Skip to content
Justus Ross-Simmons
Justus Ross-Simmons

#86Justus Ross-Simmons

Justus Ross-Simmons is a Red Zone Weapon WR for Syracuse. Justus's 2025 season produced 10.9 total EPA across 36 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 Justus Ross-Simmons'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
20 Receptions312 Rec yards5 Rec TD15.6 Yards/rec

Air yards

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

7
Targets
17.4y
Avg depth
0.4y
After catch
71%
Catch rate

The ball travels 17.4 yards in the air on an average target 8.5 yards deeper than the median. Another 0.4 comes after the catch.

Where he is targeted

targets · completion rate · yards
deep
0
0
3
67% · 47y
short
1
0% · 0y
2
100% · 18y
1
100% · 17y
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
  • Volume23
  • Explosiveness57
  • Consistency50
  • Pass-Down0
Player type
Red Zone Weapon WR

Goes from good to great inside the 20 — high TD conversion on limited looks makes this receiver a scoring machine.

Red zone targetHigh TD rateSize/catch radius advantage
Peer percentiles
Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)100th %ile · elite
Game-to-game consistency50th %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.
  • Production faded as the season progressed — 1.29 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
  • Peak game: 2.95 EPA/play in Wk 3 vs Colgate.

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
Keytaon ThompsonVirginia0.3200.412.5
Nick NashSan José State0.3100.514.0
Cade HarrisAir Force0.3300.514.8
Ainias SmithTexas A&M0.3100.517.0
Xavier WhiteTexas Tech0.3000.518.6

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+2.9502.95Wk 1 vs Tennessee: +0.56 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs UConn: +0.56 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Colgate: +2.95 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Clemson: +0.17 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs Duke: -0.86 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs SMU: +0.46 EPA/play6Wk 9 vs Georgia Tech: +0.60 EPA/play9
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
1vsTennesseeL26-4515.035016.70230.56
2vsUConnW27-205.158316.62530.56
3vsColgateW66-2412626.01262.95
4@ClemsonW34-219.555310.62180.17
5vsDukeL3-386.622412.0013-0.86
6@SMUL18-3113.425829.00520.46
9@Georgia TechL16-419.32189.00100.60

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
8.2%
Passing plays
14.7%
Rushing plays
0.0%
Standard downs
7.2%
Passing downs
10.7%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.47
Passing downs
0.00
Pass / Rush EPA
0.30 / —

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.