#18Landen Thomas

TE·Florida State·2025

Landen Thomas is a Red Zone Weapon TE for Florida State.

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 Landen Thomas'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

3 Receptions35 Rec yards2 Rec TD11.7 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs TE peers

Efficiency0
Volume5
Explosiveness31
Consistency85
Pass-Down100

Player type

Red Zone Weapon TE

Goes from good to great inside the 20 — high TD conversion on limited looks makes this receiver a scoring machine.

Red zone targetHigh TD rateSize/catch radius advantage

Peer percentiles

Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)0th %ile · below avg

Game-to-game consistency85th %ile · above avg

Key findings

▸Below-average efficiency vs TE peers — value comes through volume, not per-play impact.
▸Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
▸High game-to-game consistency — reliable floor each week.
▸3 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
▸Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
▸Peak game: 2.54 EPA/play in Wk 4 vs Kent State (SP+ -19).

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.

Historical Comparables · TE · efficiency + volume + value

Players from 2013–2025 matched on EPA efficiency, play volume, and adjusted value tier — not just one metric.

Player	Team	Yr	Plays	WEPA/play	Line val	Total EPA
A.J. Doyle	Massachusetts	2013	53	0.040	0.0	2.1
Robby Preckel	Northwestern	2025	42	0.060	0.1	2.5
Blake Bell	Oklahoma	2013	63	0.070	0.1	4.4
Jaheim Bell	South Carolina	2022	73	0.110	0.0	8.0
Kaden Feagin	Illinois	2025	115	0.040	0.0	4.6

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost

Wk	Opponent	Result	Opp SP+	Rec	Rec Yds	Avg	Rec TD	Long	EPA/play
4	vsKent State	W66-10	-19.3	1	2	2.0	1	2	2.54
7	vsPittsburgh	L31-34	8.4	1	25	25.0	1	25	1.31
11	@Clemson	L10-24	9.5	1	8	8.0	0	8	0.72

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

1.7%

Passing plays

3.8%

Rushing plays

0.0%

Standard downs

0.8%

Passing downs

3.9%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: -3.54
Passing downs: 0.74
Pass / Rush EPA: -0.12 / —

Usage = share of team plays (CFBD has no true snap counts).