#3Parker Livingstone

WR·Texas·2025

Parker Livingstone is a Red Zone Weapon WR for Texas. Parker's 2025 season produced 14.2 total EPA across 48 plays.

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 Parker Livingstone'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

29 Receptions516 Rec yards6 Rec TD17.8 Yards/rec

Returns

1 Kick returns4 KR yards0 KR TD

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs WR peers

Efficiency100
Volume17
Explosiveness72
Consistency48
Pass-Down100

Player type

Red Zone Weapon WR

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)100th %ile · elite

Game-to-game consistency48th %ile · average

Key findings

▸Top-10% efficiency among WRs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
▸Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
▸7 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
▸Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
▸Strong second-half surge — EPA/play improved 0.08 from the first to second half of the season.
▸Peak game: 2.02 EPA/play in Wk 2 vs San José State (SP+ -14).

NIL Market Tier· 2025

On3 valuation ↗

Star

Top-10 nationally. Multiple mid-to-large collective deals expected.

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.

Player	Team	Yr	Plays	WEPA/play	Line val	Total EPA
Nick Nash	San José State	2021	45	0.310	0.5	14.0
Keytaon Thompson	Virginia	2020	39	0.320	0.4	12.5
Ainias Smith	Texas A&M	2020	55	0.310	0.5	17.0
Xavier White	Texas Tech	2020	62	0.300	0.5	18.6
Tyler Buchner	Notre Dame	2021	51	0.250	0.3	12.8

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	@Ohio State	L7-14	30.1	2	47	23.5	1	32	-0.63
2	vsSan José State	W38-7	-14.3	4	128	32.0	2	83	2.02
3	vsUTEP	W27-10	-17.5	2	23	11.5	0	22	-1.00
4	vsSam Houston	W55-0	-27.8	3	34	11.3	0	15	1.02
6	@Florida	L21-29	3.5	2	47	23.5	0	33	0.59
7	vsOklahoma	W23-6	18.3	2	29	14.5	0	21	0.58
9	@Mississippi State	W45-38	4.1	4	22	5.5	2	14	0.83
10	vsVanderbilt	W34-31	20.3	2	21	10.5	0	11	0.43
12	@Georgia	L10-35	24.1	2	17	8.5	0	13	-0.14
13	vsArkansas	W52-37	5.1	2	104	52.0	1	54	1.27
14	vsTexas A&M	W27-17	20.7	1	19	19.0	0	19	0.18
20	vsMichigan	W41-27	12.4	3	25	8.3	0	12	—

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

5.9%

Passing plays

11.5%

Rushing plays

0.0%

Standard downs

5.7%

Passing downs

6.3%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: 0.03
Passing downs: 0.74
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.29 / —

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