Skip to content
Adrian Norton
Adrian Norton

#2Adrian Norton

WR·Akron·2024

Adrian Norton is a Vertical Threat WR for Akron. Adrian's 2024 season ranks in the 100th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 59 plays — a elite rate for the WR.

What projects, and what doesn't · WRs · 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)0.47
    Beats guessing the WR average by 16%. n=6,302 WR seasons
  • EPA per play (efficiency)0.09
    Not projectable — we do not forecast this. n=5,767 WR seasons
  • Total EPA (value)0.45
    Beats guessing the WR average by 12%. n=5,767 WR seasons

Across all positions, usage carries year to year at 0.47 and efficiency at 0.07. So Adrian Norton'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.

2024 Production

Receiving
43 Receptions832 Rec yards7 Rec TD19.3 Yards/rec
Returns
1 Kick returns15 KR yards0 KR TD

Performance Analysis · 2024 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume27
  • Explosiveness82
  • Consistency80
  • Pass-Down100
Player type
Vertical Threat WR

Elite deep receiver who stretches the field. Wins downfield, commands safety attention, and creates the threat that opens underneath routes.

Downfield threatYAC upsideCreates space for teammates
Peer percentiles
Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)100th %ile · elite
Game-to-game consistency80th %ile · above avg
Key findings
  • ▸Top-10% efficiency among WRs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
  • ▸Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
  • ▸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.
  • ▸Production faded as the season progressed — 0.85 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
  • ▸Peak game: 2.61 EPA/play in Wk 3 vs Colgate.

NIL Market Tier· 2024

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.

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+2.610−2.61Wk 2 vs Rutgers: +2.21 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Colgate: +2.61 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs South Carolina: +0.97 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs Ohio: +0.82 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs Bowling Green: +1.25 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Western Michigan: +1.33 EPA/play7Wk 9 vs Eastern Michigan: +0.59 EPA/play9Wk 10 vs Buffalo: +0.41 EPA/play10Wk 12 vs Northern Illinois: -0.14 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Kent State: +1.43 EPA/play13
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
2@RutgersL17-496.435518.31322.21
3vsColgateW31-20—512525.01362.61
4@South CarolinaL7-5016.945614.01420.97
5@OhioL10-302.355911.80220.82
6vsBowling GreenL20-27-1.837826.00481.25
7@Western MichiganL24-34-10.2816821.00601.33
9vsEastern MichiganW25-21-13.322914.51210.59
10vsBuffaloL30-41-4.069816.32280.41
12@Northern IllinoisL16-29-3.525728.5140-0.14
13@Kent StateW38-17-33.0510721.40361.43

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
9.4%
Passing plays
15.8%
Rushing plays
0.0%
Standard downs
8.6%
Passing downs
11.0%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.75
Passing downs
1.35
Pass / Rush EPA
1.01 / —

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

EPA = expected points added (opponent-adjusted). NIL estimates are model-based ranges, not reported deals. Data: CollegeFootballData. Not betting advice.