Skip to content
DeAree Rogers

#1DeAree Rogers

DeAree Rogers is a Slot Specialist WR for Northern Illinois. DeAree's 2025 season ranks in the 100th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 57 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 DeAree Rogers'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
46 Receptions506 Rec yards3 Rec TD11.0 Yards/rec
Returns
9 Punt returns70 PR yards0 PR TD

Air yards

Where the ball goes, and how much of the gain is the throw rather than the run after it.

17
Targets
4.9y
Avg depth
4.8y
After catch
65%
Catch rate

The ball travels 4.9 yards in the air on an average target 4.0 yards shorter than the median. Another 4.8 comes after the catch.

Where he is targeted

targets · completion rate · yards
deep
0
1
0% · 0y
0
short
5
80% · 22y
4
50% · 21y
7
71% · 32y
leftmiddleright

Depth and direction come from CFBD’s passing detail, which is backfilled after the games: this covers weeks 1–2 only. Spikes, throwaways and intentional grounding are excluded before any average.

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume25
  • Explosiveness27
  • Consistency75
  • Pass-Down7
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 consistency75th %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.
  • 8 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
  • Peak game: 1.92 EPA/play in Wk 9 vs Ball State (SP+ -23).

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

+1.9201.92Wk 1 vs Holy Cross: +1.18 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Maryland: +0.33 EPA/play2Wk 4 vs Mississippi State: +0.82 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs San Diego State: +0.71 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs Miami (OH): +1.14 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Eastern Michigan: -0.03 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Ohio: +0.44 EPA/play8Wk 9 vs Ball State: +1.92 EPA/play9Wk 11 vs Toledo: -0.08 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Massachusetts: +0.81 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Western Michigan: -0.00 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs Kent State: +1.19 EPA/play14
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
1vsHoly CrossW19-1777310.40251.18
2@MarylandL9-200.63165.30110.33
4@Mississippi StateL10-384.168414.01240.82
5vsSan Diego StateL3-66.755110.20150.71
6vsMiami (OH)L14-25-3.444010.00201.14
7@Eastern MichiganL10-16-14.73258.3017-0.03
8@OhioL21-48-4.0710715.31500.44
9vsBall StateW21-7-23.034314.31221.92
11@ToledoL3-426.03299.7014-0.08
12@MassachusettsW45-3-36.6155.0050.81
13vsWestern MichiganL19-35-1.422110.5016-0.00
14vsKent StateL31-35-19.32126.0071.19

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
8.7%
Passing plays
23.8%
Rushing plays
0.8%
Standard downs
5.3%
Passing downs
15.4%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.88
Passing downs
0.62
Pass / Rush EPA
0.70 / 0.90

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.