#5Jerand Bradley

WR·Texas Tech·2023

Jerand Bradley is a Versatile WR for Texas Tech. Jerand's 2023 season produced 36.7 total EPA across 37 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 Jerand Bradley'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

36 Receptions431 Rec yards4 Rec TD12.0 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2023 · vs WR peers

Efficiency100
Volume14
Explosiveness33
Consistency82
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 consistency82th %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.
▸8 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 — 0.10 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
▸Peak game: 1.84 EPA/play in Wk 2 vs Oregon (SP+ 26).

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.

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost

Wk	Opponent	Result	Opp SP+	Rec	Rec Yds	Avg	Rec TD	Long	EPA/play
1	@Wyoming	L33-35	-3.6	8	88	11.0	1	29	0.93
2	vsOregon	L30-38	26.2	5	83	16.6	1	34	1.84
3	vsTarleton State	W41-3	—	4	40	10.0	0	15	0.68
4	@West Virginia	L13-20	7.5	3	30	10.0	1	16	1.48
5	vsHouston	W49-28	-7.8	1	5	5.0	0	5	0.10
6	@Baylor	W39-14	-8.3	1	6	6.0	0	6	0.33
7	vsKansas State	L21-38	16.2	5	46	9.2	1	16	1.29
8	@BYU	L14-27	-3.3	3	21	7.0	0	9	0.27
10	vsTCU	W35-28	7.9	1	13	13.0	0	13	1.13
11	@Kansas	W16-13	9.9	4	91	22.8	0	33	1.25
12	vsUCF	W24-23	3.4	1	8	8.0	0	8	0.61

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

4.8%

Passing plays

9.5%

Rushing plays

0.0%

Standard downs

4.7%

Passing downs

5.2%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: 0.68
Passing downs: 1.73
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.99 / —

Usage = share of team plays (CFBD has no true snap counts).