Skip to content
Jai'Den Thomas

#9Jai'Den Thomas

RB·UNLV·2025

Jai'Den Thomas is a Pass-Catching Back for UNLV. Jai'Den's 2025 season ranks in the 57th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 191 plays — a average rate for the RB.

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 Jai'Den Thomas'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
1034 Rush yards12 Rush TD148 Carries7.0 Yards/carry
Receiving
38 Receptions233 Rec yards1 Rec TD6.1 Yards/rec

Air yards

Where the ball goes, and how much of the gain is the throw rather than the run after it.

12
Targets
0.7y
Avg depth
6.3y
After catch
58%
Catch rate

The ball travels 0.7 yards in the air on an average target 8.3 yards shorter than the median. Another 6.3 comes after the catch.

Where he is targeted

targets · completion rate · yards
deep
0
0
0
short
2
100% · 15y
1
100% · -2y
9
44% · 39y
leftmiddleright

Depth and direction come from CFBD’s passing detail, which is backfilled after the games: this covers weeks 1–2 only. Spikes, throwaways and intentional grounding are excluded before any average.

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs RB peers

  • Efficiency57
  • Volume66
  • Explosiveness80
  • Consistency47
  • Receiving99
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)57th %ile · average
Game-to-game consistency47th %ile · average
Key findings
  • 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 0.09 from the first to second half of the season.
  • Peak game: 0.89 EPA/play in Wk 14 vs Nevada (SP+ -13).

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.

Historical Comparables · RB · 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
Saquon BarkleyPenn State0.3403.997.9
Dalvin CookFlorida State0.3404.399.3
Breece HallIowa State0.3404.5102.3
Hassan HaskinsMichigan0.3804.8106.4
James FlandersTulsa0.3904.9103.7

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+0.8900.89Wk 1 vs Sam Houston: +0.13 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs UCLA: -0.03 EPA/play2Wk 4 vs Miami (OH): +0.12 EPA/play4Wk 6 vs Wyoming: +0.31 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Air Force: +0.47 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Boise State: -0.16 EPA/play8Wk 10 vs New Mexico: -0.21 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Colorado State: +0.85 EPA/play11Wk 13 vs Hawai'i: +0.20 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs Nevada: +0.89 EPA/play14Wk 15 vs Boise State: -0.25 EPA/play15
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+CarRush YdsAvgRush TDRecRec YdsRec TDEPA/play
0vsIdaho StateW38-311014714.732160
1vsSam HoustonW38-21-27.89657.213300.13
2vsUCLAW30-23-8.713614.70-0.03
4@Miami (OH)W41-38-3.4131189.113400.12
6@WyomingW31-17-11.316966.0021710.31
7vsAir ForceW51-48-3.211888.0165800.47
8@Boise StateL31-563.111383.51120-0.16
10vsNew MexicoL35-400.913342.6011650-0.21
11@Colorado StateW42-10-15.6713118.711400.85
13vsHawai'iW38-101.713614.7021400.20
14@NevadaW42-17-13.4111039.4432400.89
15@Boise StateL21-383.110414.101100-0.25
20vsOhioL10-17-4.011514.603160

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
23.0%
Passing plays
12.5%
Rushing plays
33.0%
Standard downs
26.8%
Passing downs
14.2%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.17
Passing downs
0.40
Pass / Rush EPA
0.29 / 0.19

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.