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 | 43 | — |
| Target share | 16.5% | 267th / 534 |
| Catch rate | 48.8% | 483rd / 534 |
| Success rate per target | 46.5% | 296th / 534 |
| Yards per target | 7.1 | 350th / 534 |
| Explosive catches | 7.0% | 405th / 534 |
| Deep-target rate | 20.9% | — |
| 3rd-down targets | 8 | — |
| Red-zone targets | 3 | — |
Charting
Where Webb's plays went: throw and catch spots, air yards and yards after the catch, read from the play-by-play
Where he's targeted47 targets charted
2025 charting · Maryland
2025 season. ESPN's play-by-play only has throw and catch spots for part of 2025 (5 of Webb’s games here), so treat the maps as a sample.
Where he's targeted25 targets charted
Career
4 seasons at 2 schools since 2014 · box-score totals, snap share estimated from play-by-play
| Season | Team | G | Snaps | Rec | Rec yds | Rec TD | Tgt share |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 so far |  Maryland#79 · 2-6 | 8 | 70% | 24 | 319 | 0 | 16.5% |
| 2025 | Maryland#84 · 4-8 | 11 | 38% | 22 | 318 | 2 | 8.1% |
| 2024 |  Tennessee#12 · 10-3 | 4 | 9% | 6 | 48 | 0 | 6.7% |
| 2023 | Tennessee#16 · 9-4 | 8 | 29% | 16 | 166 | 1 | 10.6% |
Past seasons are summed from ESPN box scores; success rates and snap shares come from the play-by-play. Kaleb Webb's team rank is that season's final TDC rank. A dash means the stat wasn't recorded.
Game Log
Kaleb Webb'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 | Defense | Returns | |||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wk | Opponent | Result | Game score | Rec | Yds | Y/R | TD | Long | Tkl | Solo | TFL | Sacks | Hur | PD | INT | TD | KR | KR yds | PR | PR yds | TD |
| 1 |  Hampton | W 62–0 | 4.3 | 1 | 9 | 9.0 | 0 | 9 | · | · | · | · | · | · | · | · | · | · | · | · | · |
| 2 | @ UConn | W 38–14 | 6.9 | 5 | 60 | 12.0 | 0 | 30 | · | · | · | · | · | · | · | · | · | · | · | · | · |
| 3 |  Virginia Tech | L 26–35 | 7.9 | 5 | 98 | 19.6 | 0 | 44 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | · | · | · | · | · | · | · |
| 4 |  UCLA | L 3–54 | 1.2 | 2 | 15 | 7.5 | 0 | 11 | · | · | · | · | · | · | · | · | 2 | 8 | · | · | · |
| 5 | @ Nebraska | L 23–48 | 6.7 | 4 | 53 | 13.3 | 0 | 19 | · | · | · | · | · | · | · | · | · | · | · | · | · |
| 6 | @ Ohio State | L 16–45 | 5.1 | 2 | 14 | 7.0 | 0 | 10 | · | · | · | · | · | · | · | · | · | · | · | · | · |
| 7 |  Rutgers | L 30–37 | 5.7 | 2 | 24 | 12.0 | 0 | 17 | · | · | · | · | · | · | · | · | 1 | 25 | · | · | · |
| 9 |  Illinois | L 17–20 | 6.5 | 3 | 46 | 15.3 | 0 | 17 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | · | · | · | · | · | · | · |
| 2026 · 8 games | 5.5 | 24 | 319 | 13.3 | 0 | 44 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | · | · | 3 | 33 | · | · | · | ||
2026 Season Stats
FBS rank among qualifying players
| Receiving | 2026 | FBS rank |
|---|---|---|
| Receptions | 24 | 229th / 2089 |
| Yards | 319 | 229th / 2074 |
| Yards / catch | 13.3 | 183rd / 460 |
| Touchdowns | 0 | — |
| Long | 44 | — |
| Defense | 2026 | FBS rank |
|---|---|---|
| Tackles | 2 | 3934th / 5664 |
| Solo | 2 | — |
| Tackles for loss | 0 | — |
| Sacks | 0 | — |
| QB hurries | 0 | — |
| Passes defended | 0 | — |
| Defensive TD | 0 | — |
| Fumbles | 2026 | FBS rank |
|---|---|---|
| Fumbles | 2 | — |
| Lost | 1 | — |
| Recovered | 0 | — |
| Kick returns | 2026 | FBS rank |
|---|---|---|
| Returns | 3 | — |
| Yards | 33 | — |
| Average | 11 | — |
| Touchdowns | 0 | — |
| Long | 25 | — |
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 | Plays made | Special teams | Snap share |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wk 1 · Hampton | ✓ WR | 78 | ~44 (29–54) | 5 | · | · | 56% |
| Wk 2 · UConn | ✓ WR | 78 | ~47 (31–57) | 6 | · | · | 60% |
| Wk 3 · Virginia Tech | ✓ WR | 64 | ~48 (32–58) | 7 | · | · | 75% |
| Wk 4 · UCLA | ✓ WR | 69 | ~40 (26–49) | 4 | · | 2 | 58% |
| Wk 5 · Nebraska | ✓ WR | 69 | ~55 (36–67) | 9 | · | · | 80% |
| Wk 6 · Ohio State | ✓ WR | 53 | ~39 (12–53) | 5 | · | · | 74% |
| Wk 7 · Rutgers | — | 64 | ~51 (34–62) | 6 | · | 1 | 80% |
| Wk 9 · Illinois | — | 58 | ~48 (32–58) | 6 | 1 | · | 83% |
| Season | 6 GS | 533 | 372 (312–433) | 48 | 1 | 3 | 70% |
Position Room
12 WRs on the Maryland roster, ordered by rec
| # | Player | Pos | Class | Rec | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA/play |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 13 | Chris Durr Jr. | WR | JR | 58 | 638 | 4 | 27% | +0.53 |
| 2 | Kaleb Webb | WR | SR | 24 | 319 | 0 | 16% | +0.23 |
| 1 | Na'eem Abdul-Rahim Gladding | WR | JR | 22 | 279 | 2 | — | — |
| 17 | Jayden Kitchens | WR | FR | 10 | 111 | 0 | 5% | +0.19 |
| 11 | Ryan Manning | WR | JR | 7 | 58 | 0 | 4% | -0.15 |
| 80 | Ejani Shakir | WR | JR | 3 | 35 | 0 | 4% | +0.70 |
| 14 | Jordan Scott | WR | SR | 2 | 25 | 1 | 3% | +0.49 |
| 10 | Zymear Smith | WR | FR | — | — | — | 3% | -0.53 |
| 15 | Jackson Hamilton | WR | FR | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | Josiah Teasley | WR | FR | — | — | — | — | — |
| 83 | Emerson Smith | WR | SO | — | — | — | — | — |
| 88 | Justin DeVaughn | 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. Maryland depth chart →