Computed from every play, garbage time excluded. FBS rank among players with enough volume
| Receiving | Value | FBS rank |
|---|---|---|
| Targets | 7 | — |
| Target share | 8.3% | — |
| Catch rate | 57.1% | — |
| Success rate per target | 42.9% | — |
| Yards per target | 10.6 | — |
| Explosive catches | 28.6% | — |
| Deep-target rate | 0.0% | — |
| 3rd-down targets | 0 | — |
| Red-zone targets | 0 | — |
FBS rank among qualifying players
| Receiving | 2026 | FBS rank |
|---|---|---|
| Receptions | 5 | 500th / 1676 |
| Yards | 97 | 323rd / 1662 |
| Yards / catch | 19.4 | — |
| Touchdowns | 0 | — |
| Long | 38 | — |
| Kick returns | 2026 | FBS rank |
|---|---|---|
| Returns | 1 | — |
| Yards | 7 | — |
| Average | 7 | — |
| Touchdowns | 0 | — |
| Long | 7 | — |
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 | Special teams | Snap share |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wk 1 · Miami (OH) | ✓ TE | 75 | ~31 (14–44) | 2 | · | 41% |
| Wk 2 · UCF | ✓ TE | 71 | ~43 (36–52) | 2 | 1 | 61% |
| Wk 3 · Syracuse | ✓ TE | 60 | ~41 (35–50) | 4 | · | 68% |
| Season | 3 GS | 206 | 115 (63–153) | 8 | 1 | 56% |
5 TEs on the Pittsburgh roster, ordered by rec
| # | Player | Pos | Class | Rec | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA/play |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17 | Elijah Lagg | TE | SR | 5 | 40 | 1 | 2% | +1.88 |
| 86 | Carson Kent | TE | SR | 5 | 97 | 0 | — | — |
| 18 | Max Hunt | TE | SO | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | Truitt Brown | TE | JR | — | — | — | — | — |
| 44 | Adam Howanitz | TE | SR | — | — | — | — | — |
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. Pittsburgh depth chart →