Skip to content
Josh Hoover
Josh Hoover

#10Josh Hoover

QB·TCU·202520249.8 pts line valueDay 2 (Rds 2–3)

Josh Hoover is a 2-year Dual-Threat QB for TCU. Josh's 2024 season ranks in the 75th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 488 plays — a above-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 Josh Hoover'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.

2024 Production

Passing
313/471 Comp/Att3949 Pass yards27 Pass TD11 INT66.5% Comp %
Rushing
-19 Rush yards4 Rush TD47 Carries-0.4 Yards/carry

Performance Analysis · 2024 · vs QB peers

  • Efficiency75
  • Volume100
  • Dual-Threat53
  • Consistency85
  • Clutch65
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)75th %ile · above avg
Game-to-game consistency85th %ile · above avg
Key findings
  • ▸Above-average efficiency for the QB position (75th percentile).
  • ▸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.
  • ▸Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
  • ▸Peak game: 0.74 EPA/play in Wk 2 vs Long Island University.

NIL Market Tier· 2024

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.

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
Kyle McCordSyracuse0.50912.1321.4
Tanner MordecaiSMU0.63014.0321.5
Ryan HigginsLouisiana Tech0.58613.7334.6
Trace McSorleyPenn State0.51312.7321.0

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+0.740−0.74Wk 1 vs Stanford: +0.41 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Long Island University: +0.74 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs UCF: +0.50 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs SMU: +0.52 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs Kansas: +0.65 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs Houston: +0.07 EPA/play6Wk 8 vs Utah: +0.05 EPA/play8Wk 9 vs Texas Tech: +0.55 EPA/play9Wk 10 vs Baylor: +0.57 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Oklahoma State: +0.57 EPA/play11Wk 13 vs Arizona: +0.58 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs Cincinnati: +0.16 EPA/play14
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+C/ATTPass YdsPass TDINTQBRRush YdsRush TDEPA/play
1@StanfordW34-27-8.228/423532065.4-310.41
2vsLong Island UniversityW45-0—20/252672091.5——0.74
3vsUCFL34-352.835/524024090.81000.50
4@SMUL42-6617.528/433963286.0-710.52
5vsKansasW38-274.928/373563288.1-600.65
6vsHoustonL19-30-8.223/372332242.7-1400.07
8@UtahW13-77.722/412630050.1710.05
9vsTexas TechW35-344.321/323443246.5-100.55
10@BaylorL34-378.425/343332082.6710.57
11vsOklahoma StateW38-13-2.626/352861076.8100.57
13vsArizonaW49-28-2.819/262521168.7-1800.58
14@CincinnatiW20-13-0.118/352120151.3900.16
20vsLouisianaW34-34.820/322524189.7-40—

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
57.9%
Passing plays
96.9%
Rushing plays
8.6%
Standard downs
51.5%
Passing downs
72.2%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.39
Passing downs
0.51
Pass / Rush EPA
0.46 / 0.17

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

Career · rolling EPA, game by game

Per-game EPA5-game avg
+1.230−0.362025
EPA per play · 2024 — 2025 · 25 games
SeasonTeamLine valueTotal EPA
2024TCU
9.8
261.0
2025TCU
8.4
197.8

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.