Skip to content
Carnell Tate
Carnell Tate

#17Carnell Tate

WR·Ohio State·2025

Carnell Tate is a Versatile WR for Ohio State. Carnell's 2025 season ranks in the 100th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 66 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 Carnell Tate'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
51 Receptions875 Rec yards9 Rec TD17.2 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume28
  • Explosiveness68
  • Consistency89
  • Pass-Down100
Player type
Versatile WR

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 consistency89th %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.
  • ▸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 0.19 from the first to second half of the season.
  • ▸Peak game: 2.13 EPA/play in Wk 1 vs Texas (SP+ 16).

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.

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+2.130−2.13Wk 1 vs Texas: +2.13 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Grambling: +1.27 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Ohio: +1.59 EPA/play3Wk 5 vs Washington: +0.66 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs Minnesota: +1.29 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Illinois: +0.33 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Wisconsin: +1.78 EPA/play8Wk 10 vs Penn State: +1.56 EPA/play10Wk 14 vs Michigan: +1.14 EPA/play14Wk 15 vs Indiana: +1.85 EPA/play15
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
1vsTexasW14-716.224924.51402.13
2vsGramblingW70-0—56913.81401.27
3vsOhioW37-9-4.0510120.21491.59
5@WashingtonW24-618.433311.00110.66
6vsMinnesotaW42-31.5918320.31491.29
7@IllinoisW34-1612.944110.30110.33
8@WisconsinW34-0-4.4611118.52331.78
10vsPenn StateW38-1418.1512424.81571.56
14@MichiganW27-912.458216.41501.14
15vsIndianaL10-1332.444511.31201.85
20vsMiamiL14-2420.733712.3015—

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
9.9%
Passing plays
19.6%
Rushing plays
0.6%
Standard downs
9.2%
Passing downs
12.6%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.91
Passing downs
1.72
Pass / Rush EPA
1.15 / 0.67

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.