Skip to content
Davis Patterson

#9Davis Patterson

Davis Patterson is a Slot Specialist WR for Northern Illinois.

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 Davis Patterson'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.

2023 Production

Receiving
16 Receptions197 Rec yards0 Rec TD12.3 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2023 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume15
  • Explosiveness35
  • Consistency65
  • 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 consistency65th %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 1.14 from the first to second half of the season.
  • Peak game: 3.77 EPA/play in Wk 8 vs Eastern Michigan (SP+ -12).

NIL Market Tier· 2023

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
Savion WilliamsTCU0.4501.125.2
Keytaon ThompsonMississippi State0.4601.232.2
Javion PoseyFlorida Atlantic0.4501.423.8

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+3.7703.77Wk 2 vs Southern Illinois: -0.14 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Nebraska: -0.03 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Tulsa: +0.79 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs Toledo: +1.62 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs Akron: +2.41 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Ohio: +0.71 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Eastern Michigan: +3.77 EPA/play8Wk 10 vs Central Michigan: -0.10 EPA/play10
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
2vsSouthern IllinoisL11-143258.3011-0.14
3@NebraskaL11-350.323015.0018-0.03
4vsTulsaL14-22-13.73227.3090.79
5@ToledoL33-353.722914.50161.62
6@AkronW55-14-21.611919.00192.41
7vsOhioW23-13-1.623517.50280.71
8vsEastern MichiganW20-13-12.312020.00203.77
10@Central MichiganL31-37-19.12178.5010-0.10

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
5.3%
Passing plays
10.7%
Rushing plays
0.0%
Standard downs
3.5%
Passing downs
9.3%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.39
Passing downs
0.76
Pass / Rush EPA
0.60 / —

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.