#1Will Henderson III

RB·UTSA·2025

Will Henderson III is a Explosive Back for UTSA. Will's 2025 season ranks in the 70th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 129 plays — a average rate for the RB.

What projects, and what doesn't · RBs · 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)0.52
Beats guessing the RB average by 18%. n=4,219 RB seasons
EPA per play (efficiency)0.10
Not projectable — we do not forecast this. n=3,575 RB seasons
Total EPA (value)0.41
Beats guessing the RB average by 9%. n=3,575 RB seasons

Across all positions, usage carries year to year at 0.47 and efficiency at 0.07. So Will Henderson III'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

Rushing

866 Rush yards6 Rush TD125 Carries6.9 Yards/carry

Receiving

19 Receptions132 Rec yards2 Rec TD6.9 Yards/rec

Returns

2 Kick returns34 KR yards0 KR TD

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs RB peers

Efficiency70
Volume45
Explosiveness78
Consistency57
Receiving58

Player type

Explosive Back

Elite per-carry efficiency — breaks big runs and creates chunk plays at a top rate while in a limited role.

Big-play threatHigh EPA per carryCapitalises on opportunities

Peer percentiles

Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)70th %ile · average

Game-to-game consistency57th %ile · average

Key findings

▸3 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 — 0.18 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
▸Peak game: 1.69 EPA/play in Wk 7 vs Rice (SP+ -15).

NIL Market Tier· 2025

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 · RB · 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
Saquon Barkley	Penn State	2016	288	0.340	3.9	97.9
Travis Etienne	Clemson	2019	213	0.470	4.7	100.1

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+	Car	Rush Yds	Avg	Rush TD	Rec	Rec Yds	Rec TD	EPA/play
1	@Texas A&M	L24-42	20.7	7	12	1.7	0	1	13	0	0.07
2	vsTexas State	L36-43	2.3	5	49	9.8	0	3	16	0	0.64
3	vsIncarnate Word	W48-20	—	11	33	3.0	0	2	8	0	0.10
4	@Colorado State	W17-16	-15.6	7	23	3.3	0	1	5	0	-0.23
6	@Temple	L21-27	-5.1	10	42	4.2	0	2	10	0	0.05
7	vsRice	W61-13	-14.8	5	115	23.0	2	—	—	—	1.69
8	@North Texas	L17-55	13.8	5	65	13.0	0	—	—	—	0.63
10	vsTulane	W48-26	6.3	12	52	4.3	1	3	30	1	0.31
11	@South Florida	L23-55	11.6	5	27	5.4	0	1	5	0	0.16
12	@Charlotte	W28-7	-26.7	19	185	9.7	1	1	6	0	0.28
13	vsEast Carolina	W58-24	8.0	19	146	7.7	0	2	-8	0	-0.01
14	vsArmy	L24-27	0.8	6	58	9.7	0	2	7	0	0.28
20	vsFlorida International	W57-20	-10.5	14	59	4.2	2	1	40	1	—

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

15.9%

Passing plays

5.1%

Rushing plays

28.1%

Standard downs

17.8%

Passing downs

11.6%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: 0.11
Passing downs: 0.72
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.55 / 0.18

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