Skip to content
Max Whisner

#87Max Whisner

Max Whisner is a Versatile TE for Sam Houston.

What projects, and what doesn't · TEs · 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)0.42
    Beats guessing the TE average by 9%. n=2,225 TE seasons
  • EPA per play (efficiency)0.04
    Not projectable — we do not forecast this. n=2,016 TE seasons
  • Total EPA (value)0.46
    Beats guessing the TE average by 13%. n=2,016 TE seasons

Across all positions, usage carries year to year at 0.47 and efficiency at 0.07. So Max Whisner'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.

2026 Production

Receiving
5 Receptions37 Rec yards0 Rec TD7.4 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2026 · vs TE peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume13
  • Explosiveness3
  • Consistency50
  • Pass-Down100
Player type
Versatile TE

Balanced profile without a single dominant trait — contributes across multiple dimensions.

Balanced usageMulti-role
Peer percentiles
Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)100th %ile · elite
Key findings
  • Top-10% efficiency among TEs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
  • Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
  • Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
  • Peak game: 0.73 EPA/play in Wk 1 vs Troy (SP+ -11).

NIL Market Tier· 2026

On3 valuation ↗
Starter

Meaningful starter. Local collective + position-group 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 · TE · 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
Kaden FeaginIllinois0.1500.07.8
Robby PreckelNorthwestern0.0600.12.5
D'Vaughn PennamonOle Miss0.2000.011.0
Johnny LanganRutgers0.2400.08.9
Blake BellOklahoma0.0700.14.4

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+0.7300.73Wk 1 vs Troy: +0.73 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Tulsa: -0.15 EPA/play2
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
1@TroyL21-24-11.422010.00150.73
2vsTulsaL17-23-2.33175.708-0.15

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
4.4%
Passing plays
6.8%
Rushing plays
0.0%
Standard downs
5.5%
Passing downs
2.3%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.02
Passing downs
0.74
Pass / Rush EPA
0.14 / —

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.