Efficiency & Role
EPA = expected points added per play. Compared with every FBS WR/TE who qualifies
Advanced
Computed from every play, garbage time excluded. FBS rank among players with enough volume
| Receiving | Value | FBS rank |
|---|---|---|
| Targets | 33 | — |
| Target share | 13.8% | 382nd / 534 |
| Catch rate | 63.6% | 286th / 534 |
| Success rate per target | 51.5% | 206th / 534 |
| Yards per target | 5.6 | 461st / 534 |
| Explosive catches | 3.0% | 479th / 534 |
| Deep-target rate | 12.1% | — |
| 3rd-down targets | 10 | — |
| Red-zone targets | 7 | — |
Charting
Where Trimble's plays went: throw and catch spots, air yards and yards after the catch, read from the play-by-play
Where he's targeted35 targets charted
Game Log
Brayden Trimble's box score, game by game, from ESPN, with a 0–10 game score for each (hover it for how it works). Click a result for the full game
| Receiving | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wk | Opponent | Result | Game score | Rec | Yds | Y/R | TD | Long |
| 1 |  UAB | W 42–23 | 4.6 | 1 | 11 | 11.0 | 0 | 11 |
| 2 |  Duke | L 27–31 | 5.4 | 3 | 17 | 5.7 | 0 | 9 |
| 3 |  Southern Illinois | W 48–10 | 6.8 | 5 | 57 | 11.4 | 0 | 15 |
| 4 | @ Ohio State | L 19–42 | 5.9 | 4 | 28 | 7.0 | 0 | 12 |
| 5 |  Purdue | L 17–24 | 3.6 | 2 | 3 | 1.5 | 0 | 3 |
| 6 | @ Michigan State | W 38–37 | 6.7 | 4 | 56 | 14.0 | 0 | 27 |
| 8 |  Oregon | W 21–10 | 3.6 | 1 | 5 | 5.0 | 0 | 5 |
| 9 | @ Maryland | W 20–17 | 6.2 | 2 | 21 | 10.5 | 1 | 16 |
| 2026 · 8 games | 5.4 | 22 | 198 | 9.0 | 1 | 27 | ||
2026 Season Stats
FBS rank among qualifying players
| Receiving | 2026 | FBS rank |
|---|---|---|
| Receptions | 22 | 272nd / 2089 |
| Yards | 198 | 441st / 2074 |
| Yards / catch | 9 | 403rd / 460 |
| Touchdowns | 1 | 412th / 914 |
| Long | 27 | — |
Snaps by Game
Estimated snaps from a model trained on real NFL snap counts. Ranges in brackets are where the real number lands 80% of the time: wide for a single game, tighter over the season. How it works
| Game | Start | Team plays | Est. snaps | Plays involved | Snap share |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wk 1 · UAB | ✓ WR | 43 | ~25 (8–34) | 2 | 58% |
| Wk 2 · Duke | ✓ WR | 68 | ~40 (26–49) | 3 | 59% |
| Wk 3 · Southern Illinois | ✓ WR | 57 | ~40 (26–49) | 5 | 70% |
| Wk 4 · Ohio State | — | 71 | ~50 (33–61) | 8 | 70% |
| Wk 5 · Purdue | — | 65 | ~51 (34–62) | 7 | 78% |
| Wk 6 · Michigan State | — | 69 | ~42 (28–51) | 5 | 61% |
| Wk 8 · Oregon | ✓ WR | 58 | ~31 (10–42) | 2 | 53% |
| Wk 9 · Maryland | — | 65 | ~40 (26–49) | 3 | 62% |
| Season | 4 GS | 496 | 319 (198–387) | 35 | 64% |
Position Room
16 WRs on the Illinois roster, ordered by rec
| # | Player | Pos | Class | Rec | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA/play |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17 | Collin Dixon | WR | SR | 59 | 776 | 10 | 32% | +0.81 |
| 13 | Hudson Clement | WR | SR | 32 | 453 | 1 | 20% | +0.47 |
| Brayden Trimble | WR | 22 | 198 | 1 | 14% | -0.04 | ||
| 10 | Ty Robinson | WR | SR | 12 | 164 | 3 | 8% | +0.67 |
| 6 | Jershaun Newton | WR | SO | 1 | 5 | 0 | 2% | -0.29 |
| 80 | Eddie Kasper | WR | SR | 1 | 7 | 0 | 3% | -0.38 |
| 0 | Nas Rankin | WR | FR | — | — | — | — | — |
| 1 | Jayshon Platt | WR | SR | — | — | — | — | — |
| 3 | Kenyon Alston | WR | FR | — | — | — | — | — |
| 8 | Davon Grant | WR | FR | — | — | — | — | — |
| 8 | Jacob Eberhart | WR | FR | — | — | — | — | — |
| 9 | Alex Perry | WR | SR | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | Nate Cichy | WR | FR | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | Karson Kaiser | WR | JR | — | — | — | — | — |
| 81 | Leslie Mosley Jr. | WR | FR | — | — | — | — | — |
| 82 | Jacob Harvey | WR | FR | — | — | — | — | — |
Stats, EPA and usage come from CollegeFootballData.com and refresh daily. FBS ranks only count players with enough volume for the stat to mean something. Qualifying for EPA takes 4+ plays per team game. Illinois depth chart →