Nate Boerkircher is a Versatile TE for Texas A&M.
2026 Usage Outlook · projected share of team plays
Regressed toward the TE mean. Model correlation r≈0.42 on a 2019-2025 walk-forward — volume only; efficiency not projected.
2025 Production
Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs TE peers
Balanced profile without a single dominant trait — contributes across multiple dimensions.
- ▸Top-10% efficiency among TEs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
- ▸Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
- ▸High game-to-game consistency — reliable floor each week.
- ▸9 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 — 0.76 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
- ▸Peak game: 3.64 EPA/play in Wk 3 vs Notre Dame (SP+ 24).
NIL Market Tier· 2025
On3 valuation ↗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.
| Player | Team | Yr | Plays | WEPA/play | Line val | Total EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ty Thompson | Tulane | 2024 | 48 | 0.420 | 0.4 | 20.2 |
| Seth Green | Minnesota | 2018 | 83 | 0.390 | 0.0 | 32.4 |
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 | Opponent | Result | Opp SP+ | Rec | Rec Yds | Avg | Rec TD | Long | EPA/play |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | vsUTSA | W42-24 | 3.7 | 2 | 17 | 8.5 | 0 | 13 | 0.93 |
| 3 | @Notre Dame | W41-40 | 24.4 | 1 | 11 | 11.0 | 1 | 11 | 3.64 |
| 5 | vsAuburn | W16-10 | 11.6 | 1 | 9 | 9.0 | 0 | 9 | 0.79 |
| 6 | vsMississippi State | W31-9 | 4.1 | 1 | 7 | 7.0 | 0 | 7 | 0.97 |
| 7 | vsFlorida | W34-17 | 3.5 | 3 | 35 | 11.7 | 0 | 28 | 0.63 |
| 8 | @Arkansas | W45-42 | 5.1 | 4 | 29 | 7.3 | 1 | 12 | 0.92 |
| 9 | @LSU | W49-25 | 10.3 | — | — | — | — | — | 0.33 |
| 11 | @Missouri | W38-17 | 14.4 | 2 | 15 | 7.5 | 0 | 11 | -0.39 |
| 12 | vsSouth Carolina | W31-30 | 5.9 | 3 | 40 | 13.3 | 1 | 19 | 1.54 |
| 14 | @Texas | L17-27 | 16.2 | 1 | 8 | 8.0 | 0 | 8 | 1.29 |
| 1 | vsMiami | L3-10 | 20.7 | 2 | 33 | 16.5 | 0 | 19 | 0.41 |
Usage & Situational · Pro
- Standard downs
- 0.68
- Passing downs
- 0.95
- Pass / Rush EPA
- 0.70 / 1.32
Usage = share of team plays (CFBD has no true snap counts).