Skip to content
Jaxson Dart

#2Jaxson Dart

QB·Ole Miss·2024202320229.4 pts line valueDay 2 (Rds 2–3)

Jaxson Dart is a 3-year Dual-Threat QB for Ole Miss. Jaxson's 2023 season ranks in the 50th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 465 plays — a average rate for the QB. Jaxson's production has improved each season, a positive development trajectory.

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 Jaxson Dart'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
233/359 Comp/Att3364 Pass yards23 Pass TD5 INT64.9% Comp %
Rushing
391 Rush yards8 Rush TD119 Carries3.3 Yards/carry

Performance Analysis · 2023 · vs QB peers

  • Efficiency50
  • Volume100
  • Dual-Threat100
  • Consistency81
  • Clutch97
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)50th %ile · average
Game-to-game consistency81th %ile · above avg
Career trajectory:↑ Rising
Key findings
  • High-volume role — one of the team's most-used QBs by play share.
  • Career trajectory is upward — WEPA value has improved season over season.
  • High game-to-game consistency — reliable floor each week.
  • 7 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 — 0.26 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
  • Peak game: 1.00 EPA/play in Wk 1 vs Mercer.

NIL Market Tier· 2023

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
Tanner MordecaiSMU0.63014.0321.5
Kyle McCordSyracuse0.50912.1321.4
Ryan HigginsLouisiana Tech0.58613.7334.6
Sam HartmanWake Forest0.55611.8359.6

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+1.0001.00Wk 1 vs Mercer: +1.00 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Tulane: +0.47 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Georgia Tech: +0.82 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Alabama: +0.34 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs LSU: +0.81 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs Arkansas: +0.15 EPA/play6Wk 8 vs Auburn: +0.40 EPA/play8Wk 9 vs Vanderbilt: +0.25 EPA/play9Wk 10 vs Texas A&M: +0.71 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Georgia: +0.04 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs UL Monroe: +0.56 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Mississippi State: +0.12 EPA/play13
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+C/ATTPass YdsPass TDINTQBRRush YdsRush TDEPA/play
1vsMercerW73-718/233344095.93601.00
2@TulaneW37-202.817/272672168.24100.47
3vsGeorgia TechW48-230.310/182511091.513620.82
4@AlabamaL10-2423.120/352440170.2610.34
5vsLSUW55-4919.126/393894091.25010.81
6vsArkansasW27-203.516/251531049.63300.15
8@AuburnW28-217.610/172021186.24420.40
9vsVanderbiltW33-7-12.719/282401136.7-2010.25
10vsTexas A&MW38-3515.624/333872095.9800.71
11@GeorgiaL17-5231.210/171120167.62000.04
12vsUL MonroeW35-3-21.624/313103057.0-700.56
13@Mississippi StateW17-70.514/26961040.83000.12
20vsPenn StateW38-2523.525/403793092.9141

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
50.9%
Passing plays
91.7%
Rushing plays
18.2%
Standard downs
42.4%
Passing downs
69.4%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.36
Passing downs
0.65
Pass / Rush EPA
0.47 / 0.54

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

Career · rolling EPA, game by game

Per-game EPA5-game avg
+1.180−0.0920232024
EPA per play · 2022 — 2024 · 39 games
SeasonTeamLine valueTotal EPA
2022Ole Miss
6.6
216.2
2023Ole Miss
9.4
258.3
2024Ole Miss
13.0
302.4

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.