Skip to content
DeAndre Moore Jr.
DeAndre Moore Jr.

#3DeAndre Moore Jr.

WR·Texas·2025

DeAndre Moore Jr. is a Versatile WR for Texas. DeAndre's 2025 season produced 30.9 total EPA across 43 plays.

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 DeAndre Moore Jr.'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
38 Receptions532 Rec yards4 Rec TD14.0 Yards/rec
Returns
1 Kick returns11 KR yards0 KR TD1 Punt returns8 PR yards0 PR TD

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume19
  • Explosiveness47
  • Consistency60
  • 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 consistency60th %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.
  • Production faded as the season progressed — 0.41 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
  • Peak game: 2.01 EPA/play in Wk 7 vs Oklahoma (SP+ 18).

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

+2.0102.01Wk 1 vs Ohio State: -0.39 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs San José State: -0.09 EPA/play2Wk 4 vs Sam Houston: +1.34 EPA/play4Wk 6 vs Florida: +0.93 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Oklahoma: +2.01 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Kentucky: +1.98 EPA/play8Wk 9 vs Mississippi State: +0.67 EPA/play9Wk 10 vs Vanderbilt: +1.13 EPA/play10Wk 12 vs Georgia: +1.14 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Arkansas: -0.69 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs Texas A&M: -0.49 EPA/play14
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
1@Ohio StateL7-1430.1263.009-0.39
2vsSan José StateW38-7-14.34307.5017-0.09
4vsSam HoustonW55-0-27.857915.80381.34
6@FloridaL21-293.537525.00420.93
7vsOklahomaW23-618.335016.71242.01
8@KentuckyW16-131.833712.30191.98
9@Mississippi StateW45-384.16538.80140.67
10vsVanderbiltW34-3120.334916.30291.13
12@GeorgiaL10-3524.157515.00191.14
13vsArkansasW52-375.137424.7346-0.69
14vsTexas A&MW27-1720.7144.004-0.49

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
6.6%
Passing plays
12.2%
Rushing plays
0.0%
Standard downs
5.5%
Passing downs
8.8%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.48
Passing downs
1.02
Pass / Rush EPA
0.72 / —

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.