Skip to content
Mason Williams

#86Mason Williams

TE·Ohio·2025

Mason Williams is a Versatile TE for Ohio. Mason's 2025 season produced 18.0 total EPA across 34 plays.

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 Mason Williams'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
27 Receptions285 Rec yards3 Rec TD10.6 Yards/rec
Returns
2 Kick returns23 KR yards0 KR TD

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs TE peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume11
  • Explosiveness24
  • Consistency57
  • Pass-Down31
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 consistency57th %ile · average
Key findings
  • Top-10% efficiency among TEs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
  • Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
  • 8 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
  • Production faded as the season progressed — 0.13 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
  • Peak game: 1.43 EPA/play in Wk 4 vs Gardner-Webb.

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

+1.4301.43Wk 1 vs Rutgers: +1.34 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs West Virginia: -0.08 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Ohio State: -0.07 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Gardner-Webb: +1.43 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs Bowling Green: +1.19 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs Ball State: -0.62 EPA/play6Wk 8 vs Northern Illinois: +0.75 EPA/play8Wk 9 vs Eastern Michigan: +0.41 EPA/play9Wk 11 vs Miami (OH): +0.82 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Western Michigan: +0.50 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Massachusetts: +1.06 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs Buffalo: -0.80 EPA/play14
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
1@RutgersL31-341.02105.0161.34
2vsWest VirginiaW17-10-6.82136.5013-0.08
3@Ohio StateL9-3730.1133.003-0.07
4vsGardner-WebbW52-3511717.00171.43
5vsBowling GreenW35-20-12.689311.61191.19
6@Ball StateL14-20-23.0144.004-0.62
8vsNorthern IllinoisW48-21-16.712323.00230.75
9@Eastern MichiganW28-21-14.734515.00300.41
11vsMiami (OH)W24-20-3.422311.50150.82
12@Western MichiganL13-17-1.422010.00110.50
13vsMassachusettsW42-14-36.611111.00111.06
14@BuffaloW31-26-7.511111.0111-0.80
20vsUNLVW17-104.32126.009

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
3.8%
Passing plays
10.3%
Rushing plays
0.0%
Standard downs
4.1%
Passing downs
3.2%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.56
Passing downs
0.44
Pass / Rush EPA
0.53 / —

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.