Skip to content
Sam Wiglusz

#12Sam Wiglusz

WR·Ohio·2023

Sam Wiglusz is a Slot Specialist WR for Ohio. Sam's 2023 season ranks in the 100th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 67 plays — a elite rate for the WR.

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 Sam Wiglusz'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.

2023 Production

Receiving
55 Receptions664 Rec yards3 Rec TD12.1 Yards/rec
Returns
2 Kick returns43 KR yards0 KR TD1 Punt returns4 PR yards0 PR TD

Performance Analysis · 2023 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume26
  • Explosiveness34
  • Consistency83
  • Pass-Down100
Player type
Slot Specialist WR

The offense's primary passing-down weapon — routes, separation, and reliability on 3rd down define this role.

3rd-down converterRoute technicianHigh passing-down share
Peer percentiles
Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)100th %ile · elite
Game-to-game consistency83th %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.
  • 8 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 0.20 from the first to second half of the season.
  • Peak game: 1.65 EPA/play in Wk 8 vs Western Michigan (SP+ -16).

NIL Market Tier· 2023

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
Keytaon ThompsonMississippi State0.4601.232.2
Savion WilliamsTCU0.4501.125.2
Bert Emanuel Jr.Central Michigan0.4601.624.4

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+1.6501.65Wk 2 vs Florida Atlantic: +0.46 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Iowa State: +1.58 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Bowling Green: +0.54 EPA/play4Wk 6 vs Kent State: +0.77 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Northern Illinois: +0.20 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Western Michigan: +1.65 EPA/play8Wk 9 vs Miami (OH): +1.17 EPA/play9Wk 12 vs Central Michigan: +0.90 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Akron: +0.43 EPA/play13
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
0@San Diego StateL13-20-10.31010310.3015
2@Florida AtlanticW17-10-9.44225.5090.46
3vsIowa StateW10-77.555310.61161.58
4@Bowling GreenW38-7-7.822613.00200.54
6vsKent StateW42-17-26.344411.01300.77
7@Northern IllinoisL13-23-7.54379.30140.20
8vsWestern MichiganW20-17-15.91015515.51381.65
9vsMiami (OH)L16-302.857915.80241.17
12vsCentral MichiganW34-20-19.135117.00300.90
13@AkronW25-14-21.633010.00120.43
20vsGeorgia SouthernW41-21-5.256412.8031

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
9.0%
Passing plays
19.1%
Rushing plays
0.3%
Standard downs
7.2%
Passing downs
13.3%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.58
Passing downs
1.08
Pass / Rush EPA
0.82 / -0.92

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.