#22Tyson Davis

WR·Central Michigan·2025

Tyson Davis is a Slot Specialist WR for Central Michigan. Tyson's 2025 season produced 22.2 total EPA across 32 plays.

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 Tyson Davis'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

25 Receptions323 Rec yards2 Rec TD12.9 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs WR peers

Efficiency100
Volume13
Explosiveness39
Consistency60
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 consistency60th %ile · average

Key findings

▸Top-10% efficiency among WRs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
▸Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
▸5 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 0.28 from the first to second half of the season.
▸Peak game: 3.00 EPA/play in Wk 10 vs Western Michigan (SP+ -1).

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.

Historical Comparables · WR · efficiency + volume + value

Players from 2013–2025 matched on EPA efficiency, play volume, and adjusted value tier — not just one metric.

Player	Team	Yr	Plays	WEPA/play	Line val	Total EPA
Quadree Henderson	Pittsburgh	2016	63	0.530	1.6	33.4
DeAndre Hughes	Air Force	2021	60	0.470	1.3	28.2
Savion Williams	TCU	2024	56	0.450	1.1	25.2
Keytaon Thompson	Mississippi State	2017	70	0.460	1.2	32.2
Bert Emanuel Jr.	Central Michigan	2022	53	0.460	1.6	24.4

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost

Wk	Opponent	Result	Opp SP+	Rec	Rec Yds	Avg	Rec TD	Long	EPA/play
1	@San José State	W16-14	-14.3	1	6	6.0	0	6	0.22
2	@Pittsburgh	L17-45	8.4	2	25	12.5	0	13	0.85
3	@Michigan	L3-63	12.4	3	5	1.7	0	4	-0.09
4	vsWagner	W49-10	—	2	41	20.5	1	33	2.13
5	vsEastern Michigan	W24-13	-14.7	1	8	8.0	0	8	0.17
6	@Akron	L22-28	-13.9	3	51	17.0	0	28	0.94
8	@Bowling Green	W27-6	-12.6	—	—	—	—	—	-0.95
10	@Western Michigan	L21-24	-1.4	2	45	22.5	1	33	3.00
12	vsBuffalo	W38-19	-7.5	2	15	7.5	0	11	0.34
13	@Kent State	W28-16	-19.3	2	21	10.5	0	15	0.35
14	vsToledo	L3-21	6.0	2	53	26.5	0	36	2.17
20	vsNorthwestern	L7-34	5.8	5	53	10.6	0	13	—

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

4.7%

Passing plays

12.5%

Rushing plays

0.6%

Standard downs

3.2%

Passing downs

7.9%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: 0.35
Passing downs: 1.00
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.78 / -0.18

Usage = share of team plays (CFBD has no true snap counts).