Skip to content
Roman Wilson
Roman Wilson

#1Roman Wilson

WR·Michigan·2023

Roman Wilson is a Red Zone Weapon WR for Michigan. Roman's 2023 season ranks in the 100th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 52 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 Roman Wilson'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
48 Receptions789 Rec yards12 Rec TD16.4 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2023 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume18
  • Explosiveness63
  • Consistency89
  • Pass-Down100
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 consistency89th %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.
  • ▸12 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
  • ▸Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
  • ▸Peak game: 2.75 EPA/play in Wk 4 vs Rutgers (SP+ 4).

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

+2.750−2.75Wk 1 vs East Carolina: +1.70 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs UNLV: +1.76 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Bowling Green: +1.76 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Rutgers: +2.75 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs Nebraska: +1.39 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs Minnesota: +0.76 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Indiana: +1.09 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Michigan State: +2.04 EPA/play8Wk 10 vs Purdue: +1.58 EPA/play10Wk 12 vs Maryland: +1.95 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Ohio State: +1.89 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs Iowa: +0.46 EPA/play14
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
1vsEast CarolinaW30-3-12.867813.03161.70
2vsUNLVW35-71.448922.32471.76
3vsBowling GreenW31-6-7.824221.01331.76
4vsRutgersW31-73.535919.70252.75
5@NebraskaW45-70.345814.52291.39
6@MinnesotaW52-100.435618.70340.76
7vsIndianaW52-7-7.43144.7171.09
8@Michigan StateW49-0-6.825025.01252.04
10vsPurdueW41-13-7.3914315.90351.58
12@MarylandW31-2411.012323.00231.95
13vsOhio StateW30-2425.233612.01221.89
14vsIowaW26-05.811414.00140.46
20vsWashingtonW34-1316.435418.0037—
20vsAlabamaW27-2023.147318.3129—

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
6.4%
Passing plays
14.7%
Rushing plays
0.2%
Standard downs
5.8%
Passing downs
7.9%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
1.30
Passing downs
1.71
Pass / Rush EPA
1.46 / 0.41

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.