Skip to content
Ahmad Edwards

#14Ahmad Edwards

Ahmad Edwards is a Slot Specialist WR for Ball State. Ahmad's 2023 season produced 22.6 total EPA across 41 plays.

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 Ahmad Edwards'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.

2023 Production

Receiving
31 Receptions354 Rec yards1 Rec TD11.4 Yards/rec
Returns
1 Kick returns23 KR yards0 KR TD

Performance Analysis · 2023 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume19
  • Explosiveness29
  • Consistency74
  • Pass-Down0
Player type
Slot Specialist WR

The offense's primary passing-down weapon — routes, separation, and reliability on 3rd down define this role.

3rd-down converterRoute technicianHigh passing-down share
Peer percentiles
Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)100th %ile · elite
Game-to-game consistency74th %ile · average
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.
  • 6 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
  • Strong second-half surge — EPA/play improved 0.11 from the first to second half of the season.
  • Peak game: 1.58 EPA/play in Wk 5 vs Western Michigan (SP+ -16).

NIL Market Tier· 2023

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.

Historical Comparables · WR · efficiency + volume + value

Players from 2013–2025 matched on EPA efficiency, play volume, and adjusted value tier — not just one metric.

PlayerTeamWEPA/playLine valTotal EPA
Quadree HendersonPittsburgh0.5301.633.4
DeAndre HughesAir Force0.4701.328.2
Savion WilliamsTCU0.4501.125.2
Keytaon ThompsonMississippi State0.4601.232.2
Javion PoseyFlorida Atlantic0.4501.423.8

Comps are statistical — efficiency, volume, and value tier all factor in. Style and conference context differ.

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+1.5801.58Wk 2 vs Georgia: +1.41 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Indiana State: -0.01 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Georgia Southern: -0.20 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs Western Michigan: +1.58 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs Eastern Michigan: +0.05 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Toledo: +1.28 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Central Michigan: +1.13 EPA/play8Wk 10 vs Bowling Green: +0.82 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Northern Illinois: +0.40 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Kent State: +0.71 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Miami (OH): +0.34 EPA/play13
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
2@GeorgiaL3-4531.244711.80281.41
3vsIndiana StateW45-723216.0021-0.01
4vsGeorgia SouthernL3-40-5.2122.002-0.20
5@Western MichiganL24-42-15.937224.01571.58
6@Eastern MichiganL10-24-12.33217.0090.05
7vsToledoL6-133.733812.70281.28
8vsCentral MichiganW24-17-19.111313.00131.13
10@Bowling GreenL21-24-7.83258.30100.82
11@Northern IllinoisW20-17-7.55326.40140.40
12vsKent StateW34-3-26.325025.00460.71
13vsMiami (OH)L15-172.84225.5070.34

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
6.7%
Passing plays
15.7%
Rushing plays
0.5%
Standard downs
5.1%
Passing downs
9.9%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.88
Passing downs
0.21
Pass / Rush EPA
0.56 / 0.39

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.