#7Mikey Matthews

WR·UCLA·2025

Mikey Matthews is a Versatile WR for UCLA. Mikey's 2025 season ranks in the 100th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 51 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 Mikey Matthews'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

33 Receptions348 Rec yards2 Rec TD10.5 Yards/rec

Returns

2 Kick returns28 KR yards0 KR TD9 Punt returns47 PR yards0 PR TD

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs WR peers

Efficiency100
Volume23
Explosiveness24
Consistency44
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 consistency44th %ile · below avg

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.
▸Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
▸Production faded as the season progressed — 0.08 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
▸Peak game: 1.23 EPA/play in Wk 8 vs Maryland (SP+ 1).

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.

Player	Team	Yr	Plays	WEPA/play	Line val	Total EPA
Tyler Buchner	Notre Dame	2021	51	0.250	0.3	12.8
Samajie Grant	Arizona	2016	62	0.250	0.3	15.5
Xavier White	Texas Tech	2020	62	0.300	0.5	18.6
Ainias Smith	Texas A&M	2020	55	0.310	0.5	17.0
Nick Nash	San José State	2021	45	0.310	0.5	14.0

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

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	vsUtah	L10-43	22.2	2	22	11.0	0	18	-0.25
2	@UNLV	L23-30	4.3	5	34	6.8	0	15	0.30
3	vsNew Mexico	L10-35	0.9	3	67	22.3	0	32	0.94
6	vsPenn State	W42-37	18.1	1	5	5.0	0	5	-0.15
7	@Michigan State	W38-13	-3.4	2	46	23.0	0	37	0.32
8	vsMaryland	W20-17	0.6	3	31	10.3	1	14	1.23
9	@Indiana	L6-56	32.4	1	18	18.0	0	18	-0.50
11	vsNebraska	L21-28	6.2	2	31	15.5	0	24	0.84
12	@Ohio State	L10-48	30.1	4	18	4.5	0	8	-0.09
13	vsWashington	L14-48	18.4	6	38	6.3	1	37	-0.12
14	@USC	L10-29	16.9	4	38	9.5	0	21	0.61

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

8.2%

Passing plays

15.5%

Rushing plays

0.6%

Standard downs

7.7%

Passing downs

9.4%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: 0.12
Passing downs: 0.54
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.31 / -0.47

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