@West Virginia	L21-42	7.5	14/24	166	2	0	56.7	44	1	0.47
13	vsKansas	L16-49	9.9	15/27	104	1	0	67.2	61	0	0.26

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

53.1%

Passing plays

89.5%

Rushing plays

26.3%

Standard downs

48.4%

Passing downs

63.6%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: 0.16
Passing downs: 0.50
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.26 / 0.33

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