#1Michael Trigg

TE·Baylor·2025

Michael Trigg is a Versatile TE for Baylor. Michael's 2025 season ranks in the 100th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 89 plays — a elite rate for the TE.

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 Michael Trigg'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

50 Receptions694 Rec yards6 Rec TD13.9 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs TE peers

Efficiency100
Volume30
Explosiveness46
Consistency73
Pass-Down70

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 consistency73th %ile · average

Key findings

▸Top-10% efficiency among TEs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
▸High game-to-game consistency — reliable floor each week.
▸7 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
▸Production faded as the season progressed — 0.21 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
▸Peak game: 1.49 EPA/play in Wk 9 vs Cincinnati (SP+ 5).

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.

Player	Team	Yr	Plays	WEPA/play	Line val	Total EPA
Seth Green	Minnesota	2018	83	0.390	0.0	32.4
Ty Thompson	Tulane	2024	48	0.420	0.7	20.2
Johnny Langan	Rutgers	2020	59	0.300	0.0	17.7
Evan Svoboda	Wyoming	2024	75	0.290	0.5	21.8
Jordan Myers	Rice	2021	59	0.270	0.2	15.9

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

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
1	vsAuburn	L24-38	11.6	7	99	14.1	1	20	-0.04
2	@SMU	W48-45	13.4	4	38	9.5	0	13	0.42
3	vsSamford	W42-7	—	2	14	7.0	0	11	0.85
4	vsArizona State	L24-27	3.9	5	71	14.2	2	33	1.09
5	@Oklahoma State	W45-27	-15.1	3	62	20.7	1	35	1.48
6	vsKansas State	W35-34	7.0	8	155	19.4	0	42	0.82
8	@TCU	L36-42	8.3	3	56	18.7	0	36	-0.25
9	@Cincinnati	L20-41	4.5	3	30	10.0	1	15	1.49
10	vsUCF	W30-3	-1.2	5	82	16.4	1	32	1.28
12	vsUtah	L28-55	22.2	3	42	14.0	0	27	0.23
13	@Arizona	L17-41	12.0	7	45	6.4	0	15	0.00

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

10.5%

Passing plays

18.3%

Rushing plays

0.0%

Standard downs

9.3%

Passing downs

13.1%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: 0.44
Passing downs: 0.56
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.49 / —

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