Skip to content
Jeremiah Hixon

#8Jeremiah Hixon

Jeremiah Hixon is a Versatile WR for New Mexico. Jeremiah's 2023 season produced 42.4 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 Jeremiah Hixon'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
39 Receptions482 Rec yards5 Rec TD12.4 Yards/rec
Returns
1 Punt returns0 PR yards0 PR TD

Performance Analysis · 2023 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume20
  • Explosiveness36
  • Consistency73
  • 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 consistency73th %ile · average
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.
  • Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
  • Strong second-half surge — EPA/play improved 0.76 from the first to second half of the season.
  • Peak game: 2.89 EPA/play in Wk 12 vs Fresno State (SP+ 3).

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
Bert Emanuel Jr.Central Michigan0.4601.624.4
Savion WilliamsTCU0.4501.125.2

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+2.8902.89Wk 1 vs Texas A&M: +1.08 EPA/play1Wk 3 vs New Mexico State: +0.76 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Massachusetts: -0.62 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs Wyoming: +0.62 EPA/play5Wk 7 vs San José State: +1.15 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Hawai'i: +1.84 EPA/play8Wk 9 vs Nevada: +2.26 EPA/play9Wk 10 vs UNLV: +0.37 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Boise State: +1.21 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Fresno State: +2.89 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Utah State: +0.05 EPA/play13
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
1@Texas A&ML10-5215.66427.00221.08
3vsNew Mexico StateL17-27-1.85459.00150.76
4@MassachusettsW34-31-17.5-0.62
5@WyomingL26-35-3.66498.22170.62
7vsSan José StateL24-52-3.422211.00191.15
8vsHawai'iW42-21-16.436220.72281.84
9@NevadaL24-34-22.0411629.01592.26
10vsUNLVL14-561.44194.8090.37
11@Boise StateL14-425.933010.00121.21
12@Fresno StateW25-172.524824.00262.89
13vsUtah StateL41-44-10.944912.30280.05

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
7.0%
Passing plays
14.2%
Rushing plays
0.3%
Standard downs
6.7%
Passing downs
7.5%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.80
Passing downs
1.11
Pass / Rush EPA
0.92 / 0.23

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.