Skip to content
Jaylen Johnson

#1Jaylen Johnson

Jaylen Johnson is a Versatile WR for East Carolina. Jaylen's 2023 season ranks in the 100th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 51 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 Jaylen Johnson'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
45 Receptions466 Rec yards2 Rec TD10.4 Yards/rec
Returns
1 Kick returns-7 KR yards0 KR TD

Performance Analysis · 2023 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume21
  • Explosiveness22
  • Consistency80
  • 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 consistency80th %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.
  • 9 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
  • Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
  • Strong second-half surge — EPA/play improved 0.19 from the first to second half of the season.
  • Peak game: 1.42 EPA/play in Wk 9 vs UTSA (SP+ 5).

NIL Market Tier· 2023

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

+1.4201.42Wk 1 vs Michigan: +0.46 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Marshall: +1.13 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs App State: +0.14 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Gardner-Webb: +1.19 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs Rice: +0.09 EPA/play5Wk 7 vs SMU: +0.51 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Charlotte: +0.47 EPA/play8Wk 9 vs UTSA: +1.42 EPA/play9Wk 10 vs Tulane: +0.74 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Florida Atlantic: +0.49 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Navy: +0.25 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Tulsa: +1.29 EPA/play13
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
1@MichiganL3-3031.333010.00130.46
2vsMarshallL13-31-9.04379.30141.13
3@App StateL28-433.834113.70390.14
4vsGardner-WebbW44-067011.70341.19
5@RiceL17-24-10.24287.00110.09
7vsSMUL10-3110.1273.5050.51
8vsCharlotteL7-10-21.43237.70140.47
9@UTSAL27-415.4810513.11291.42
10vsTulaneL10-132.834013.30320.74
11@Florida AtlanticW22-7-9.424020.00320.49
12@NavyL0-10-13.74266.50110.25
13vsTulsaL27-29-13.73196.31111.29

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
7.5%
Passing plays
14.2%
Rushing plays
0.0%
Standard downs
6.1%
Passing downs
9.8%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.42
Passing downs
1.06
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.