Skip to content
J.J. McCarthy

#9J.J. McCarthy

QB·Michigan·202320228.5 pts line valueDay 2 (Rds 2–3)

J.J. McCarthy is a 2-year Dual-Threat QB for Michigan. J.J.'s 2022 season ranks in the 68th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 372 plays — a average 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 J.J. McCarthy'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.

2022 Production

Passing
208/322 Comp/Att2719 Pass yards22 Pass TD5 INT64.6% Comp %
Rushing
306 Rush yards5 Rush TD70 Carries4.4 Yards/carry

Performance Analysis · 2022 · vs QB peers

  • Efficiency68
  • Volume100
  • Dual-Threat90
  • Consistency80
  • Clutch52
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)68th %ile · average
Game-to-game consistency80th %ile · above avg
Key findings
  • High-volume role — one of the team's most-used QBs by play share.
  • High game-to-game consistency — reliable floor each week.
  • 9 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
  • Production faded as the season progressed — 0.23 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
  • Peak game: 1.34 EPA/play in Wk 2 vs Hawai'i (SP+ -25).

NIL Market Tier· 2022

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
Stetson BennettGeorgia0.63512.5323.0

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+1.3401.34Wk 1 vs Colorado State: +0.93 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Hawai'i: +1.34 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs UConn: +0.51 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Maryland: +0.44 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs Iowa: +0.10 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs Indiana: +0.48 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Penn State: +0.46 EPA/play7Wk 9 vs Michigan State: +0.20 EPA/play9Wk 10 vs Rutgers: +0.39 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Nebraska: +0.22 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Illinois: +0.03 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Ohio State: +0.64 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs Purdue: +0.60 EPA/play14Wk 1 vs TCU: +0.54 EPA/play1
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+C/ATTPass YdsPass TDINTQBRRush YdsRush TDEPA/play
1vsColorado StateW51-7-22.24/4300099.95010.93
2vsHawai'iW56-10-24.711/122293099.21601.34
3vsUConnW59-0-14.615/182140063.0700.51
4vsMarylandW34-2711.218/262202067.6500.44
5@IowaW27-1412.718/241551078.8-1400.10
6@IndianaW31-10-7.128/363043182.22600.48
7vsPenn StateW41-1722.417/241450177.05700.46
9vsMichigan StateW29-71.215/251671065.65000.20
10@RutgersW52-17-9.113/271512086.0610.39
11vsNebraskaW34-3-1.28/171292050.0-810.22
12vsIllinoisW19-1715.918/342080046.71800.03
13@Ohio StateW45-2331.112/242633092.62710.64
14vsPurdueW43-227.711/17161311400.60
1vsTCUL45-5124.320/34343225210.54

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
40.1%
Passing plays
85.4%
Rushing plays
10.6%
Standard downs
34.5%
Passing downs
56.6%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.40
Passing downs
0.45
Pass / Rush EPA
0.43 / 0.35

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

Career · rolling EPA, game by game

Per-game EPA5-game avg
+1.470−0.122023
EPA per play · 2022 — 2023 · 29 games
SeasonTeamLine valueTotal EPA
2022Michigan
8.5
231.7
2023Michigan
9.3
260.1

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.