Skip to content
Julian Sayin

#10Julian Sayin

QB·Ohio State·202510.6 pts line value1st Round

Julian Sayin is a Clutch Passer for Ohio State. Julian's 2025 season ranks in the 98th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 415 plays — a elite 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 Julian Sayin'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

Passing
301/391 Comp/Att3610 Pass yards32 Pass TD8 INT77.0% Comp %
Rushing
-44 Rush yards0 Rush TD42 Carries-1.0 Yards/carry

Air yards

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

23
Attempts
13.8y
Avg depth
3.1y
After catch
83%
Catch rate

The ball travels 13.8 yards in the air on an average throw 6.0 yards deeper than the median. Another 3.1 comes after the catch.

Where he throws

attempts · completion rate · yards
deep
3
33% · 24y
0
1
100% · 48y
short
8
100% · 107y
5
60% · 32y
6
100% · 89y
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 QB peers

  • Efficiency98
  • Volume100
  • Dual-Threat17
  • Consistency86
  • Clutch86
Player type
Clutch Passer

Elevates on passing downs — 3rd-and-medium, two-minute drills, and pressure situations are where this QB is best.

3rd-down precisionLate-game valueHigh passing-down EPA
Peer percentiles
Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)98th %ile · elite
Game-to-game consistency86th %ile · above avg
Key findings
  • Top-10% efficiency among QBs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
  • 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: 1.18 EPA/play in Wk 10 vs Penn State (SP+ 18).

NIL Market Tier· 2025

On3 valuation ↗
Elite

Top-3 player at position nationally. Collective + national brand 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
Kaidon SalterLiberty0.71114.7345.6
Malik CunninghamLouisville0.68114.7341.6
Ryan HigginsLouisiana Tech0.58613.7334.6

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+1.1801.18Wk 1 vs Texas: +0.27 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Grambling: +0.65 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Ohio: +0.52 EPA/play3Wk 5 vs Washington: +0.58 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs Minnesota: +0.84 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Illinois: +0.57 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Wisconsin: +0.70 EPA/play8Wk 10 vs Penn State: +1.18 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Purdue: +0.28 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs UCLA: +0.26 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Rutgers: +0.72 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs Michigan: +0.79 EPA/play14Wk 15 vs Indiana: +0.25 EPA/play15
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+C/ATTPass YdsPass TDINTQBRRush YdsRush TDEPA/play
1vsTexasW14-716.213/201261074.5200.27
2vsGramblingW70-018/193064175.6-700.65
3vsOhioW37-9-4.025/323473277.5-200.52
5@WashingtonW24-618.422/282082088.91200.58
6vsMinnesotaW42-31.523/273263097.4200.84
7@IllinoisW34-1612.919/271662086.0300.57
8@WisconsinW34-0-4.436/423934094.2700.70
10vsPenn StateW38-1418.120/233164099.11301.18
11@PurdueW34-10-6.127/333031187.5-900.28
12vsUCLAW48-10-8.723/311841082.1-100.26
13vsRutgersW42-91.013/191572083.30.72
14@MichiganW27-912.419/262333197.0700.79
15vsIndianaL10-1332.421/292581160.7-2900.25
20vsMiamiL14-2420.722/352871270.4-420

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
48.5%
Passing plays
95.7%
Rushing plays
5.5%
Standard downs
43.3%
Passing downs
66.5%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.46
Passing downs
0.69
Pass / Rush EPA
0.57 / -0.01

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

Career · rolling EPA, game by game

Per-game EPA5-game avg
+1.27+0.16
EPA per play · 2025 · 14 games

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.