#5Israel Polk

WR·Akron·2025

Israel Polk is a Red Zone Weapon WR for Akron. Israel's 2025 season ranks in the 100th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 62 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 Israel Polk'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

33 Receptions525 Rec yards8 Rec TD15.9 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs WR peers

Efficiency100
Volume22
Explosiveness59
Consistency43
Pass-Down64

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 consistency43th %ile · below avg

Key findings

▸Top-10% efficiency among WRs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
▸Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
▸5 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
▸Strong second-half surge — EPA/play improved 0.17 from the first to second half of the season.
▸Peak game: 1.52 EPA/play in Wk 3 vs UAB (SP+ -16).

NIL Market Tier· 2025

On3 valuation ↗

Star

Top-10 nationally. Multiple mid-to-large collective deals expected.

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.

Player	Team	Yr	Plays	WEPA/play	Line val	Total EPA
Cade Harris	Air Force	2024	45	0.330	0.5	14.8
Eli Heidenreich	Navy	2024	66	0.340	0.7	22.4
Ainias Smith	Texas A&M	2020	55	0.310	0.5	17.0
Micah Davis	Air Force	2021	44	0.370	0.6	16.3
Keytaon Thompson	Virginia	2020	39	0.320	0.4	12.5

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost

Wk	Opponent	Result	Opp SP+	Rec	Rec Yds	Avg	Rec TD	Long	EPA/play
1	vsWyoming	L0-10	-11.3	2	13	6.5	0	11	-0.24
2	@Nebraska	L0-68	6.2	1	4	4.0	0	4	-0.53
3	@UAB	L28-31	-15.8	4	99	24.8	2	75	1.52
4	vsDuquesne	W51-7	—	2	47	23.5	0	27	-0.62
5	@Toledo	L3-45	6.0	2	16	8.0	0	14	0.33
6	vsCentral Michigan	W28-22	-8.8	2	14	7.0	0	9	0.81
7	vsMiami (OH)	L7-20	-3.4	5	28	5.6	1	8	0.13
8	@Ball State	L28-42	-23.0	5	72	14.4	2	25	0.55
9	@Buffalo	W24-16	-7.5	3	67	22.3	0	46	0.49
11	vsMassachusetts	W44-10	-36.6	1	13	13.0	1	13	0.36
12	vsKent State	L35-42	-19.3	4	67	16.8	1	19	0.13
13	@Bowling Green	W19-16	-12.6	2	85	42.5	1	75	0.62

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

7.8%

Passing plays

15.0%

Rushing plays

0.3%

Standard downs

7.8%

Passing downs

7.7%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: 0.32
Passing downs: 0.40
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.36 / -0.33

Usage = share of team plays (CFBD has no true snap counts).