Skip to content
Jamari Person

#3Jamari Person

Jamari Person is a Slot Specialist WR for Liberty. Jamari's 2025 season produced 16.0 total EPA across 46 plays.

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 Jamari Person'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
28 Receptions315 Rec yards0 Rec TD11.3 Yards/rec

Air yards

Where the ball goes, and how much of the gain is the throw rather than the run after it.

6
Targets
14.5y
Avg depth
2.3y
After catch
50%
Catch rate

The ball travels 14.5 yards in the air on an average target 5.6 yards deeper than the median. Another 2.3 comes after the catch.

Where he is targeted

targets · completion rate · yards
deep
0
0
2
50% · 33y
short
0
0
4
50% · 20y
leftmiddleright

Depth and direction come from CFBD’s passing detail, which is backfilled after the games: this covers weeks 1–2 only. Spikes, throwaways and intentional grounding are excluded before any average.

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume16
  • Explosiveness28
  • Consistency57
  • Pass-Down0
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 consistency57th %ile · average
Key findings
  • Top-10% efficiency among WRs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
  • Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
  • 4 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
  • Production faded as the season progressed — 0.15 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
  • Peak game: 2.49 EPA/play in Wk 8 vs New Mexico State (SP+ -16).

NIL Market Tier· 2025

On3 valuation ↗
Star

Top-10 nationally. Multiple mid-to-large collective deals expected.

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
Cade HarrisAir Force0.3300.514.8
Keytaon ThompsonVirginia0.3200.412.5
Micah DavisAir Force0.3700.616.3
Keytaon ThompsonVirginia0.3700.615.2
Nick NashSan José State0.3100.514.0

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+2.4902.49Wk 1 vs Maine: -0.26 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Jacksonville State: +0.92 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Bowling Green: +0.10 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs James Madison: +0.24 EPA/play4Wk 7 vs UTEP: +0.97 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs New Mexico State: +2.49 EPA/play8Wk 10 vs Delaware: +0.75 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Missouri State: +0.37 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Florida International: +0.11 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Louisiana Tech: -0.22 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs Kennesaw State: +0.20 EPA/play14
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
1vsMaineW28-733913.0020-0.26
2@Jacksonville StateL24-34-6.744711.80140.92
3@Bowling GreenL13-23-12.622010.00130.10
4vsJames MadisonL13-3112.322914.50170.24
7@UTEPW19-8-17.555210.40130.97
8vsNew Mexico StateW30-27-15.511515.00152.49
10vsDelawareW59-30-10.911616.00160.75
11vsMissouri StateL17-21-10.74338.3090.37
12@Florida InternationalL27-34-10.533110.30140.11
13@Louisiana TechL28-34-1.3188.008-0.22
14vsKennesaw StateL42-48-5.422512.50130.20

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
5.7%
Passing plays
14.4%
Rushing plays
0.0%
Standard downs
3.5%
Passing downs
11.2%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.59
Passing downs
0.16
Pass / Rush EPA
0.35 / —

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.