#10Quinn Henicle

QB·Old Dominion·2025

Quinn Henicle is a Dual-Threat QB for Old Dominion. Quinn's 2025 season produced 9.5 total EPA across 48 plays.

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 Quinn Henicle'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

17/40 Comp/Att184 Pass yards0 Pass TD0 INT42.5% Comp %

Rushing

209 Rush yards2 Rush TD44 Carries4.8 Yards/carry

Returns

1 Punt returns4 PR yards0 PR TD

Air yards

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

Attempts

10.0y

Avg depth

4.6y

After catch

69%

Catch rate

The ball travels 10.0 yards in the air on an average throw — 1.5 yards deeper than the median. Another 4.6 comes after the catch.

Where he throws

attempts · completion rate · yards

deep

75% · 104y

—

100% · 68y

short

17% · 7y

82% · 118y

78% · 42y

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

Efficiency0
Volume48
Dual-Threat93
Consistency65
Clutch50

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)0th %ile · below avg

Game-to-game consistency65th %ile · average

Key findings

▸Below-average efficiency vs QB peers — value comes through volume, not per-play impact.
▸Production faded as the season progressed — 0.24 EPA/play decline from first to second half.

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.

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost

Wk	Opponent	Result	Opp SP+	C/ATT	Pass Yds	Pass TD	INT	QBR	Rush Yds	Rush TD	EPA/play
2	vsNorth Carolina Central	W54-6	—	3/5	20	0	0	42.1	10	0	-0.40
6	vsCoastal Carolina	W47-7	-15.1	1/4	2	0	0	17.1	49	0	0.07
8	@James Madison	L27-63	12.3	—	—	—	—	—	9	0	-0.17
10	@UL Monroe	W31-6	-21.6	0/1	0	0	0	2.9	2	0	-0.69
12	vsTroy	W33-0	-4.8	—	—	—	—	—	5	0	-0.94
13	@Georgia Southern	W45-10	-9.4	2/5	35	0	0	31.2	27	0	0.14
20	vsSouth Florida	W24-10	11.6	11/25	127	0	0	40.2	107	2	—

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

16.7%

Passing plays

22.5%

Rushing plays

13.3%

Standard downs

14.2%

Passing downs

22.3%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: 0.18
Passing downs: 0.23
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.07 / 0.37

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