Skip to content
Jameel Gardner Jr.
Jameel Gardner Jr.

#18Jameel Gardner Jr.

Jameel Gardner Jr. is a Slot Specialist WR for Kent State. Jameel's 2023 season produced 15.0 total EPA across 47 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 Jameel Gardner 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.

2023 Production

Receiving
24 Receptions298 Rec yards1 Rec TD12.4 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2023 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency80
  • Volume23
  • Explosiveness36
  • Consistency16
  • Pass-Down94
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)80th %ile · above avg
Game-to-game consistency16th %ile · below avg
Key findings
  • Above-average efficiency for the WR position (80th percentile).
  • Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
  • High game-to-game variance — boom-or-bust profile.
  • 4 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 — 1.16 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
  • Peak game: 2.56 EPA/play in Wk 4 vs Fresno State (SP+ 3).

NIL Market Tier· 2023

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.

PlayerTeamWEPA/playLine valTotal EPA
Keytaon ThompsonVirginia0.3200.412.5
Cade HarrisAir Force0.3300.514.8
Nick NashSan José State0.3100.514.0
Ainias SmithTexas A&M0.3100.517.0
Xavier WhiteTexas Tech0.3000.518.6

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+2.5602.56Wk 3 vs Central Connecticut: +2.13 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Fresno State: +2.56 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs Miami (OH): +0.88 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs Ohio: -0.69 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Eastern Michigan: +0.01 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Buffalo: -0.18 EPA/play8Wk 10 vs Akron: -0.33 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Bowling Green: +0.09 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Ball State: -1.07 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Northern Illinois: +0.60 EPA/play13
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
3vsCentral ConnecticutW38-1011414.00142.13
4@Fresno StateL10-532.524924.50402.56
5vsMiami (OH)L3-232.855611.20170.88
6@OhioL17-42-1.6122.002-0.69
7@Eastern MichiganL14-28-12.32147.0080.01
8vsBuffaloL6-24-15.24102.508-0.18
10@AkronL27-31-21.62136.507-0.33
11vsBowling GreenL19-49-7.83196.3090.09
12@Ball StateL3-34-14.911010.0010-1.07
13vsNorthern IllinoisL27-37-7.5311137.01500.60

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
8.1%
Passing plays
17.9%
Rushing plays
0.0%
Standard downs
5.4%
Passing downs
12.7%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.18
Passing downs
0.44
Pass / Rush EPA
0.32 / —

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.