#89Will Kacmarek

TE·Ohio State·2025

Will Kacmarek is a Versatile TE for Ohio State.

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 Will Kacmarek'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

15 Receptions168 Rec yards2 Rec TD11.2 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs TE peers

Efficiency100
Volume10
Explosiveness28
Consistency79
Pass-Down0

Player type

Versatile TE

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 consistency79th %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.
▸6 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
▸Production faded as the season progressed — 0.28 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
▸Peak game: 2.07 EPA/play in Wk 8 vs Wisconsin (SP+ -4).

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 · TE · 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
Ty Thompson	Tulane	2024	48	0.420	0.7	20.2
Seth Green	Minnesota	2018	83	0.390	0.0	32.4

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
2	vsGrambling	W70-0	—	2	55	27.5	1	47	2.03
3	vsOhio	W37-9	-4.0	2	12	6.0	0	7	-0.05
7	@Illinois	W34-16	12.9	1	7	7.0	0	7	0.58
8	@Wisconsin	W34-0	-4.4	1	2	2.0	1	2	2.07
10	vsPenn State	W38-14	18.1	1	14	14.0	0	14	1.22
14	@Michigan	W27-9	12.4	2	30	15.0	0	25	0.91
15	vsIndiana	L10-13	32.4	3	20	6.7	0	9	0.50
20	vsMiami	L14-24	20.7	3	28	9.3	0	12	—

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

3.6%

Passing plays

7.1%

Rushing plays

0.0%

Standard downs

4.3%

Passing downs

0.9%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: 0.86
Passing downs: -0.18
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.80 / —

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