Skip to content
Josh Schuchts

#4Josh Schuchts

TE·UTEP·2025

Josh Schuchts is a Versatile TE for UTEP.

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 Josh Schuchts'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
21 Receptions232 Rec yards3 Rec TD11.0 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs TE peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume13
  • Explosiveness27
  • Consistency72
  • Pass-Down77
Player type
Versatile TE

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 consistency72th %ile · average
Key findings
  • Top-10% efficiency among TEs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
  • Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
  • High game-to-game consistency — reliable floor each week.
  • 4 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 0.18 from the first to second half of the season.
  • Peak game: 1.64 EPA/play in Wk 11 vs Jacksonville State (SP+ -7).

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.

Historical Comparables · TE · 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
Ty ThompsonTulane0.4200.720.2
Seth GreenMinnesota0.3900.032.4
Johnny LanganRutgers0.3000.017.7
Evan SvobodaWyoming0.2900.521.8
Jordan MyersRice0.2700.215.9

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+1.6401.64Wk 5 vs Louisiana Tech: +0.13 EPA/play5Wk 7 vs Liberty: +0.56 EPA/play7Wk 10 vs Kennesaw State: +1.04 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Jacksonville State: +1.64 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Missouri State: +1.37 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs New Mexico State: -0.26 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs Delaware: +0.27 EPA/play14
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
5vsLouisiana TechL11-30-1.34215.30110.13
7vsLibertyL8-19-9.03186.0090.56
8vsSam HoustonW35-17-27.8144.014
10@Kennesaw StateL20-33-5.424120.51411.04
11vsJacksonville StateL27-30-6.73237.70131.64
12@Missouri StateL24-38-10.722914.50181.37
13vsNew Mexico StateL31-34-15.5294.505-0.26
14@DelawareL31-61-10.948721.81640.27

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
4.5%
Passing plays
8.6%
Rushing plays
0.0%
Standard downs
5.0%
Passing downs
3.7%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.55
Passing downs
0.71
Pass / Rush EPA
0.60 / —

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.