Skip to content
Rickey Taylor Jr.
Rickey Taylor Jr.

#3Rickey Taylor Jr.

Rickey Taylor Jr. is a Versatile WR for Northern Illinois.

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 Rickey Taylor Jr.'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
9 Receptions134 Rec yards1 Rec TD14.9 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume14
  • Explosiveness53
  • Consistency71
  • Pass-Down0
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
Game-to-game consistency71th %ile · average
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.
  • Peak game: 1.39 EPA/play in Wk 13 vs Western Michigan (SP+ -1).

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 · 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
Bert Emanuel Jr.Central Michigan0.4601.624.4
Keytaon ThompsonMississippi State0.4601.232.2

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+1.3901.39Wk 11 vs Toledo: +0.37 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Massachusetts: +0.04 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Western Michigan: +1.39 EPA/play13
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
11@ToledoL3-426.036923.00410.37
12@MassachusettsW45-3-36.63124.0060.04
13vsWestern MichiganL19-35-1.435317.71211.39

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
4.9%
Passing plays
20.5%
Rushing plays
0.0%
Standard downs
5.7%
Passing downs
3.1%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.72
Passing downs
0.20
Pass / Rush EPA
0.66 / —

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.