Skip to content
Camden Brown

#4Camden Brown

Camden Brown is a Red Zone Weapon WR for Georgia Southern. Camden's 2025 season ranks in the 100th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 86 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 Camden 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
65 Receptions1079 Rec yards14 Rec TD16.6 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume31
  • Explosiveness64
  • Consistency81
  • Pass-Down100
Player type
Red Zone Weapon WR

Goes from good to great inside the 20 — high TD conversion on limited looks makes this receiver a scoring machine.

Red zone targetHigh TD rateSize/catch radius advantage
Peer percentiles
Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)100th %ile · elite
Game-to-game consistency81th %ile · above avg
Key findings
  • Top-10% efficiency among WRs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
  • High game-to-game consistency — reliable floor each week.
  • 10 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: 2.13 EPA/play in Wk 12 vs Coastal Carolina (SP+ -15).

NIL Market Tier· 2025

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
Keytaon ThompsonMississippi State0.4601.232.2
Savion WilliamsTCU0.4501.125.2
Bert Emanuel Jr.Central Michigan0.4601.624.4

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+2.1302.13Wk 1 vs Fresno State: +0.84 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs USC: +0.53 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Jacksonville State: +0.49 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Maine: +1.15 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs James Madison: +0.80 EPA/play5Wk 7 vs Southern Miss: +0.86 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Georgia State: +1.16 EPA/play8Wk 9 vs Arkansas State: +0.11 EPA/play9Wk 11 vs App State: +1.09 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Coastal Carolina: +2.13 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Old Dominion: -0.05 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs Marshall: +1.42 EPA/play14
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
1@Fresno StateL14-421.845513.81180.84
2@USCL20-5916.937525.02320.53
3vsJacksonville StateW41-34-6.723316.51180.49
4vsMaineW45-17611819.71441.15
5@James MadisonL10-3512.3511122.20430.80
7vsSouthern MissL35-38-7.11215813.21260.86
8vsGeorgia StateW41-24-24.534816.02201.16
9@Arkansas StateL24-34-8.85448.81240.11
11@App StateW25-23-11.469716.20381.09
12vsCoastal CarolinaW45-40-15.1513326.63732.13
13vsOld DominionL10-455.93206.7010-0.05
14@MarshallW24-19-4.5915717.42431.42
20vsApp StateW29-10-11.423015.0021

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
10.7%
Passing plays
21.2%
Rushing plays
0.0%
Standard downs
10.1%
Passing downs
11.9%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.72
Passing downs
1.22
Pass / Rush EPA
0.88 / —

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.