Skip to content
Troy Omeire
Troy Omeire

#5Troy Omeire

WR·UNLV·2025

Troy Omeire is a Versatile WR for UNLV. Troy's 2025 season produced 31.5 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 Troy Omeire'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
32 Receptions521 Rec yards5 Rec TD16.3 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume12
  • Explosiveness62
  • Consistency67
  • Pass-Down6
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 consistency67th %ile · average
Key findings
  • ▸Top-10% efficiency among WRs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
  • ▸Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
  • ▸8 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
  • ▸Strong second-half surge — EPA/play improved 1.18 from the first to second half of the season.
  • ▸Peak game: 2.80 EPA/play in Wk 8 vs Boise State (SP+ 3).

NIL Market Tier· 2025

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.

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
Quadree HendersonPittsburgh0.5301.633.4
DeAndre HughesAir Force0.4701.328.2
Keytaon ThompsonMississippi State0.4601.232.2
Bert Emanuel Jr.Central Michigan0.4601.624.4
Savion WilliamsTCU0.4501.125.2

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

Game Log · EPA per play, week by week

+2.800−2.80Wk 1 vs Idaho State: +0.32 EPA/play1Wk 1 vs Sam Houston: -0.11 EPA/play1Wk 1 vs Ohio: -0.17 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs UCLA: +2.52 EPA/play2Wk 4 vs Miami (OH): +0.87 EPA/play4Wk 6 vs Wyoming: -0.76 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Air Force: +1.00 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Boise State: +2.80 EPA/play8Wk 10 vs New Mexico: +1.09 EPA/play10Wk 12 vs Utah State: +0.69 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Hawai'i: +2.47 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs Nevada: +2.38 EPA/play14Wk 15 vs Boise State: +0.33 EPA/play15
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+EPA/playPassRush
1Idaho State——0.320.32—
1Sam Houston—-27.8-0.11-0.11—
1Ohio—-4.0-0.17-0.17—
2UCLA—-8.72.522.52—
4Miami (OH)—-3.40.870.87—
6Wyoming—-11.3-0.76-0.76—
7Air Force—-3.21.001.00—
8Boise State—3.12.802.80—
10New Mexico—0.91.091.09—
12Utah State—-3.10.690.69—
13Hawai'i—1.72.472.47—
14Nevada—-13.42.382.38—
15Boise State—3.10.330.33—

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
4.2%
Passing plays
8.7%
Rushing plays
0.0%
Standard downs
3.9%
Passing downs
4.9%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.97
Passing downs
0.71
Pass / Rush EPA
0.88 / —

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.