Skip to content
Wyatt Young

#10Wyatt Young

Wyatt Young is a Vertical Threat WR for North Texas. Wyatt's 2025 season ranks in the 100th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 91 plays — a elite rate for the WR.

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 Wyatt Young'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
70 Receptions1264 Rec yards10 Rec TD18.1 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume28
  • Explosiveness74
  • Consistency77
  • Pass-Down100
Player type
Vertical Threat WR

Elite deep receiver who stretches the field. Wins downfield, commands safety attention, and creates the threat that opens underneath routes.

Downfield threatYAC upsideCreates space for teammates
Peer percentiles
Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)100th %ile · elite
Game-to-game consistency77th %ile · above avg
Key findings
  • Top-10% efficiency among WRs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
  • Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
  • High game-to-game consistency — reliable floor each week.
  • 12 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 — 0.21 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
  • Peak game: 2.47 EPA/play in Wk 13 vs Rice (SP+ -15).

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.

PlayerTeamWEPA/playLine valTotal EPA
Quadree HendersonPittsburgh0.5301.633.4
DeAndre HughesAir Force0.4701.328.2
Keytaon ThompsonMississippi State0.4601.232.2
Savion WilliamsTCU0.4501.125.2
Bert Emanuel Jr.Central Michigan0.4601.624.4

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+2.4702.47Wk 1 vs Lamar: +2.15 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Western Michigan: +0.59 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Washington State: +0.51 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Army: +0.84 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs South Alabama: +1.34 EPA/play5Wk 7 vs South Florida: +1.01 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs UTSA: +0.91 EPA/play8Wk 9 vs Charlotte: +0.86 EPA/play9Wk 10 vs Navy: +0.42 EPA/play10Wk 12 vs UAB: +0.83 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Rice: +2.47 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs Temple: +1.00 EPA/play14Wk 15 vs Tulane: -0.56 EPA/play15
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
1vsLamarW51-049724.32462.15
2@Western MichiganW33-30-1.445914.80230.59
3vsWashington StateW59-103.8242.0060.51
4@ArmyW45-380.82199.51130.84
5vsSouth AlabamaW36-22-12.713636.00361.34
7vsSouth FloridaL36-6311.677911.30221.01
8vsUTSAW55-173.7610217.03420.91
9@CharlotteW54-20-26.7919021.11700.86
10vsNavyW31-176.255210.40230.42
12@UABW53-24-15.8814317.91610.83
13@RiceW56-24-14.8829536.92842.47
14vsTempleW52-25-5.1612721.20751.00
15@TulaneL21-346.3166.006-0.56
20vsSan Diego StateW49-476.77557.9013

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
9.9%
Passing plays
19.6%
Rushing plays
0.6%
Standard downs
8.6%
Passing downs
13.7%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.66
Passing downs
1.14
Pass / Rush EPA
0.82 / 0.96

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.