Skip to content
Terrell Crosby Jr.
Terrell Crosby Jr.

#5Terrell Crosby Jr.

WR·Toledo·2025

Terrell Crosby Jr. is a Slot Specialist 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 Terrell Crosby 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
16 Receptions194 Rec yards1 Rec TD12.1 Yards/rec
Returns
1 Kick returns32 KR yards0 KR TD

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency67
  • Volume11
  • Explosiveness34
  • Consistency68
  • Pass-Down6
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)67th %ile · average
Game-to-game consistency68th %ile · average
Key findings
  • ▸Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
  • ▸5 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
  • ▸Production faded as the season progressed — 0.15 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
  • ▸Peak game: 1.72 EPA/play in Wk 5 vs Akron (SP+ -14).

NIL Market Tier· 2025

On3 valuation ↗
Starter

Meaningful starter. Local collective + position-group 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
Amare JonesTulane0.1800.012.8
Brandon ChatmanNavy0.2300.612.0
Tyler BuchnerNotre Dame0.2500.312.8
Justin LynchTemple0.2400.315.1
Amare JonesTulane0.2300.813.3

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+1.720−1.72Wk 1 vs Kentucky: -0.47 EPA/play1Wk 3 vs Morgan State: +0.59 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Western Michigan: +0.61 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs Akron: +1.72 EPA/play5Wk 8 vs Kent State: +1.24 EPA/play8Wk 9 vs Washington State: +0.40 EPA/play9Wk 11 vs Northern Illinois: +1.11 EPA/play11Wk 14 vs Central Michigan: -0.11 EPA/play14
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
1@KentuckyL16-241.8144.004-0.47
3vsMorgan StateW60-0—2178.5090.59
4@Western MichiganL13-14-1.433411.30160.61
5vsAkronW45-3-13.911919.00191.72
8vsKent StateW45-10-19.323919.51211.24
9@Washington StateL7-283.82178.5090.40
11vsNorthern IllinoisW42-3-16.734314.30241.11
14@Central MichiganW21-3-8.822110.5017-0.11
20vsLouisvilleL22-2712.4——————

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
4.0%
Passing plays
8.4%
Rushing plays
0.3%
Standard downs
3.3%
Passing downs
5.8%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.27
Passing downs
0.01
Pass / Rush EPA
0.15 / 0.19

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.