#1Rome Odunze

WR·Washington·2023

Rome Odunze is a Versatile WR for Washington. Rome's 2023 season ranks in the 100th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 116 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 Rome Odunze'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

92 Receptions1640 Rec yards13 Rec TD17.8 Yards/rec

Returns

2 Kick returns17 KR yards0 KR TD2 Punt returns87 PR yards1 PR TD

Performance Analysis · 2023 · vs WR peers

Efficiency100
Volume36
Explosiveness72
Consistency88
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 consistency88th %ile · above avg

Key findings

▸Top-10% efficiency among WRs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
▸High game-to-game consistency — reliable floor each week.
▸13 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 — 0.41 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
▸Peak game: 1.95 EPA/play in Wk 4 vs California (SP+ -0).

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

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	vsBoise State	W56-19	5.9	7	132	18.9	1	29	1.18
2	vsTulsa	W43-10	-13.7	7	107	15.3	1	34	0.92
3	@Michigan State	W41-7	-6.8	8	180	22.5	0	50	1.70
4	vsCalifornia	W59-32	-0.1	5	125	25.0	2	44	1.95
5	@Arizona	W31-24	14.1	5	64	12.8	0	18	0.79
7	vsOregon	W36-33	26.2	8	128	16.0	2	43	1.71
8	vsArizona State	W15-7	-11.3	5	82	16.4	0	21	0.76
9	@Stanford	W42-33	-11.9	6	89	14.8	1	25	0.77
10	@USC	W52-42	9.4	5	82	16.4	0	26	0.87
11	vsUtah	W35-28	8.5	3	111	37.0	2	44	0.58
12	@Oregon State	W22-20	12.6	7	106	15.1	2	32	1.29
13	vsWashington State	W24-21	4.9	7	120	17.1	2	40	0.80
14	vsOregon	W34-31	26.2	8	102	12.8	0	34	0.82
20	vsMichigan	L13-34	31.3	5	87	17.4	0	44	—
20	vsTexas	W37-31	23.2	6	125	20.8	0	52	—

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

12.5%

Passing plays

20.7%

Rushing plays

1.0%

Standard downs

11.4%

Passing downs

15.5%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: 0.88
Passing downs: 1.20
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.99 / 0.83

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