Scores
Dev
← Player leaders
Lake McRee

#87Lake McRee

TE·USC·2025

Lake McRee is a Versatile TE for USC. Lake's 2025 season produced 25.6 total EPA across 46 plays.

2026 Usage Outlook · projected share of team plays

4%
projected
band 2%'25 6%7%

Regressed toward the TE mean. Model correlation r≈0.42 on a 2019-2025 walk-forward — volume only; efficiency not projected.

2025 Production

Receiving
30 Receptions450 Rec yards4 Rec TD15.0 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs TE peers

EfficiencyVolumeExplosivenessConsistencyPass-Down
Player type
Versatile TE

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 consistency65th %ile · average
Key findings
  • Top-10% efficiency among TEs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
  • Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
  • 7 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 — 1.28 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
  • Peak game: 2.85 EPA/play in Wk 7 vs Michigan (SP+ 12).

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 · TE · efficiency + volume + value

Players from 2014–2024 matched on EPA efficiency, play volume, and adjusted value tier — not just one metric.

PlayerTeamYrPlaysWEPA/playLine valTotal EPA
Ty ThompsonTulane2024480.4200.420.2
Seth GreenMinnesota2018830.3900.032.4
Johnny LanganRutgers2020590.3000.017.7
Evan SvobodaWyoming2024750.2900.021.8
Jordan MyersRice2021590.2700.215.9

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

Wk 1 vs Missouri State: +2.85 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Georgia Southern: +0.37 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Purdue: +1.67 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Michigan State: +1.01 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs Illinois: +0.41 EPA/play5Wk 7 vs Michigan: +2.85 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Notre Dame: -0.33 EPA/play8Wk 10 vs Nebraska: -0.28 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Northwestern: +0.22 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Iowa: +0.25 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Oregon: +0.88 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs UCLA: +0.70 EPA/play14
EPA per play, by weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
1vsMissouri StateW73-13-10.727236.01642.85
2vsGeorgia SouthernW59-20-9.423417.00220.37
3@PurdueW33-17-6.136722.30291.67
4vsMichigan StateW45-31-3.42168.00101.01
5@IllinoisL32-3412.935919.70240.41
7vsMichiganW31-1312.424120.50212.85
8@Notre DameL24-3424.42189.0110-0.33
10@NebraskaW21-176.22115.506-0.28
11vsNorthwesternW38-175.835217.30420.22
12vsIowaW26-2119.73196.3080.25
13@OregonL27-4225.933110.31130.88
14vsUCLAW29-10-8.733010.01140.70

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
5.9%
Passing plays
11.9%
Rushing plays
0.0%
Standard downs
5.5%
Passing downs
6.9%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.51
Passing downs
0.67
Pass / Rush EPA
0.56 / —

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.