Senior quarterback for Wisconsin. 2025: 664 passing yards, 2 TD, 7 INT.
215 lb · Marion, IL
CFB Index
A single number blending on-field production (an EPA-based value lane) with box-score output for this player's position.
0-100, scaled within each position's own cohort — not directly comparable across positions.
How he plays
Operates within the system without forcing anything.
Sack rate: 86th percentile.
The full scouting readThe numbers
passing yards · 2025
Best game: 70 pass yds, 1 TD, vs Maryland
His career numbers, season by seasonThe story
Senior quarterback for Wisconsin. 2025: 664 passing yards, 2 TD, 7 INT.
The full story, with sourcesAura™ · Him Watch
+1aura tax
18th pctl our passing-value metric (wEPA) QBs · 160 qualified, n=15
— the discourse is fair.Buzz vs Tape
Every angle we can check here reads about where you'd expect this season.
Also checked out fine:
Hunter Simmons
Operates within the system without forcing anything. One game to point at: 177 pass yds against Michigan — Week 6, 2025.
Low coverage — composed from the verified record.
Career arc
| Season | Team | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Wisconsin | 62 | 118 | 52.5% | 664 | 5.6 | 2 | 7 | 93.5 | 40 | -- | -- |
| Career | 62 | 118 | 52.5% | 664 | 5.6 | 2 | 7 | 93.5 | 40 | -- | -- |
| Season | Team | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Wisconsin | 14 | -22 | -1.6 | 0 | -- |
| Career | 14 | -22 | -1.6 | 0 | -- |
Game log · Week-by-week
2025 season · 8 games
| Wk | Opp | CMP/ATT | YDS | TD | INT | YPA | QBR | Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wk 4 | L 10-27vs Maryland | 7/9 | 70 | 1 | 0 | 7.8 | 89.6 | |
| Wk 6 | L 10-24@ Michigan | 18/29 | 177 | 0 | 1 | 6.1 | 56.2 | Season-high 177 yds |
| Wk 7 | L 0-37vs Iowa | 8/21 | 82 | 0 | 2 | 3.9 | 0.8 | |
| Wk 8 | L 0-34vs Ohio State | 6/12 | 54 | 0 | 1 | 4.5 | 35.8 | |
| Wk 9 | L 7-21@ Oregon | 7/21 | 86 | 1 | 1 | 4.1 | 5.1 | |
| Wk 11 | W 13-10vs Washington | 2/3 | 16 | 0 | 0 | 5.3 | 76.5 | |
| Wk 13 | W 27-10vs Illinois | 2/4 | 17 | 0 | 0 | 4.3 | 44.6 | |
| Wk 14 | L 7-17@ Minnesota | 12/19 | 162 | 0 | 2 | 8.5 | 20.4 | |
| Total | 62/118 | 664 | 2 | 7 | 5.6 | 41.1 |
SIGNATURE GAME · Week 11 · 2025
W 13–10
vs Washington
16 yds · 0 TD · 0 INT · QBR 76.5
A wire-to-wire battle — won by 3 at home.
With S. West — 24 yds · 0 TD · 0 INT · QBR 100.0 · A. Bertrams — 37.5 yards per punt · 2 punts · 2 inside the 20
Signature plays · top plays by |EPA|
The plays that mattered most
Season context · Team result + system
Where this profile ranks vs the QB cohort
Box-score + play-by-play EPA percentiles
Elite: sack rate (86th percentile). Concern: interception rate (1st percentile).
Real play-by-play efficiency
Season trend
Percentiles versus same-position peers with enough snaps this season. Most bars are box-score rates; EPA / success-rate bars are computed from real play-by-play (offense only — no defensive EPA model exists yet).
Pass Profile · True throw depth (charted plays)
Adjusted ANY/A, sack rate, and where the yards came from
Adjusted ANY/A
2.93198 of 206 QBsSack rate
3.3%37 of 206 QBsRarely sacked (37 of 206), but Adjusted ANY/A hasn't followed (198 of 206).
Adjusted ANY/A uses full-season box-score totals (attempts, yards, TDs, INTs); sack rate is play-by-play-derived.
Behind LOS · Negative air yds
Short · 0–9 air yds
Middle · 10–19 air yds
Deep · 20+ air yds
Overall 52.5% completion on 118 attempts · 67% of attempts thrown 0–9 air yds.
Zeitgeist Passer Rating
2025 · our own passing-efficiency number, shown next to the 1979 formula it does not replace.
Thin sample: 86 dropbacks40Zeitgeist Passer Ratingnot ranked until 125 dropbacks
--NCAA passer ratingno box-score line yet
Positive-play rate weight 24%
36.4%2th pct of FBS QBsshare of dropbacks that gained expected points · +0.3% schedule adj.Yards per attempt weight 56%
5.8612th pct of FBS QBssacks excluded · +0.6 schedule adj.Sack rate weight 21% (penalty)
1.5%97th pct of FBS QBsthe input passer rating cannot see · -0.8% schedule adj.Opponent-adjusted; garbage time excluded (36 of 122 dropbacks dropped). 50 = FBS average; the number is pulled toward 50 when the sample is thin. How ZPR is built.
Splits · Per-game
2025 season · 8 games
Home vs Road
| YDS/g | TD/g | YPA | INT/g | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Home5g | 47.8 | 0.2 | 5.2 | 0.6 |
| Road3g | 142 | 0.3 | 6.2 | 1.3 |
First half vs Second half
| YDS/g | TD/g | YPA | INT/g | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Weeks 1-73g | 110 | 0.3 | 5.9 | 1.0 |
| Weeks 8+5g | 67.0 | 0.2 | 5.3 | 0.8 |
Supporting cast · Scheme
Staff and system around the player
Head Coach
Luke Fickell
Pass share
48.0%
85 pass / 92 run
Plays / game
59.0
3 games
Scheme: Balanced, slow tempo.
Player standing · 2025
Splitting first-team reps — starts some weeks, rotates others.
Recognition
Production · CFB Index Score
2026 outlook
Outside shot for All-Big Ten
Based on 2025: #19 of 19 Big Ten QBs
22% estimated, 95% confidence interval 19–25%. Base rate measured from players who finished at a comparable rank in their conference and came back the next season. It is an estimate from a small sample, not a forecast of this player.
Play style
Balanced passer who operates within the system, without one standout number carrying the profile.
CFB Index positional classification
Player DNA
Balanced passer who operates within the system, without one standout number carrying the profile.
His 2025 production profile sits closest to Christian Veilleux’s 2023 season.
Matches Christian on
Differs from Christian on
Through 1 college season, his career arc tracks closest to Braxton Burmeister’s path through San Diego State.
Matches Braxton on
As a sophomore, his production profile tracks closest to Michael Penix Jr.'s sophomore season at Indiana (2021).
Matches Michael on
Differs from Michael on
Player DNA