Skip to content
Antonio Meeks

#14Antonio Meeks

Antonio Meeks is a Slot Specialist WR for Louisville.

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 Antonio Meeks'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
17 Receptions189 Rec yards1 Rec TD11.1 Yards/rec
Returns
1 Punt returns2 PR yards0 PR TD

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume9
  • Explosiveness27
  • Consistency76
  • Pass-Down100
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 consistency76th %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.
  • 6 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 — 0.45 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
  • Peak game: 1.36 EPA/play in Wk 12 vs Clemson (SP+ 10).

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
Keytaon ThompsonVirginia0.3700.615.2
Dane KinamonAir Force0.4100.716.0
Micah DavisAir Force0.3700.616.3
Cade HarrisAir Force0.3300.514.8
Keytaon ThompsonVirginia0.3200.412.5

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+1.3601.36Wk 1 vs Eastern Kentucky: +1.31 EPA/play1Wk 5 vs Pittsburgh: +1.27 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs Virginia: +0.73 EPA/play6Wk 9 vs Boston College: +1.25 EPA/play9Wk 10 vs Virginia Tech: -0.40 EPA/play10Wk 12 vs Clemson: +1.36 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs SMU: -0.06 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs Kentucky: +0.79 EPA/play14
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
1vsEastern KentuckyW51-1723417.00211.31
5@PittsburghW34-278.422613.00131.27
6vsVirginiaL27-3011.111111.00110.73
9vsBoston CollegeW38-24-8.523015.00231.25
10@Virginia TechW28-16-10.1166.006-0.40
12vsClemsonL19-209.511414.00141.36
13@SMUL6-3813.4231.504-0.06
14vsKentuckyW41-01.833913.00230.79
20vsToledoW27-226.03268.7116

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
3.3%
Passing plays
6.3%
Rushing plays
0.3%
Standard downs
2.4%
Passing downs
5.6%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.10
Passing downs
0.74
Pass / Rush EPA
0.57 / -4.06

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.