Skip to content
Ryder Treadway
Ryder Treadway

#11Ryder Treadway

WR·Toledo·2025

Ryder Treadway is a Red Zone Weapon WR for Toledo.

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 Ryder Treadway'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
13 Receptions176 Rec yards3 Rec TD13.5 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume12
  • Explosiveness44
  • Consistency77
  • Pass-Down90
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 consistency77th %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.
  • ▸4 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
  • ▸Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
  • ▸Production faded as the season progressed — 0.47 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
  • ▸Peak game: 1.98 EPA/play in Wk 8 vs Kent State (SP+ -19).

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

+1.980−1.98Wk 8 vs Kent State: +1.98 EPA/play8Wk 9 vs Washington State: -0.24 EPA/play9Wk 11 vs Northern Illinois: +1.86 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Miami (OH): +1.51 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Ball State: +1.28 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs Central Michigan: +0.18 EPA/play14
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
8vsKent StateW45-10-19.322412.01131.98
9@Washington StateL7-283.8155.005-0.24
11vsNorthern IllinoisW42-3-16.723216.00211.86
12@Miami (OH)W24-3-3.445513.81241.51
13vsBall StateW38-9-23.023417.01241.28
14@Central MichiganW21-3-8.8166.0060.18
20vsLouisvilleL22-2712.412020.0020—

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
4.2%
Passing plays
8.6%
Rushing plays
0.0%
Standard downs
3.5%
Passing downs
5.7%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.88
Passing downs
1.12
Pass / Rush EPA
0.98 / —

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.