Skip to content
Patrick Overmyer
Patrick Overmyer

#9Patrick Overmyer

TE·UTSA·2025

Patrick Overmyer is a Red Zone Weapon TE for UTSA. Patrick's 2025 season ranks in the 100th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 59 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 Patrick Overmyer'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

Rushing
23 Rush yards1 Rush TD19 Carries1.2 Yards/carry
Receiving
27 Receptions344 Rec yards5 Rec TD12.7 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs TE peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume21
  • Explosiveness38
  • Consistency58
  • Pass-Down8
Player type
Red Zone Weapon TE

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 consistency58th %ile · average
Key findings
  • Top-10% efficiency among TEs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
  • Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
  • 4 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
  • Strong second-half surge — EPA/play improved 0.55 from the first to second half of the season.
  • Peak game: 1.26 EPA/play in Wk 6 vs Temple (SP+ -5).

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 · 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

+1.2601.26Wk 1 vs Texas A&M: -0.15 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Texas State: -0.47 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Incarnate Word: +0.10 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Colorado State: +0.19 EPA/play4Wk 6 vs Temple: +1.26 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Rice: -0.17 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs North Texas: +0.25 EPA/play8Wk 10 vs Tulane: +1.13 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs South Florida: +0.94 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Charlotte: +0.35 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs East Carolina: +0.39 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs Army: +0.57 EPA/play14
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
1@Texas A&ML24-4220.7372.307-0.15
2vsTexas StateL36-432.31-2-2.000-0.47
3vsIncarnate WordW48-20263.0040.10
4@Colorado StateW17-16-15.6166.0060.19
6@TempleL21-27-5.1177.0171.26
7vsRiceW61-13-14.8-0.17
8@North TexasL17-5513.8166.0060.25
10vsTulaneW48-266.346817.00441.13
11@South FloridaL23-5511.614545.01450.94
12@CharlotteW28-7-26.722010.00110.35
13vsEast CarolinaW58-248.035819.30370.39
14vsArmyL24-270.867312.22400.57
20vsFlorida InternationalW57-20-10.525025.0134

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
7.2%
Passing plays
9.8%
Rushing plays
4.6%
Standard downs
8.2%
Passing downs
4.9%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.50
Passing downs
0.24
Pass / Rush EPA
0.45 / 0.43

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.