Skip to content
Isaiah Mozee

#22Isaiah Mozee

Isaiah Mozee is a Pass-Catching Back for Nebraska. Isaiah's 2025 season produced 2.8 total EPA across 30 plays.

What projects, and what doesn't · RBs · 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)0.52
    Beats guessing the RB average by 18%. n=4,219 RB seasons
  • EPA per play (efficiency)0.10
    Not projectable — we do not forecast this. n=3,575 RB seasons
  • Total EPA (value)0.41
    Beats guessing the RB average by 9%. n=3,575 RB seasons

Across all positions, usage carries year to year at 0.47 and efficiency at 0.07. So Isaiah Mozee'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.

2025 Production

Rushing
115 Rush yards0 Rush TD26 Carries4.4 Yards/carry
Receiving
14 Receptions155 Rec yards0 Rec TD11.1 Yards/rec
Returns
3 Kick returns70 KR yards0 KR TD2 Punt returns43 PR yards0 PR TD

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs RB peers

  • Efficiency0
  • Volume14
  • Explosiveness28
  • Consistency0
  • Receiving100
Player type
Pass-Catching Back

Third-down weapon out of the backfield. Routes, hands, and separation in coverage define this role as much as rushing.

3rd-down backReceiving threatPass protection
Peer percentiles
Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)0th %ile · below avg
Game-to-game consistency0th %ile · below avg
Key findings
  • Below-average efficiency vs RB peers — value comes through volume, not per-play impact.
  • Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
  • High game-to-game variance — boom-or-bust profile.
  • Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
  • Peak game: 1.02 EPA/play in Wk 2 vs Akron (SP+ -14).

NIL Market Tier· 2025

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

+1.0901.09Wk 1 vs Cincinnati: -1.09 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Akron: +1.02 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Houston Christian: +0.66 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Michigan: -0.33 EPA/play4Wk 6 vs Michigan State: -0.26 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Maryland: +0.25 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Minnesota: -0.20 EPA/play8Wk 9 vs Northwestern: +0.31 EPA/play9Wk 10 vs USC: +0.33 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs UCLA: -0.24 EPA/play11Wk 13 vs Penn State: -0.09 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs Iowa: -0.22 EPA/play14
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+CarRush YdsAvgRush TDRecRec YdsRec TDEPA/play
1vsCincinnatiW20-174.51-2-2.00120-1.09
2vsAkronW68-0-13.936501.02
3vsHouston ChristianW59-732600.66
4vsMichiganL27-3012.4111.00-0.33
6vsMichigan StateW38-27-3.4393.00-0.26
7@MarylandW34-310.65244.8021000.25
8@MinnesotaL6-241.5273.50-0.20
9vsNorthwesternW28-215.83289.300.31
10vsUSCL17-2116.9144.000.33
11@UCLAW28-21-8.7133.00-0.24
13@Penn StateL10-3718.1140-0.09
14vsIowaL16-4019.7294.50-0.22
20vsUtahL22-4422.27324.604480

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
4.9%
Passing plays
3.9%
Rushing plays
6.0%
Standard downs
4.4%
Passing downs
6.2%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
-0.04
Passing downs
0.42
Pass / Rush EPA
0.81 / -0.12

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

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