Skip to content
La'Don Bryant

#0La'Don Bryant

La'Don Bryant is a Versatile WR for Northern Illinois.

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 La'Don Bryant'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
6 Receptions40 Rec yards0 Rec TD6.7 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency0
  • Volume8
  • Explosiveness0
  • Consistency3
  • Pass-Down77
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)0th %ile · below avg
Game-to-game consistency3th %ile · below avg
Key findings
  • Below-average efficiency vs WR peers — value comes through volume, not per-play impact.
  • Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
  • High game-to-game variance — boom-or-bust profile.
  • Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
  • Peak game: 1.48 EPA/play in Wk 2 vs Maryland (SP+ 1).

NIL Market Tier· 2025

On3 valuation ↗
Contributor

Rotational contributor. Smaller collective or local 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.

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+1.4801.48Wk 2 vs Maryland: +1.48 EPA/play2Wk 6 vs Miami (OH): -0.32 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Eastern Michigan: +0.32 EPA/play7Wk 9 vs Ball State: -0.34 EPA/play9Wk 11 vs Toledo: -0.10 EPA/play11
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
2@MarylandL9-200.6188.0081.48
6vsMiami (OH)L14-25-3.42115.506-0.32
7@Eastern MichiganL10-16-14.7166.0060.32
9vsBall StateW21-7-23.0122.002-0.34
11@ToledoL3-426.011313.0013-0.10

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
2.9%
Passing plays
8.4%
Rushing plays
0.0%
Standard downs
2.4%
Passing downs
3.9%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
-0.37
Passing downs
-0.21
Pass / Rush EPA
-0.30 / —

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.