Running back, Arizona (from Utah Tech, San José State), 2022–24
Quali Conley
- Number
- No. 7
- Height
- 5′10″
- Weight
- 210 lb
- Class (2024)
- Senior
- Hometown
- Fresno, CA
Quali Conley played running back at Utah Tech (2022), San José State (2023) and Arizona (2024).
Career highs
215rushing yards, career highvs. Tarleton State, 20223rushing touchdowns, career hightwice; last vs. New Mexico, 20247catches, career highvs. Texas Tech, 2024Rushing
| Season | Team | Car | Yds | Avg | TD | Long |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | Utah Tech | 186 | 1,092 | 5.9 | 8 | 45 |
| 2023 | San José State | 131 | 842 | 6.4 | 9 | 68 |
| 2024 | Arizona | 150 | 745 | 5.0 | 8 | 58 |
| Career | 467 | 2,679 | 5.7 | 25 | 68 | |
Receiving
| Season | Team | Rec | Yds | Avg | TD | Long |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | Utah Tech | 12 | 89 | 7.4 | 0 | 47 |
| 2023 | San José State | 27 | 269 | 10.0 | 0 | 61 |
| 2024 | Arizona | 39 | 245 | 6.3 | 1 | 16 |
| Career | 78 | 603 | 7.7 | 1 | 61 | |
Season lines from CollegeFootballData, regular season and bowls.
On the roster
| Season | Team | No. | Pos | Class | Ht | Wt |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | Utah Tech | 7 | RB | So. | ||
| 2023 | San José State | 7 | RB | Jr. | ||
| 2024 | Arizona | 7 | RB | Sr. | 5′10″ | 210 |
As each season’s roster listed the player (CollegeFootballData). Classes before the latest listing are counted back from it; “Yr 1” is the year on file where that count can’t place a season he played (a redshirt, transfer or 2020 year); height and weight as last listed.
Per play
| Season | Team | Plays | EPA/play | Pctile | Median | Total | Usage | Adj. rush |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | Utah Tech (FCS) | 89 | 0.25 | 79th (n=470) | 0.14 | 22.2 | 24% | – |
| 2023 | San José State | 139 | 0.26 | 76th (n=450) | 0.17 | 36.2 | 19% | 0.20 |
| 2024 | Arizona | 188 | 0.07 | 25th (n=434) | 0.16 | 13.2 | 25% | 0.07 |
Expected points added: how much the player’s plays moved the team’s expected score, per play and in total. Plays: total EPA divided by EPA per play, the plays the source credits to him (for a receiver roughly his catches and runs, not every target; for a passer, not every attempt), so it can differ from attempts plus carries. Percentile: against the position’s regulars that season across all divisions on file (quarterbacks with 150+ plays, backs 60+, receivers and tight ends 30+), with how many there were (n) and their median; a dash means too few plays to rank. A season in progress uses the full-season bar scaled by games played, never below 75 plays for quarterbacks, 30 for backs and 20 for receivers. The cohort grows or shrinks with the source’s coverage each season (2025 lists far more players), so compare percentiles rather than raw EPA across years. FCS seasons are marked. Usage: the share of the team’s plays the player was part of (shown from 20 plays). Adjusted pass and rush: EPA per play adjusted for the defenses faced (CollegeFootballData’s WEPA). From CollegeFootballData, 2013 on.
Game by game
2024 Arizona 12 games, 745 rushing yards, 8 TD
| Date | Opponent | Result | Car | Rush yds | Rush TD | Rec | Rec yds | Rec TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 31 | vs. | W 61–39 | 10 | 90 | 3 | 3 | 29 | 0 |
| Sep 7 | vs. | W 22–10 | 17 | 112 | 0 | 5 | 38 | 0 |
| Sep 13 | at | L 7–31 | 14 | 48 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 |
| Sep 28 | at | W 23–10 | 14 | 72 | 0 | 2 | 14 | 0 |
| Oct 5 | vs. | L 22–28 | 14 | 97 | 1 | 7 | 39 | 0 |
| Oct 12 | at | L 19–41 | 13 | 39 | 1 | 4 | 29 | 0 |
| Oct 19 | vs. | L 7–34 | 11 | 42 | 0 | 3 | 12 | 0 |
| Oct 26 | vs. | L 26–31 | 16 | 72 | 1 | 2 | 14 | 0 |
| Nov 2 | at | L 12–56 | 7 | −2 | 0 | 3 | −3 | 0 |
| Nov 15 | vs. | W 27–3 | 11 | 107 | 1 | 3 | 27 | 1 |
| Nov 23 | at | L 28–49 | 13 | 42 | 0 | 3 | 19 | 0 |
| Nov 30 | vs. | L 7–49 | 10 | 26 | 0 | 3 | 25 | 0 |
2023 San José State 13 games, 842 rushing yards, 9 TD
| Date | Opponent | Result | Car | Rush yds | Rush TD | Rec | Rec yds | Rec TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 26 | at | L 28–56 | 6 | 108 | 0 | 2 | 17 | 0 |
| Sep 3 | vs. | L 17–42 | 11 | 34 | 0 | 2 | 18 | 0 |
| Sep 9 | vs. | W 59–3 | 12 | 60 | 2 | – | – | – |
| Sep 16 | at | L 17–21 | 3 | 11 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 22 | vs. | L 20–45 | 1 | 7 | 0 | 5 | 44 | 0 |
| Oct 7 | at | L 27–35 | 3 | 9 | 1 | 2 | 25 | 0 |
| Oct 14 | at | W 52–24 | 10 | 123 | 1 | 1 | 61 | 0 |
| Oct 21 | vs. | W 42–21 | 15 | 74 | 2 | 2 | 20 | 0 |
| Oct 28 | at | W 35–0 | 19 | 73 | 1 | 4 | 48 | 0 |
| Nov 11 | vs. | W 42–18 | 15 | 93 | 0 | 1 | 17 | 0 |
| Nov 18 | vs. | W 24–13 | 13 | 155 | 1 | 2 | 7 | 0 |
| Nov 25 | at | W 37–31 | 19 | 62 | 0 | 3 | 7 | 0 |
| Dec 23 ✦ | vs. | L 14–24 | 4 | 33 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 0 |
2022 Utah Tech 11 games, 1,092 rushing yards, 8 TD
| Date | Opponent | Result | Car | Rush yds | Rush TD | Rec | Rec yds | Rec TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 3 | at | L 33–56 | 13 | 48 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 0 |
| Sep 10 | vs.Chadron State | W 56–10 | 21 | 139 | 3 | 1 | −4 | 0 |
| Sep 17 | at | L 14–44 | 9 | 10 | 0 | – | – | – |
| Sep 24 | at | L 17–31 | 14 | 112 | 0 | 3 | 50 | 0 |
| Oct 1 | vs. | L 10–26 | 20 | 148 | 1 | – | – | – |
| Oct 15 | at | L 14–41 | 6 | 9 | 0 | – | – | – |
| Oct 22 | vs. | L 13–18 | 15 | 64 | 0 | 3 | 27 | 0 |
| Oct 29 | at | W 47–44 | 23 | 131 | 1 | – | – | – |
| Nov 5 | vs. | W 48–36 | 22 | 155 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 |
| Nov 12 | vs. | W 34–28 | 25 | 215 | 1 | 1 | 7 | 0 |
| Nov 19 | at | L 26–52 | 18 | 61 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 0 |
Box scores from CollegeFootballData, 2004 on. ✦ postseason; ★ a career high on file.
Before the draft
| Drill | Pro day 2025 |
|---|---|
| Height | 5′10″ |
| Weight | 211 lb |
| Arm length | 29⅛″ |
| Hand size | 9″ |
| Wingspan | 73″ |
| 40-yard dash | 4.63 s |
| 10-yard split | 1.64 s |
| Vertical jump | 34½″ |
| Broad jump | 9′5″ |
| Bench press | 24 reps |
| 3-cone drill | 7.52 s |
| 20-yard shuttle | 4.56 s |
Pre-draft measurables: Wikipedia (CC BY-SA).
Is this you, or do you know of something wrong or missing here? Suggest a correction. We check each one against a source before changing the page.
