Skip to content
Nate Branch

#1Nate Branch

Nate Branch is a Versatile WR for App State.

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 Nate Branch'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.

2026 Production

Receiving
7 Receptions100 Rec yards0 Rec TD14.3 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2026 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume25
  • Explosiveness49
  • Consistency50
  • Pass-Down100
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)100th %ile · elite
Key findings
  • Top-10% efficiency among WRs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
  • Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
  • Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
  • Peak game: 0.95 EPA/play in Wk 1 vs Maine.

NIL Market Tier· 2026

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 · WR · 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
Quadree HendersonPittsburgh0.5301.633.4
DeAndre HughesAir Force0.4701.328.2
Savion WilliamsTCU0.4501.125.2
Javion PoseyFlorida Atlantic0.4501.423.8
Dane KinamonAir Force0.4100.716.0

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+0.9500.95Wk 1 vs Maine: +0.95 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs East Carolina: +0.65 EPA/play2
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
1vsMaineW55-355511.00230.95
2@East CarolinaW27-24-8.124522.50270.65

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
8.8%
Passing plays
17.5%
Rushing plays
2.5%
Standard downs
7.9%
Passing downs
10.9%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
-0.30
Passing downs
1.72
Pass / Rush EPA
0.70 / -0.19

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.