Skip to content
Christian Ross

#15Christian Ross

Christian Ross is a Versatile TE for Memphis.

What projects, and what doesn't · TEs · 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)0.42
    Beats guessing the TE average by 9%. n=2,225 TE seasons
  • EPA per play (efficiency)0.04
    Not projectable — we do not forecast this. n=2,016 TE seasons
  • Total EPA (value)0.46
    Beats guessing the TE average by 13%. n=2,016 TE seasons

Across all positions, usage carries year to year at 0.47 and efficiency at 0.07. So Christian Ross'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
18 Receptions174 Rec yards1 Rec TD9.7 Yards/rec
Returns
1 Kick returns2 KR yards0 KR TD

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs TE peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume8
  • Explosiveness18
  • Consistency60
  • Pass-Down100
Player type
Versatile TE

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 consistency60th %ile · average
Key findings
  • Top-10% efficiency among TEs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
  • Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
  • 4 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 0.13 from the first to second half of the season.
  • Peak game: 1.35 EPA/play in Wk 9 vs South Florida (SP+ 12).

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 · TE · 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
Ty ThompsonTulane0.4200.720.2
Seth GreenMinnesota0.3900.032.4
Johnny LanganRutgers0.3000.017.7
Evan SvobodaWyoming0.2900.521.8
Jordan MyersRice0.2700.215.9

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+1.3501.35Wk 1 vs Chattanooga: +1.25 EPA/play1Wk 3 vs Troy: +0.07 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Arkansas: -0.11 EPA/play4Wk 6 vs Tulsa: +0.59 EPA/play6Wk 8 vs UAB: +1.34 EPA/play8Wk 9 vs South Florida: +1.35 EPA/play9Wk 11 vs Tulane: -0.45 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs East Carolina: +0.06 EPA/play12
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
1vsChattanoogaW45-103279.00141.25
3@TroyW28-7-4.83186.0090.07
4vsArkansasW32-315.1144.004-0.11
5@Florida AtlanticW55-26-8.7
6vsTulsaW45-7-10.011414.00140.59
8@UABL24-31-15.824723.51371.34
9vsSouth FloridaW34-3111.634314.30281.35
11vsTulaneL32-386.3122.002-0.45
12@East CarolinaL27-318.03196.3090.06
20vsNC StateL7-314.8100.000

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
2.9%
Passing plays
5.6%
Rushing plays
0.0%
Standard downs
2.5%
Passing downs
3.8%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.32
Passing downs
0.90
Pass / Rush EPA
0.58 / —

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.