Skip to content
Jacob Stewart

#86Jacob Stewart

Jacob Stewart is a Red Zone Weapon TE for Louisville.

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 Jacob Stewart'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
4 Receptions70 Rec yards1 Rec TD17.5 Yards/rec
Returns
1 Kick returns-6 KR yards0 KR TD

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs TE peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume4
  • Explosiveness70
  • Consistency66
  • Pass-Down0
Player type
Red Zone Weapon TE

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 consistency66th %ile · average
Key findings
  • Top-10% efficiency among TEs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
  • Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
  • 3 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
  • Peak game: 5.24 EPA/play in Wk 14 vs Kentucky (SP+ 2).

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.

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+5.2405.24Wk 1 vs Eastern Kentucky: -0.63 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs James Madison: +1.03 EPA/play2Wk 11 vs California: +1.83 EPA/play11Wk 14 vs Kentucky: +5.24 EPA/play14
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
1vsEastern KentuckyW51-17111.001-0.63
2vsJames MadisonW28-1412.311515.00151.03
11vsCaliforniaL26-29-3.211111.00111.83
14vsKentuckyW41-01.814343.01435.24

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
1.5%
Passing plays
3.3%
Rushing plays
0.0%
Standard downs
1.0%
Passing downs
2.8%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
3.14
Passing downs
0.60
Pass / Rush EPA
1.87 / —

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.