Skip to content
Anthony Brown

Anthony Brown

Anthony Brown is a Versatile WR for Tulane. Anthony's 2025 season ranks in the 100th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 67 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 Anthony Brown'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

Receiving
41 Receptions523 Rec yards2 Rec TD12.8 Yards/rec
Returns
15 Kick returns357 KR yards0 KR TD

Air yards

Where the ball goes, and how much of the gain is the throw rather than the run after it.

11
Targets
13.4y
Avg depth
4.2y
After catch
45%
Catch rate

The ball travels 13.4 yards in the air on an average target 4.5 yards deeper than the median. Another 4.2 comes after the catch.

Where he is targeted

targets · completion rate · yards
deep
2
50% · 21y
0
2
0% · 0y
short
4
50% · 10y
1
100% · 3y
2
50% · 3y
leftmiddleright

Depth and direction come from CFBD’s passing detail, which is backfilled after the games: this covers weeks 1–2 only. Spikes, throwaways and intentional grounding are excluded before any average.

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume22
  • Explosiveness38
  • Consistency61
  • Pass-Down100
Player type
Versatile WR

Balanced profile without a single dominant trait — contributes across multiple dimensions.

Balanced usageMulti-role
Peer percentiles
Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)100th %ile · elite
Game-to-game consistency61th %ile · average
Key findings
  • Top-10% efficiency among WRs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
  • Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
  • 7 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
  • Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
  • Strong second-half surge — EPA/play improved 0.16 from the first to second half of the season.
  • Peak game: 1.57 EPA/play in Wk 2 vs South Alabama (SP+ -13).

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.

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
Zach AbeyNavy0.3700.825.9
Micah DavisAir Force0.3700.616.3
Keytaon ThompsonVirginia0.3700.615.2
Eli HeidenreichNavy0.3400.722.4
Dane KinamonAir Force0.4100.716.0

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+1.5701.57Wk 2 vs South Alabama: +1.57 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Duke: +0.56 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Ole Miss: -0.65 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs Tulsa: -0.16 EPA/play5Wk 7 vs East Carolina: +0.25 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Army: +0.53 EPA/play8Wk 10 vs UTSA: +0.59 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Memphis: +0.85 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Florida Atlantic: +1.07 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Temple: -0.19 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs Charlotte: +0.44 EPA/play14Wk 15 vs North Texas: +0.38 EPA/play15
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
2@South AlabamaW33-31-12.72199.50101.57
3vsDukeW34-276.62178.50140.56
4@Ole MissL10-4524.0166.016-0.65
5@TulsaW31-14-10.023216.0020-0.16
7vsEast CarolinaW26-198.033612.00240.25
8vsArmyW24-170.855210.40180.53
10@UTSAL26-483.735819.30240.59
11@MemphisW38-327.636923.01540.85
12vsFlorida AtlanticW35-24-8.735217.30261.07
13@TempleW37-13-5.1155.005-0.19
14vsCharlotteW27-0-26.799810.90190.44
15vsNorth TexasW34-2113.812222.00220.38
20@Ole MissL10-4124.06579.5021

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
7.6%
Passing plays
15.2%
Rushing plays
1.2%
Standard downs
7.4%
Passing downs
8.0%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.27
Passing downs
0.67
Pass / Rush EPA
0.42 / 0.07

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

Career · rolling EPA, game by game

Per-game EPA5-game avg
+0.820−0.29
EPA per play · 2021 · 14 games

Chart shows per-game EPA (bars) and rolling 5-game average (line). Season breaks marked with dashed lines. Line value = est. points over replacement per game.

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