Skip to content
Chase Roberts

#2Chase Roberts

WR·BYU·2025

Chase Roberts is a Versatile WR for BYU. Chase's 2025 season ranks in the 100th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 93 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 Chase Roberts'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
54 Receptions802 Rec yards6 Rec TD14.9 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume31
  • Explosiveness52
  • Consistency59
  • Pass-Down71
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 consistency59th %ile · average
Key findings
  • Top-10% efficiency among WRs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
  • 7 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 — 0.26 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
  • Peak game: 2.19 EPA/play in Wk 6 vs West Virginia (SP+ -7).

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
Keytaon ThompsonMississippi State0.4601.232.2
Savion WilliamsTCU0.4501.125.2
DeAndre HughesAir Force0.4701.328.2
Javion PoseyFlorida Atlantic0.4501.423.8
Quadree HendersonPittsburgh0.5301.633.4

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+2.1902.19Wk 1 vs Portland State: +0.45 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Stanford: +0.77 EPA/play2Wk 4 vs East Carolina: +0.61 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs Colorado: +0.71 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs West Virginia: +2.19 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Arizona: -0.16 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Utah: -0.72 EPA/play8Wk 9 vs Iowa State: +1.24 EPA/play9Wk 11 vs Texas Tech: +0.37 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs TCU: +0.38 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Cincinnati: -0.28 EPA/play13Wk 15 vs Texas Tech: +0.79 EPA/play15
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
1vsPortland StateW69-0144.0140.45
2vsStanfordW27-3-11.858416.80410.77
4@East CarolinaW34-138.059719.40400.61
5@ColoradoW24-21-8.35499.82160.71
6vsWest VirginiaW38-24-6.8416140.30852.19
7@ArizonaW33-2712.022512.5017-0.16
8vsUtahW24-2122.224321.5126-0.72
9@Iowa StateW41-279.9812816.00451.24
11@Texas TechL7-2927.666110.21140.37
12vsTCUW44-138.355010.00130.38
13@CincinnatiW26-144.511111.0011-0.28
15vsTexas TechL7-3427.633210.70180.79
20vsGeorgia TechW25-219.37578.1118

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
10.7%
Passing plays
24.7%
Rushing plays
0.0%
Standard downs
10.2%
Passing downs
12.1%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.45
Passing downs
0.58
Pass / Rush EPA
0.49 / —

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.