#2Walker Eget

QB·San José State·2025

Walker Eget is a Clutch Passer for San José State. Walker's 2025 season ranks in the 8th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 403 plays — a developing 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 Walker Eget'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

232/393 Comp/Att3058 Pass yards17 Pass TD9 INT59.0% Comp %

Rushing

96 Rush yards0 Rush TD33 Carries2.9 Yards/carry

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs QB peers

Efficiency8
Volume100
Dual-Threat31
Consistency68
Clutch76

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)8th %ile · below avg

Game-to-game consistency68th %ile · average

Key findings

▸Below-average efficiency vs QB peers — value comes through volume, not per-play impact.
▸High-volume role — one of the team's most-used QBs by play share.
▸3 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 — 0.12 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
▸Peak game: 0.74 EPA/play in Wk 6 vs New Mexico (SP+ 1).

NIL Market Tier· 2025

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.

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	EPA/play
1	vsCentral Michigan	L14-16	-8.8	24/43	308	2	2	35.3	-7	0.17
2	@Texas	L7-38	16.2	21/42	188	0	1	35.2	-14	-0.22
4	vsIdaho	W31-28	—	13/21	222	1	0	50.9	-2	0.30
5	@Stanford	L29-30	-11.8	36/58	473	3	0	74.5	19	0.48
6	vsNew Mexico	W35-28	0.9	26/30	334	3	0	92.7	17	0.74
7	@Wyoming	L28-35	-11.3	23/37	295	4	0	83.9	-18	0.50
8	@Utah State	L25-30	-3.1	27/49	340	2	0	69.8	18	0.34
10	vsHawai'i	W45-38	1.7	20/40	458	2	0	83.4	25	0.34
11	vsAir Force	L16-26	-3.2	27/42	334	0	2	28.0	23	0.34
12	@Nevada	L10-55	-13.4	11/23	74	0	3	5.3	33	-0.06
13	@San Diego State	L3-25	6.7	4/8	32	0	1	9.2	2	-0.10

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

55.9%

Passing plays

85.4%

Rushing plays

10.5%

Standard downs

49.8%

Passing downs

68.4%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: 0.24
Passing downs: 0.42
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.34 / 0.06

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