Skip to content
Chris Brooks Jr.
Chris Brooks Jr.

#2Chris Brooks Jr.

WR·Wisconsin·2025

Chris Brooks Jr. is a Versatile WR for Wisconsin.

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 Chris Brooks Jr.'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
11 Receptions124 Rec yards0 Rec TD11.3 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume7
  • Explosiveness28
  • Consistency83
  • 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 consistency83th %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.
  • ▸7 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 0.32 from the first to second half of the season.
  • ▸Peak game: 1.84 EPA/play in Wk 11 vs Washington (SP+ 18).

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

+1.840−1.84Wk 1 vs Miami (OH): +0.88 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Middle Tennessee: +1.55 EPA/play2Wk 4 vs Maryland: +0.90 EPA/play4Wk 6 vs Michigan: +1.14 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Iowa: -0.30 EPA/play7Wk 11 vs Washington: +1.84 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Indiana: +1.08 EPA/play12Wk 14 vs Minnesota: +1.37 EPA/play14
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
1vsMiami (OH)W17-0-3.422613.00170.88
2vsMiddle TennesseeW42-10-16.011111.00111.55
4vsMarylandL10-270.62199.50120.90
6@MichiganL10-2412.411212.00121.14
7vsIowaL0-3719.7177.007-0.30
9@OregonL7-2125.9——————
11vsWashingtonW13-1018.411212.00121.84
12@IndianaL7-3132.42199.50121.08
14@MinnesotaL7-171.511818.00181.37

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
2.6%
Passing plays
5.9%
Rushing plays
0.0%
Standard downs
2.4%
Passing downs
2.9%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.87
Passing downs
1.35
Pass / Rush EPA
1.07 / —

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.