Skip to content
Nasir Williams

#3Nasir Williams

Nasir Williams is a Vertical Threat WR for Central Michigan.

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 Nasir 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
4 Receptions76 Rec yards1 Rec TD19.0 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume7
  • Explosiveness80
  • Consistency87
  • Pass-Down0
Player type
Vertical Threat WR

Elite deep receiver who stretches the field. Wins downfield, commands safety attention, and creates the threat that opens underneath routes.

Downfield threatYAC upsideCreates space for teammates
Peer percentiles
Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)100th %ile · elite
Game-to-game consistency87th %ile · above avg
Key findings
  • Top-10% efficiency among WRs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
  • 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.
  • Peak game: 3.02 EPA/play in Wk 9 vs Massachusetts (SP+ -37).

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.

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+3.0203.02Wk 2 vs Pittsburgh: +0.96 EPA/play2Wk 6 vs Akron: +1.94 EPA/play6Wk 9 vs Massachusetts: +3.02 EPA/play9
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
2@PittsburghL17-458.411010.00100.96
6@AkronL22-28-13.912727.00271.94
9vsMassachusettsW38-13-36.623919.51203.02

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
2.4%
Passing plays
6.1%
Rushing plays
0.0%
Standard downs
0.6%
Passing downs
5.6%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
3.48
Passing downs
1.19
Pass / Rush EPA
1.65 / —

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.