Skip to content
Joey Hobert

#10Joey Hobert

Joey Hobert is a Versatile WR for Texas State. Joey's 2024 season ranks in the 100th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 74 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 Joey Hobert'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.

2024 Production

Receiving
70 Receptions680 Rec yards8 Rec TD9.7 Yards/rec
Returns
3 Punt returns52 PR yards0 PR TD

Performance Analysis · 2024 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume25
  • Explosiveness18
  • Consistency78
  • 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 consistency78th %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.
  • Production faded as the season progressed — 0.26 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
  • Peak game: 2.33 EPA/play in Wk 1 vs Lamar.

NIL Market Tier· 2024

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

+2.3302.33Wk 1 vs Lamar: +2.33 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs UTSA: +0.63 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Arizona State: +0.31 EPA/play3Wk 5 vs Sam Houston: +1.22 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs Troy: +0.53 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Arkansas State: +0.92 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Old Dominion: +0.51 EPA/play8Wk 10 vs Louisiana: -0.10 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs UL Monroe: +0.46 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Southern Miss: +1.63 EPA/play12Wk 14 vs South Alabama: +1.14 EPA/play14
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
1vsLamarW34-2769115.22372.33
2vsUTSAW49-102.245213.00240.63
3vsArizona StateL28-319.48475.90260.31
5vsSam HoustonL39-40-6.98759.42211.22
6@TroyW38-17-6.66457.51280.53
7vsArkansas StateW41-9-9.91010110.12300.92
8@Old DominionL14-24-6.068814.70400.51
10vsLouisianaL17-234.83144.7010-0.10
11@UL MonroeW38-17-16.74133.3090.46
12vsSouthern MissW58-3-25.645513.80261.63
14@South AlabamaW45-382.878011.41241.14
20vsNorth TexasW30-28-4.54194.8011

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
8.7%
Passing plays
18.4%
Rushing plays
0.9%
Standard downs
7.5%
Passing downs
11.5%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.70
Passing downs
1.04
Pass / Rush EPA
0.91 / -0.57

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.