Skip to content
Theo Johnson
Theo Johnson

#84Theo Johnson

TE·Penn State·2023

Theo Johnson is a Red Zone Weapon TE for Penn State. Theo's 2023 season produced 31.1 total EPA across 35 plays.

What projects, and what doesn't · TEs · 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)0.42
    Beats guessing the TE average by 9%. n=2,225 TE seasons
  • EPA per play (efficiency)0.04
    Not projectable — we do not forecast this. n=2,016 TE seasons
  • Total EPA (value)0.46
    Beats guessing the TE average by 13%. n=2,016 TE seasons

Across all positions, usage carries year to year at 0.47 and efficiency at 0.07. So Theo Johnson'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
34 Receptions341 Rec yards7 Rec TD10.0 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2023 · vs TE peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume12
  • Explosiveness20
  • Consistency81
  • Pass-Down100
Player type
Red Zone Weapon TE

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 consistency81th %ile · above avg
Key findings
  • ▸Top-10% efficiency among TEs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
  • ▸Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
  • ▸High game-to-game consistency — reliable floor each week.
  • ▸9 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 0.73 from the first to second half of the season.
  • ▸Peak game: 2.17 EPA/play in Wk 9 vs Indiana (SP+ -7).

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.

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+2.170−2.17Wk 2 vs Delaware: +0.57 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Illinois: +0.29 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Iowa: +0.65 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs Northwestern: +0.08 EPA/play5Wk 7 vs Massachusetts: +1.50 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Ohio State: +0.59 EPA/play8Wk 9 vs Indiana: +2.17 EPA/play9Wk 10 vs Maryland: +0.81 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Michigan: +1.23 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Rutgers: +0.91 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Michigan State: +1.61 EPA/play13
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
2vsDelawareW63-7—2147.0080.57
3@IllinoisW30-13-2.523216.00190.29
4vsIowaW31-05.86427.00130.65
5@NorthwesternW41-13-1.32136.50110.08
7vsMassachusettsW63-0-17.546616.52301.50
8@Ohio StateL12-2025.223919.50340.59
9vsIndianaW33-24-7.422110.51162.17
10@MarylandW51-1511.04194.81120.81
11vsMichiganL15-2431.32105.0181.23
12vsRutgersW27-63.52105.0070.91
13vsMichigan StateW42-0-6.845914.81221.61
20vsOle MissL25-3818.42168.0114—

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
4.3%
Passing plays
9.5%
Rushing plays
0.0%
Standard downs
4.2%
Passing downs
4.7%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.72
Passing downs
1.26
Pass / Rush EPA
0.89 / —

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.
Theo Johnson Stats, EPA & Player Profile — Penn State · Gridpex