Skip to content
Samari Howard

#27Samari Howard

WR·Army·2025

Samari Howard is a Versatile WR for Army.

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 Samari Howard'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
41 Rush yards0 Rush TD13 Carries3.2 Yards/carry
Receiving
11 Receptions133 Rec yards1 Rec TD12.1 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume11
  • Explosiveness34
  • Consistency69
  • Pass-Down100
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 consistency69th %ile · average
Key findings
  • Top-10% efficiency among WRs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
  • Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
  • 6 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 — 0.69 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
  • Peak game: 1.72 EPA/play in Wk 6 vs UAB (SP+ -16).

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.

PlayerTeamWEPA/playLine valTotal EPA
Keytaon ThompsonVirginia0.3200.412.5
Cade HarrisAir Force0.3300.514.8
Keytaon ThompsonVirginia0.3700.615.2
Micah DavisAir Force0.3700.616.3
Nick NashSan José State0.3100.514.0

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+1.7201.72Wk 2 vs Kansas State: +0.17 EPA/play2Wk 4 vs North Texas: +1.23 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs East Carolina: +0.91 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs UAB: +1.72 EPA/play6Wk 8 vs Tulane: +0.75 EPA/play8Wk 11 vs Temple: -0.46 EPA/play11Wk 13 vs Tulsa: +1.41 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs UTSA: +0.57 EPA/play14Wk 16 vs Navy: -0.26 EPA/play16
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
2@Kansas StateW24-217.03165.3080.17
4vsNorth TexasL38-4513.822110.51171.23
5@East CarolinaL6-288.022613.00130.91
6@UABW31-13-15.824824.00411.72
8@TulaneL17-246.3188.0080.75
11vsTempleW14-13-5.1-0.46
13vsTulsaL25-26-10.01.41
14@UTSAW27-243.711414.00140.57
16vsNavyL16-176.2-0.26

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
3.8%
Passing plays
14.0%
Rushing plays
2.1%
Standard downs
3.9%
Passing downs
3.4%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.22
Passing downs
0.73
Pass / Rush EPA
0.83 / -0.21

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.
Samari Howard Stats, EPA & Player Profile — Army · Gridpex