Skip to content
Jeremiah Hunter

#6Jeremiah Hunter

Jeremiah Hunter is a Slot Specialist WR for California. Jeremiah's 2023 season ranks in the 100th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 53 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 Jeremiah Hunter'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
63 Receptions709 Rec yards7 Rec TD11.3 Yards/rec
Returns
4 Kick returns60 KR yards0 KR TD9 Punt returns32 PR yards0 PR TD

Performance Analysis · 2023 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume20
  • Explosiveness28
  • Consistency80
  • 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 consistency80th %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.
  • Strong second-half surge — EPA/play improved 0.50 from the first to second half of the season.
  • Peak game: 1.81 EPA/play in Wk 13 vs UCLA (SP+ 10).

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
Keytaon ThompsonMississippi State0.4601.232.2
Savion WilliamsTCU0.4501.125.2
Bert Emanuel Jr.Central Michigan0.4601.624.4

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+1.8101.81Wk 1 vs North Texas: +0.60 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Auburn: +0.19 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Idaho: +1.21 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Washington: +1.04 EPA/play4Wk 6 vs Oregon State: -0.17 EPA/play6Wk 9 vs USC: +0.57 EPA/play9Wk 10 vs Oregon: +0.63 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Washington State: +1.08 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Stanford: +1.26 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs UCLA: +1.81 EPA/play13
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
1@North TexasW58-21-6.766410.71230.60
2vsAuburnL10-147.65357.00220.19
3vsIdahoW31-175489.61201.21
4@WashingtonL32-5916.458517.01501.04
5vsArizona StateW24-21-11.368914.8131
6vsOregon StateL40-5212.64184.5011-0.17
7@UtahL14-348.5
9vsUSCL49-509.489612.00250.57
10@OregonL19-6326.256412.80260.63
11vsWashington StateW42-394.934515.00361.08
12@StanfordW27-15-11.94307.51151.26
13@UCLAW33-79.7810112.62491.81
20vsTexas TechL14-346.14348.5018

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
7.0%
Passing plays
14.6%
Rushing plays
0.2%
Standard downs
5.7%
Passing downs
9.8%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.41
Passing downs
1.05
Pass / Rush EPA
0.68 / 1.28

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.
Jeremiah Hunter Stats, EPA & Player Profile — California · Gridpex