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 | 14 | — |
| Target share | 8.5% | — |
| Catch rate | 92.9% | — |
| Success rate per target | 64.3% | — |
| Yards per target | 13.0 | — |
| Explosive catches | 21.4% | — |
| Deep-target rate | 14.3% | — |
| 3rd-down targets | 3 | — |
| Red-zone targets | 1 | — |
Charting
Where Fenner's plays went: throw and catch spots, air yards and yards after the catch, read from the play-by-play
Where he's targeted15 targets charted
Game Log
Larenzo Fenner'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 |  Boston College | W 34–15 | 4.8 | 2 | 11 | 5.5 | 0 | 6 |
| 2 |  Western Carolina | W 62–10 | 3.3 | 2 | 2 | 1.0 | 0 | 3 |
| 3 |  Miami (OH) | W 35–31 | 6.7 | 3 | 57 | 19.0 | 0 | 38 |
| 4 |  Kansas State | W 31–26 | 5.8 | 1 | 32 | 32.0 | 0 | 32 |
| 5 | @ Arizona | L 7–34 | 5.5 | 2 | 22 | 11.0 | 0 | 14 |
| 7 | @ West Virginia | L 42–45 | — | no stats recorded | ||||
| 8 |  Texas Tech | W 37–24 | 6.6 | 2 | 33 | 16.5 | 1 | 17 |
| 9 |  Utah | L 25–49 | 5.7 | 2 | 28 | 14.0 | 0 | 25 |
| 2026 · 7 games | 5.5 | 14 | 185 | 13.2 | 1 | 38 | ||
2026 Season Stats
FBS rank among qualifying players
| Receiving | 2026 | FBS rank |
|---|---|---|
| Receptions | 14 | 510th / 2089 |
| Yards | 185 | 464th / 2074 |
| Yards / catch | 13.2 | — |
| Touchdowns | 1 | 412th / 914 |
| Long | 38 | — |
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 | Penalties | Snap share |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wk 1 · Boston College | ✓ WR | 61 | ~32 (10–44) | 2 | · | 52% |
| Wk 2 · Western Carolina | — | 78 | ~18 (6–25) | 2 | · | 23% |
| Wk 3 · Miami (OH) | — | 76 | ~24 (8–33) | 3 | · | 32% |
| Wk 4 · Kansas State | — | 52 | ~35 (11–48) | 2 | 1 | 67% |
| Wk 5 · Arizona | — | 57 | ~33 (11–45) | 2 | · | 58% |
| Wk 8 · Texas Tech | — | 71 | ~34 (11–47) | 2 | · | 48% |
| Wk 9 · Utah | — | 63 | ~34 (11–47) | 2 | · | 54% |
| Season | 1 GS | 528 | 210 (130–255) | 15 | 1 | 40% |
Position Room
16 WRs on the Cincinnati roster, ordered by rec
| # | Player | Pos | Class | Rec | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA/play |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11 | JV Gibson | WR | SR | 34 | 461 | 4 | 21% | +0.67 |
| 0 | Isaiah Johnson | WR | JR | 27 | 259 | 1 | 15% | +0.51 |
| 2 | Larenzo Fenner | WR | SR | 14 | 185 | 1 | 7% | +0.88 |
| 9 | Malachi Henry | WR | SR | 10 | 334 | 2 | 7% | +1.31 |
| 18 | Giyahni Kontosis | WR | SO | 5 | 39 | 0 | 5% | -0.07 |
| Cade Wolford | WR | 4 | 18 | 0 | 8% | -0.23 | ||
| 14 | Elijah Jones | WR | JR | 3 | 29 | 0 | 4% | -0.10 |
| 16 | Flynn Schiele | WR | SR | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | H'eij Jackson | WR | FR | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | Dadrien Waller | WR | FR | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | Joshua Smith | WR | FR | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | Taizaun Burns | WR | SO | — | — | — | — | — |
| 37 | Ryan Taleb | WR | JR | — | — | — | — | — |
| 39 | Christian Moulton | WR | SO | — | — | — | — | — |
| 89 | Pierce Ayers | WR | SO | — | — | — | — | — |
| Jalen Williams | WR | — | — | — | 3% | -0.85 |
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. Cincinnati depth chart →